Jealous Boobs?

Just today I had a friend from home come to visit for a lunch date and just to catch up. Over our Alberto's extra cheese pizza she mentioned Reebok's new shoes that apparently do wonders for the female body. Being at Wheaton, without cable, clearly I hadn't seen the ads yet, but upon returning to my room decided to look into this miraculous footwear. This is what I found:



First of all, ladies, please tell me you don't believe this crap. The claim is that
1) the shoes "incorporate stability balls under the heels and forefoot to create a natural instability to force muscles to adapt and encourage toning." and
2)"make you feel like you're walking on a soft, sandy beach, providing 28% more gluteus maximus muscle activation, and 11% more calf and hamstring activation."

The commercial clearly suggests, similar to what was discussed in Killing Us Softly, that the main focal point of a woman is either her chest or her ass. For a low price of $99.99 at Lady's Foot Locker women can buy the self esteem that the corporate world has slowly but surely destroyed. I'll leave you with an ever so wise comment from one male viewer:

"oh my god this video is so hot her tits are amazing!! i love this video, GO REEBOK!!!!! man i wish i could bang this chick. and all the women who posted bad things on this video, get off the computer and go back to the kitchen where you belong!!"

If buying these shoes will get me "banged" by a man like this, then I prefer the cellulite.

Outrageous Act

For my outrageous act, Tarah and I went to a mall in Portland, Maine to interview people about their vote on the repeal of the gay marriage law. Our interviews started with us introducing ourselves as a monogamous homosexual couple that was very disheartened by the results of the recent gay marriage polls. We then asked people for their first name, age, marital status, and hometown. Once we had established a conversation we then posed the question of whether or not the individual had voted in the November ballots. If so we asked them if they felt comfortable sharing with us what they voted on Question 1 (No meaning to not repeal the legalization of gay marriage and Yes meaning to repeal the law). If they shared how they voted we then asked them to explain to us why they voted the way they did. If they did not feel comfortable sharing with us we merely wished them a Happy Holiday season and took note of their other responses. We were able to speak with 13 people, 6 voted No, 3 voted Yes, and 4 either didn't want to share their vote or hadn't voted at all. Each interview really shed light on how people are able to justify discrimination. For this to still be occurring today is such a shame. As a Mainer I am embarrassed that our state has digressed and joined the host of other places where gender, not love is the basis of marriage.

Objectification

The other day I was having a discussion with a group of friends and the phrase, "she is the object of my affection," came up. At first I did not think the phrase was anything out of the ordinary, because if is commonly used in reference to both males and females.  (Although mostly females I think.) The more my friends and I began to think about the phrase though the stranger it became. To think that we find it endearing when we are described as the object of someone's affection is somewhat absurd. Essentially this phrase serves to degrade as it lessens someone's status to that of an object; something that is so inhuman it is without feeling or emotion, simply existing for a specific purpose or use. When analyzed in the context of women I feel that this phrase becomes particularly offensive. It suggests that women are "objects," subject to men's needs and wants. Although this is a normal phrase in our culture, I had never realized what serious implications it ever had. I think it is very important to analyze the way that we speak and the words and phrases that we choose to use because they are often implying things we don't even mean. 

Tough Guise

Hip-Hop: Beyond the Beats and Rhymes is a documentary looking at how the hip-hop culture works and the gender roles created by it. One of the notions brought up within the movie was of Tough Guise. Tough Guise is the cultural construction for men in order to gain respect. A dominant masculine front put up to not be called negative things. Society takes the biology of men as being stronger then women. This is done so that woman can gain the respect of men. If a man receives a comment outside of the “box” of “manly” stereotypical words they are seen as weak and not a “man”. With there being no support for people outside of that box it is tough to live up to the notions put forth to being a man. This is why it is important for such things to be visible (being manly) so that the world can come to terms with themselves and to be able to deal with the stereotypes of the tough guise.

Tough Guise/Killing Us Softly

It really doesn’t seem noticeable until seeing a film like Jackson Katz’s the boxes that we confine each gender to. And then after watching these films it seems to be the only thing I notice. This isn’t the first time it’s come up either, we saw it when reading Baby X, but what I can’t understand is how to create change. If these images of what is female and what is male has become fully ingrained in society, so much so that it is unconsciously passed along to new generations, is it possible to reverse it? Even though we saw the pure degradation of women through advertising in Killing Us Softly, it seems ironic that women actually have an easier time pushing the boundaries of their gender roles. Maybe the first battle is getting people to admit there is a problem. To be able to address these issues we must first acknowledge that they exist.

Maybe to see change we need an army of baby X’s. What advice can we give parents of new babies to try and decrease the continuing cycle? It seems that the stories of parents fighting against gender norms are unique. They may be accomplishing a small piece toward societies improvement as a whole, but what is the cost. The cost is the unique family fighting against the norm. It takes courage and determination to reverse something as ingrained as this. Unfortunately, this world seems to be lacking in courageous and determined people, especially in this area. It is most likely a large struggle for parents to overcome their own life education that girls must be feminine and boys masculine. To watch their child walk out into the world pushing gender norm boundaries must be quite the dilemma for parents who are programmed to only want to do the best for their children and keep them safe. People who fight gender norms must be selfless, they are fighting for something that most likely will not be resolved in the near future and they have to have enough courage for those who will come after them.

Vietnamese Women

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2349059.stm

The above article talks about the plight that Vietnamese women suffer from because of society and inequality. While I wholeheartedly agree that those issues are deplorable and should immediately be resolved, I am so tired of reading and hearing about all these articles and coverage on how all Vietnamese women are mistreated. All of these articles and news coverage seem to do is give the illusion that Vietnamese women have nothing good in their lives; their portrayals make people think that all that happens to them is they get beaten everyday of their lives. A Vietnamese woman is so much more than a subservient wife and mother whose life is shackled to the home and kitchen. Instead of publishing all of these work that give Westerns the image of poor women needing to be saved, these newspapers and organizations should focus more on all of the other roles that Vietnamese women assume: in most cases, they are also business owners, the financial head of households, the glue that holds the entire family together. Like housewives in America, Vietnamese women are regarded as nothing but slaves; people who don't have stories and lessons to share, people who don't have their own opinions and aspirations of their own. Perhaps if everyone focused less on the negativity that Vietnamese women as a whole suffer from and focus more on the individual woman and her personal story, their living conditions, like all of these research and speculation, would become less based in academia and theories and more on actions and application.

outrageous act

For my outrageous act, I lead a guided duscussion about gender rolers with the 4-5 grade class at Pinecroft elementary school. THe students and I talked about what it meant to "act like a boy" and to "act like a girl". I had the kids give me sterotypical things that they considered to be masculine and feminine, and we organized them into lists. Next we talkedd about what happens to kids who try to break out of their gender roles. The students were very clear in telling me that kids would be teased and possibly rejected. A boy in the class expressed his opinion that boys where in more danger from teasing because boys are more likley to use violence against one another. (I thought it was really interesting that he was already thinking about that since it is something that we are just formally learning about now in college.) the last think I had them do is write me a paragraph about how they felt gender roles affected them and something non-gender typical that they would like to do. I got some interesting responces; surprising to me was that most of them felt that gender roles where both god and bad, and were able to defend both of their reasoning's. The girls were all able to some up with activities for me, but the boys had a much harder time feeling comfortable finding something non-gender typical that they would like to do.

OA

Many social interactions between male and female strangers consist of a male, or a group of males, addressing a female, or a group of females, with dehumanizing and sexual comments. . It is sometimes referred to as “catcalling,” and it is usually a casual form of male bonding that is unwelcomed from the female victim(s). I decided to commit a gender-role violating act by performing this type of action, as a female, to males. Two fellow females and I went to a mall and stood outside of a store waiting for a male to walk by. We would only address males who weren’t with females. Examples of comments we made loudly towards them were: “Damn baby, you fine,” “Take a look at that ass,” “Aww, smile baby.” We made sure to look their bodies up and down as we said these types of statements. Some men did not seem to hear us, possibly because they did not realize they were being addressed. Most of the men, however, seemed confused and surprised. I expected more men to enjoy this experience because men are stereotypically the gender that has a higher desire for sex, but surprisingly, they did not find much pleasure in being spoken to in sexual ways by women. We received some uncomfortable laughs from men, who must have thought we were joking or playing some game. Above all, the most consistent reaction was one of confusion. This reaction shows how little, if ever, this happens to men. And it is, and should be, a normal reaction to when a stranger addresses another in such a way. Most women do not blink an eye when it happens to them because it is nothing out of the ordinary.
This act is outrageous and gender role violating because it’s going against the societal norm of men being able to address strange women, but not the other way around. We felt dumb saying these types of comments to men because it was uncomfortable for us, as females, to shout things at people we do not know. It is an act that when, done by males, other people in the vicinity are oblivious to, but when done by females, have those same people turning around in shock to look at who these girls are speaking to in such a derogatory way. This act not only made the men we were speaking to uncomfortable, but made other shoppers in the mall give us strange, sometimes angry, looks. That uneasy, uncomfortable feeling we had while we were taking part in the act is how everyone should feel when they are saying similar things because people should not be allowed to address strangers in this way. I could not help feeling like I was doing something wrong, something I was not permitted to do. Somehow, men do not get this feeling because in our society they are allowed, and even, expected to behave in such a way. The instinctive rule of respect strangers have to give each other is bent for men so they can treat random women, as most females refer to it, “as animals” or as “less than human”.

Outrageous Act

For my outrageous act, I decided to help raise money for ActionAid, an organization committed to ending world poverty. I created a facebook group called Outrageous Act: Skip your Coffee Once a Month to Help End World Poverty, asking people to give up something that they buy regularly once a month, and instead, donate that amount of money to ActionAid. This act was outrageous because it asks people to take a look at their daily behavior, realize that they have privileges that many other people do not have, and do something to help others. Because there is power in numbers, my act will accomplish more now that I have asked others to participate with me, instead of just making a small monthly donation by myself. I have also brought up an issue that often gets overlooked, especially among college students as they usually have their own financial concerns. ActionAid helps by donating money to individuals suffering from poverty, and assisting with structural changes such as literacy programs and increased access to healthcare. My act also raises awareness about issues affecting women globally.

blog evaluation

For my blog evaluation, a chose a blog called Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog. The purpose of this blog is to answer reader’s questions on feminism and help to clarify some common misconceptions or confusing aspects of feminist theory. I think that the blog does a good job of answering questions and providing basic information, but does come off a little arrogant in the introduction when the authors mention that this is a place for comments that would normally be disruptive on a feminist blog. I think that this might turn some readers away, specifically ones who actually are curious about feminism and feminist theory. I think that while basic questions on a more advanced blog may be disruptive, there are nicer ways to put it in the introduction, instead of making the reader feel like they have done something wrong by asking questions about feminism. I found this blog to be extremely interesting even though I am probably not the blogs indented audience, which would probably be people who do not identify as a feminist and would like to learn more about feminism for their own personal lives or in order to further understand women’s issues and gender inequality. As a women’s studies major, I liked this blog because it gave me an idea of what some people unfamiliar with feminism may want to know or different misunderstandings that people may have surrounding feminist theory.

Women in Ads

After seeing ads like those that Dolce and Gabbana publish worldwide, it really makes me wonder who is setting these beauty standards? How is looking like a half dead woman who resembles a plastic mannequin something to strive for? Is that what men in our society want us to look like? Would they prefer us without any of our feminine traits to the way which we were created to look like? The dove campaign has the right idea on how to portray beauty. Almost 100% of other ads in newspapers and magazines alter the way the female body looks like. People are making a living off of things like photo shop and other ways of altering images to be something more "perfect". In this video we can see how an already beautiful body is changed to be something which is more aspired.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHLpRxAmCrw&NR=1

The message that this sends to not only young women, but every women- is that beauty perfection is attainable at any age.

Does the Tough Guise really make guys tough?

It is so strange to think about the ways in which society constructs men and women. Over time the ideal woman has shrunk and the ideal man has grown. What does this say about our culture? That the woman is the submissive being who relies on the bigger man to control and take care of her? This is the message that is being brought to us each and everyday- regardless of whether or not we notice. The pressure that parents begin to put on their sons from birth is where it all begins. Right away boys are taught that they shouldn't cry, to toughen up, to be aggressive and active. Is this the way that we want our men to be when they are all grown up? What if they don't want to behave this way? Could the inner conflict men feel regarding social constructions be stronger than that of women?
Why is it so much harder for a man to go outside the expectations of society and escape that box they have been put in since a young age? When a girl or a woman does something typically more "masculine" they are praised and often looked upon as going over and above their expectations. If a man leaves that masculinity "box", he loses his manhood. This does not make men tough- in fact it does the opposite.

OA

For my outrageous act I wore heels to my Thanksgiving dinner.  I wanted to do it to battle the generic and pointless gender roles my family deems necessary.  I wasn't sure what was going to happen when I did it because I have some incredibly conservative family members who I knew would be there.  I assumed my grandparents would push it aside or make stupid comments, and I was sure my great-uncle was going to have something obnoxious to say to me about it. 

The morning of, I got dressed, put the heels on and went downstairs to help my mom get everything ready and wait for the guests to arrive.  When people started getting to the house they all just thought I had grown taller.  Then they looked at my feet and saw that I was wearing my sister's 3 inch heels.  Then the faces were made.

Much to my surprise my grandmother was a lot more okay with it than I thought.  My grandfather just pretended nothing was happening... but my great-uncle was for lack of a better word, a complete dick.  He said that he knew that I was gay, but that he didn't know that I wanted to be a woman.  So then I explained that I was happy as a man and that I was wearing the heels for a project, but he didn't get it.  It was a little bit of an uncomfortable situation for me, but all in all I'm glad I did it.  Because I did "as the women do" that day I was able to show my family that gender does not determine household chores, and a person's behaviors are not always indicative of their genders.  

Taylor Swift: Wholesome or Harpie?

I was watching SNL a couple of weeks ago when Taylor Swift was both the guest star and the musical act. I know that there's been a lot of media attention given to her lately, mostly because of her song lyrics and music videos. A lot of people, mainly feminists, have criticized her songs for being anti-feminists, for fitting the stereotypical model of the love struck damsel in distress waiting for her Prince Charming. While my feelings on this topic is ambivalent, this isn't what I took issue with during her guest appearance.

During her opening monologue, Swift sang a song that she composed titled "My SNL Monologue Song (La La La)". In the song, she sings about how she likes sparkly dresses and baking (adding fuel to the anti-feminist fire) and parodies all of the gossip surrounding her personal life. However, a good section of the song is spent on her past romantic relationships, both public and private. She includes the lyrics:

I like writing songs about douche bags who cheat on me but I'm not gonna say that
In my monologue
I like writing their names in songs so they're ashamed to go in public
But I'm not gonna say that in my monologue
La la la la la la la la
This is my musical monologue
You might think I'd bring up Joe [Jonas], the guy who broke up with me over the phone but I'm not gonna mention him
In my monologue
HEY JOE, I'm doing real well, hosting SNL, but I'm not gonna brag about that in my monologue.
La ha ha ha

These lyrics make me question her actions and the implications that she provides to anti-feminists. There are two sides that can be taken on this issue. The first is that Swift is a teenager who writes about what she knows best: love and relationships. It could be argued that by her shaming the boys who cheated on her in front of the whole world could be taken as either teenage rashness or even a well deserved feminist punishment. On the other hand, her actions could be taken as a representation of the vengeful actions dealt by scorned women. She could quite well become a representation for vindictive women, giving critics fuel with everything from her looks to her age to her public persona. Her actions make me question the limits of revenge. Is it justifiable because it's a safety method or is it just being vindictive and petty? Is there any essential difference between what Swift does in her songs and all of those websites where scorned women post information and pictures of guys who have hurt them in some way?

Selling Women's Bodies, No, Selling Lingerie...

Well, what a commercial this is. At first, as Amanda Hess wrote in her column, it seems as though this is targeted at women. But, it's not. It is targeted at men. Just one more way the media is selling women's bodies to sell their products. I thought this was a nice addition to our discussion's Monday about commercials, ads, and the media.

Boobs Gone Wrong?

News Story about how a mom was breast-feeding at Target. An employee called the cops claiming that it was illegal, indecent exposure, etc. Little did this employee know it is Target policy to allow breast-feeding in public. Good job, sir or madam. Good job.







Now even if it was illegal. Can we discuss for a moment how many t3h boobz have entered our culture? They are everywhere used to sell everything. You can't see an ad without cleavage flying around all over the place and gawd forbid a movie star doesn't have a big chest. Our culture is obsessed with them as sexual objects yet if a mother is using them for what they're actually FOR then we get upset? THEN we get upset? We need to re-examine our values people and SPECIFICALLY how we value women. They can use their bodies to jerk us off in Playboy but not to feed their young and you know, actually put their mammory gland to use. Because THAT, dear reader, would be obscene.

Global Fem.

When I first picked up the "Penguin Atlas of Women in the World" I had no idea that a simple looking book could have so many controversial topics put forth. This book holds so much information that one would not know on ones own. This book includes many different maps of the world corresponding with different issues. One page points out the different countries that have already signed, ratified, just signed, or have not signed the (UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. This map states that all of the countries around the world except Iran, Sudan, Somalia, and the United States have signed the CEDAW. It is horrible that this has not passed yet and hopefully that will change within the New Year.
The other section that stood out to me the most was the section on rape. This section brought the sad truth that most crimes against women often go unreported and unpunished to light. Rape is such a big issue in our world because in some places rape is legal as well as a custom for men to be able to rape their wives. Even if your husband is raping his wife it still constitutes at rape and is wrong because the women is not giving consent to the acts being played out. Everyone in the world does not see it like that and it is a very hard truth to get past.

EDIT://If you agree with I said down there then here are some things you can do:
Write letters to your Senators, Maj. Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, and/or Pres. Obama!

Pro-Choice America
Planned Parenthood
Stop Stupak
NOW
Fight for Women's Health

Today is the day when it is decided whether or not the Stupak-Pitts/Reid compromise will be selected or simply the Stupak amendment. For those who don't know (I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't, the news is keeping their head down on this one as they do with most "women's issues") Stupak wishes to add an amendment into the new Healthcare Reform that bans insurance companies from covering abortion care. Reid's compromise was under the new Healthcare, this would only apply to government-funded insurance companies.
The ugly truth about this whole Stupak-Pitts, Reid thing is we're getting screwed either way. One way is just more detestable.
If Stupak gets his way, there is no choice. If Reid gets his way, only 60% of us get a choice and even then it's iffy. Why the number? 40% of women who get abortions (of the 650,000 estimated annually) are unmarried, under the poverty line, and under the age of 35. These women need something affordable--like, say the new Healthcare. Oh wait, that's right, because to get the Healthcare passed in the FIRST place, they needed the support of the Catholic Church and other religious fanatics. So yeah tough chance on that one as now one man decides if you really need an abortion (yeah if you get federally backed insurance now, only chance you have of an abortion getting covered is if it's life-threatening).
Katha Pollitt asks in her article women have always been taking one for the team. Well who's team is it anyway? And why do a bunch of white, upper-class men get to decide the fate of Caucasian women, women of color, Asian women, lower-class women, middle-class women, and women in general? It is not a man's decision nor is it the government's decision. And it DEFINITELY shouldn't be the government's decision if the only reason they're doing it is to pass a fucking bill.

Tough Guise

One of the most interesting documentaries I’ve watched while at school is called Hip-Hop: Beyond the Beats and Rhymes. This is an in-depth look at the hip-hop culture and the gender roles created by it. Some of the most interesting parts of the film were the interviews with Jackson Katz describing the ways, in which gender roles affect males, especially in pop culture and the media. These themes are discussed to a greater extent in Katz’ film Tough Guise. By discussing the ways in which gender roles are even more restricting for males than they are for females Katz is able to draw a conclusion about the ways men are negatively socialized.
I thought this gave an interesting perspective toward gender. Usually in a Women’s Studies class we spend very little time studying how males are socialized, unless it is directly in comparison to women. In reality the variety of ways that men are portrayed in the media is very slim and results in a need for men to maintain a tough and violent personality to be considered masculine in this society. With the ways that men are told to act it can often times result in incidences of violence and will continue to until there is a movement to address the negative affects. As Jackson Katz points out when violence is committed the gender of the perpetrator is very seldom addressed when boys are involved but when a female is involved the reasons for her to do so are analyzed in terms of her gender very often. It is important for us as a society to realize that until the social issue of the ways that boys are being told they have to act there will continue to be a perpetual cycle of a narrow set of character traits expectable for men.

tough guise

Watching this film brought me right back to high school and middle school--where I thought that I had to be more masculine to prove to the other boys my age that I was cool. When I was eleven and starting middle school, I was chubby, I didn't do any sports and I was far from masculine. People made fun of me for being gay when I was unable to do sports in gym, and I constantly felt like I had to change in order to fit in. However, I was too lazy to change, so I continued to be called the fag.
I'm really happy that this film was made, because I had always just assumed that men were supposed to act certain ways, and that if one didn't conform, than he was just lesser of a man. The film helped me realize that there are different types of men, and they do not have to exert violence or sexism to be socially acceptable or man enough. It was the first time I had heard someone other than close friends speak about this subject as a social problem. I really appreciate how the film illustrates the problems that men face, because although women's issues are incredibly important, many people don't understand the pressure that men face in our society.

Blog for Choice

If you're looking for some pro-choice action visit this NARAL blog!

http://www.blogforchoice.com/

Masculinity

Just found this and thought it was interesting considering what we talked about today in class.

Killing Us Softly &Tough Guise

Watching these films was very hard, because it is such a horrible feeling to know that that is how your own society and culture view and value you. Killing Us Softly was particularly interesting to me, because the media's portrayal of women in ads has always bothered me, and I have seen its impact on women's bodies. The fact that the behaviors expected of women, to be submissive and 'below' men, is seen in ads with children, was very disturbing. I never really thought about just how much of an impact ads and the media have on people until I really thought about it after watching this. I liked how the media in Killing Us Softly linked into the portrayal of violence and masculinity in Tough Guise. It was very interesting to see how young men were describing masculinity, especially the independence factor. I have always thought that women included independence in their descriptions of a woman, much the way the men in the film were, but clearly, according to the film, two independent people of opposite sexes would not be a good idea. Women simply are not portrayed this way, and since these are the messages that people are getting about being a man or a woman, independence is not one that women are shown as having. Being a woman is all about being submissive and pleasing the men, according to the media, which is really quite sad. Being such a 'progressive' country, I would hope that our media would take that as well, and give alternate portrayals of women and men, but unfortunately, these images play into a fairy tale life that many young girls dream of. Much as I love Disney movies, they too play into the submissive, man-pleasing ways of the more recent media productions.

Reproductive Rights for Women

While looking through a few posts on feministing.com I came across one that particularly interested me. I have been looking into reproductive rights for women, and recently was surprised to find that the US House of Representative recently voted in favor of health care reform that included an abortion ban. So much for reproductive rights for women. The fact that there is still a problem with the lack of separation between church and state continues to bother me and I am even more surprised that people are still having trouble considering abortion services as health services. The interesting part about this post was not the fact that the blogger was as shocked and upset as I was when I heard the news but the fact that she believed that this ban could be a “movement win.” She believes that since there has been an uproar in the community and an increase in activism against this ban, it may help in the end bring women more reproductive rights. People have become recommitted to reproductive justice and more people have come to realize what a huge topic it really is. Women’s health needs to be protected and access needs to be expanded. People have had the wrong idea that electing Democrats into office and having a Democratic majority in the house also means that we are electing pro-choice majorities and that reproductive choice is safe. It is clear that this is untrue and more needs to be done on a government level to prevent more rights being taken from women. So I hope that this blogger is right and we can all be inspired and come together as a united movement.

sexist hair salon?

So I noticed that one of these hair salons is opening in Mansfield Crossing. Its called knockouts and the idea is that its like hooters but for haircuts. I was watching a local news channel and some people were complaining because they thought it was sexist an inappropriate, especially because it is opening next to Friendly's which is a kids/family restaurant. I was really torn about the sexist part. At first I didn't think it was such a big deal because it shouldn't matter what women want to wear while they are cutting a man's hair. But then I thought, well, there probably isn't a hair salon where women can go and get their haircut by men walking around in speedos. I also thought about the fact that most men who go there will most likely go to see their hairdresser walking around in a tight cropped shirt, rather than because she gives a really good haircut. Not only does this play into the whole "sex sells" idea, but it puts looks and sex appeal before skills. I know that giving a haircut might not be the biggest deal in the world, but using sex appeal to sell it sends a really bad message about women's ability to do something besides dress in skimpy clothing and look hot. I think that this idea can connect to many professions and can also show that something that may seem innocent could have a lot of deeper issues behind it.

Opting Out

I am not a working mother. And my own mother only worked for part of my childhood. However, I am a college aged young woman who is pursuing hire education while planning to raise a family someday so there were ways in which I could relate to the Opting Out article and other things that struck me as interesting. I do hope that the titles of optional up and coming articles such as “Gen X Men Crave Work/Life Balance Too” and
"Stay at Home Moms By Default, not Design” do surface in the publishing world in the upcoming future. I really wish I had the time to read the original article because I am curious to see this manifesto that sparked such a strong reaction. Hewett touches upon some of the other great writing there is about the modern working/mother/housewife living embodiment of yesterday and today. And one thing that is so great is she mentions how humorous motherhood autobiographical can be, and I think I have mentioned this before, humor stands out. Humor makes a point that statistics and scary seriousness sometimes falls short from. Hewett and Hochschild both look into this world that is so often mentioned but rarely studied. How is the modern day woman doing it all? Has any progress been made? If not, why not? Hewett and Hochschild both share in the belief that motherhood only deepened their sense of self as feminists, it added to, it did not take away.

Hewett and Belkin do serve a somewhat limited perspective focusing on the highly educated working woman who “opted out” but did they really? This idea of being “pushed out” is one that is recurring throughout the different texts in class and it sparks my interest because I wonder if women were surveyed would they say they opted out or were pushed out… and if they say they opted out is that just something they tell themselves? Are all women pressured to choose between home and career? I believe the answer is yes. Even if the woman herself denies this, I believe that they unknowingly are constantly being challenged to stay or go and the consequences of either with surface eventually.

A Conversation about Black Feminisms

Attending the informal talk with Beverly Guy-Sheftall and Paul Gidding's "A Conversation about Black Feminisms" was very interesting and thought provoking. Sheftall and Gidding’s had a conversation with each other to start off the discussion before taking questions from the students Sheftall was the discussion leader within the talking in asking Gidding’s about her new book IDA: A Sword Among Lions. This book is about Ida B. Wells and her contributions to the feminist movement and how her childhood played a huge role in her life.
I really enjoyed when both of these women had a chance to speak since Gidding’s was doing a huge chunk of the talking about her book previous to the discussion. My favorite part of the night was when Sheftall expressed how much of an activist she really is by talking about how she balances the life of an activist to her academic side. She stated that she has and will in the future put her job on the line if necessary so that she can stay true to her activist self. It is phenomenal that she can go to that extent just to make sure she keeps her two selves equal.

"Telling it like it is: Rewriting the "opting out" narrative" (optional post)

After reading the piece written by Heather Hewett and finishing up The Second Shift I really started to think about the word "choice" and what it means when we apply it to women and motherhood. Hewett talks about whether or not this idea of "opting out" is truly a choice or if it is the impact of "greater forces that often compel us to make certain choices." When a woman becomes a mother (now this is assuming the woman chose to have a child) she is taking on a huge responsibility- a life! Like The Second Shift talked about, the workforce has yet to fully accommodate those workers who have obligations to their children at home. Now this is where the word "choice" comes in: work or kids. Seems pretty simple right? Of course that is an impossible decision to make and a lot of the time there is not even the option of "choosing" to opt-out. In my optimistic mind I want to believe that it is fully possible to be a successful worker (by working I mean parent AND paid employee.) When I think about The Second Shift and Hewett's article a question comes to mind: what happens if a woman is single or in a relationship but has nobody to share the house/child care with? If she neglects the second shift is she a bad mother? If she neglects her work is she a weak female? There are endless labels women are given when it comes to work/life and the "choices" they make. Like Hewett mentions, it is important to remember that these decisions are not always real choices and are often a bigger systemic problem. Which is when the "personal is political" comes into play. When woman do find themselves having to leave the workforce to better things at home it is sometimes a political issue and not necessarily a personal choice. I have been told many times "you can't have the best of both worlds" but in this case I believe we should be able to have the best of both worlds. Actually I believe there should be only ONE world. Family life and work life need to work together!

reading my high school newspaper with a new feminist perspective

One of my favorite parts of my high school was my student newspaper, Inklings. I occasionally wrote for the paper, and now my little brother has joined the newspaper staff. He always emails me his articles, and once in a while one that he thinks I may find interesting, usually something about an old teacher I had or a club I was a part of. Last week, he emailed me this article about a tradition with the cheer leading squad. Football is a huge deal in my town, everybody goes to the games and the school is extremely supportive of the team. The article talks about a tradition where each cheerleader is assigned to a varsity football player who they bake for the night before a game, along with putting up a good luck poster in the cafeteria the Friday before a fame. The article discusses this tradition as sexist, because even though it is not required, there is the "everybody does it" idea that forces the cheerleaders to participate. The response to this article was mostly negative. Students claimed that it was not a big deal and could not see how it was sexist. What the article does not mention, however, is that it goes way beyond baking and signs in the cafeteria. At least while I was in high school, cheerleaders would often do their players laundry, carry their books the day before a game, bring them their lunch to their table, run errands for them after school, was their cars, pretty much become their personal assistant. I never really though of this as sexist while I was in high school, but looking back on it the entire thing seems absurd. What worries me most is not that this is happening, but the response that the students have to this "tradition". I was always very interested in women's rights, but never really considered myself a feminist until I went to college, when it was too late to be able to fix this and many other issues of sexism in my high school. I was curious to see what other women's studies students would think of this article and see if anybody who identifies as a feminist had any similar thoughts when they look back on their high school experiences.

feministing response

When I found out that the editors of feministing.com were coming to Wheaton, I visited the blog for the first time, and continued to read it once in a while when I had time to kill and was near my laptop. I never realized that having the editors come speak would be such an inspiring event. As a women's studies major, I always have trouble getting my point across to people (both on and off campus) that I am doing something worthwhile with my time at college. After hearing the editors speak in class, I felt much better equipped to go home for Thanksgiving break and give people examples of what I can do with my degree in women's studies. Later that night, I had dinner with the editors and sat next to Miriam. I also have an interest in women's health care, so I told her that I am really interested in what she does. My conversation with her opened up many new doors for me, and made me realize that I can do what I am passionate about and make changes in the world the way I want to. I was expecting to go to the lecture and just learn about feminist issues and what it is like to write for a feminist blog. Although I did learn all of those things, this event also helped me see what I am studying and where I am going with my life very differently. Since the editors have come to campus, I have been reading feministing almost every day and have a new outlooks on what my college education will lead me to later in life. THANK YOU FEMINISTING!!!!!

Feministing.com Response

Many points were brought up the night 3 editors/contributors from Feministing.com came to visit. The one that struck a cord with me most was that there is no right answer. There is no rigid agenda or set of values for feminists. For a woman of color, their MO could be getting racial equality and gender equality. For an LGBTQ woman, it's gay rights and women's rights.

This can be a blessing as well as a curse.

For members of the movement that need security in their cause (that like to know just what they're fighting for) this can cause a sense of lack of community and maybe even squabbles. They need then to embrace the uncertainty and flexibility of feminism (or should I say, feminisms). This can cause another problem too.
For people who want to join the cause they might think "Oh it's only about gay rights? I'm more of an economic-rights focused girl." Or if one asked about it, how would a member respond?

It was said at the panel that feminism is wanting equality for everyone that is oppressed. It's working together with any group neccessary to achieve global equality (the disabled community, communities of color, female communities all over the world, etc).

So in conclusion what is feminism's main goal? It's whatever you believe in. Much like what Mariam said about gender. Don't be a boy or girl if you don't feel like either of those fit you. Be a femme, be a butch, be a tomboy, be an androgene, be everything. This ties into their theory that feminism encompasses many spectrums and where you fall in that set of spectrums is the "right" feminism for you.

As a member of a society that loves categories and labels, I was worried to find myself able to free-fall amongst the labels. Queer, female, feminist. What do each of those mean, I'd ask. Well now it's a bit easier because ever since Feministing I ask, "What do each of those mean TO ME?"

The Institution of Marriage

Alright, so not to sound like a right wing Sarah Palin figure or anything, but why on earth does it make sense to want to abolish marriage? (This is in response to Ackelsberg/Plaskow article in WIR) Let me first get it out there that sure, I understand the argument being made about how marital benefits exclude large portions of the population and that isn't fair etc.; however, the solution then is not to "disestablish marriage as a legal form and the creation of a status of "civil union" that will allow people to create their own forms, and have them recognized by the state." The solution would be to petition for a better system of getting the "marital benefits" to those who aren't married and have no immediate plans to be married. This is not a problem with marriage, this is a problem with the government. And anyway, marraige should not be about the benefits, it should be about love and security. Call me crazy but I want to be married somday and feel safe in the knowledge that the person I have chosen to spend my life with has made a legal commitment not sleep with other people, to stay with me even when I'm old and fat, and to help take care of the children that we have raised together. Right, if it's a meaningful relationship and we are truly in love they should do this anyway; but I want more than that and a civil union doesn't necessarily imply that I'll get that particular set of benefits.

Chris Rock's Good Hair Preview

This is the trailer I discussed Monday in Class for the movie Good Hair. It mirrors a lot of the same things we were discussing about the pressures of modern society on African American Women to have certain hair to be considered "good"

Feminist Discussion at Wheaton

I thought this discussion on Thursday October 22 by Paula Giddings and Bevery Guy-Sheftall was really interesting and covered a wide range of topics. By beginning with the questions about the book, we as an audience were able to see the thought process of two very prominent African American feminist scholars as they discussed such an important figure in feminist history. They were able to speak strongly about the relationship and connection they could feel with a figure like Ida B. Wells-Barnett as they experienced the same process of understanding the violence and hate directed toward activism through their activist participation with freedom rides and protesting lynching, respectively. It was extremely interesting to be able to understand through the story of Ida how racism began to be defined in a dualistic manner and had different meanings for different generations. For the generation living through the post-slavery world it would appear that African-Americans were indeed making huge strides, the activism would go through waves.

After taking the time to discuss the novel an even more interesting, in my opinion, segment commenced with a question and answer session with the two women. In this segment they were able to address issues such as what it means to be an academic and an activist, as well as a broader discussion on their definition of feminism in general. When defining feminism they were able to assert that they feel to be a feminist is not only to fight for equality of gender but to end the process of all -isms in a society. After when asked if they found it difficult to identify as both an activist and a scholar the answer was promptly no. In fact it was stated that activism was not just a place outside of the university and by joining the Women's Studies department it offered a place to integrate both the activist and feminist aspects of their lives. They also discussed the fact that the way that feminism was constructed has had a negative effect on the connotations it receives today and if it had been more inclusive to all genders and races since the beginning it would have resulted in a much more effective agent to fight against all oppressions, not that of specifically women.

New Standards by Shania "Art" Mason

New Standards 831Share

Wednesday, July 9, 2008 at 8:47pm

I AM my hair
My hair is me
We are one, and we aspire to be free
Not locked and dreading
Not shocked or shedding
No weaves no threading
Just aspirin’ to be free
Naked as my body as the water hits it’s skin
This hair on my head reps the beauty that’s within
Not purchased from a store
not sweepin’ against the floor
Still I refuse to ignore
Who I really am
Cuz I’m not a straight-haired diva
Nor am I a believer
In colors, rinses, and dyes
Synthetic hair supporting enveloped lies
Sculptin’ a false image
Afraid to defy
What society wants every woman to be
Like them girls on the b.e.t
And the one’s that agree that
Longer is better
And better is beauty
And beauty is straight
And straight is cute
And straight is coool
And coool is in
From the root to her chin
Straight strands like strings of violins
Arrested by bobby pins
Let that shit be free
I said Let that shit be free!
Cuz your hair might be the closest you’ll ever get to freedom
So there’s your reason
To be natural
It’s a hard pill to swallow when you admire a reflection in the mirror that
Isn’t factual
It’s a hard pill to swallow when you believe something is yours because you paid for it
Paid 15 years for a house
But the government can still take it (it ain’t yours)
Weave to match the color of your real hair
But you still fakin’ (it ain’t yours)
Braids from your head to your toes
But your head’s achin’
Think that roller-set looks cute
But you’re mistakin’
Because what’s beautiful is when you can dance in the rain
And not worry about the money you paid for that touch-up
Goin’ down the drain
And beauty is when you can go swimmin’ when the blazin’ sun hits your skin
No caps, no nothing, just jump right on in
And beauty is when you can roll right out of bed
Spread some water and grease in your head
And move on with your day
And if you hear “ay bay bay,”
Then there’s more reason to feel great
That someone appreciates
The real you
The real you
The real hairdo
No glues,
And no 3 to 4 hours gone to waste
Just to replace
The image that you were born with
Thriving on all sorts of myths
And this shit makes me sick
It makes me sick when girls spend
So much money on hair, just to be back in the salon the next weekend
Stuck in the little girl mentality
Still playin’ pretend
Tryin’ to keep up with repetitious trends
When will this end?
Ladies,
Ladies,
Ladies, When will you begin to love your hair for what it is and what it isn’t
Black men,
Black men,
Black men, when will you allow your Nubian queens to be everything they are
Natural, Kinky, and so serene
It’s time that the standards of beauty be defined by the natural black woman
By everything she is and by everything that makes her stunning

PEACE+WISDOM
-ARTMASON

Discussion between Paula Giddings and Beverly Guy-Sheftall

I found the discussion on Thursday between Giddings and Guy-Sheftall to be very enlightening and thought-provoking. I enjoyed that the conversation was focused around Gidding's book and it was so interesting to learn more about Ida B. Wells, a person which I felt like I knew very little about. I was surprised and excited to learn that a woman (Wells) was the first person to begin an anti-lynching campaign in 1892. 

The point in the conversation that most stood out to me was when Giddings discussed the period of time after the Civil War in which there was Reconstruction, and how eventually that actually led into a regression. I had never really thought about the fact that the United States made so much progress towards equality between blacks and whites after the war, and then let that progress slip away for awhile, which eventually caused the civil rights movement. I found myself wondering, does progress in terms of civil or human rights ever really stick? It seems as if we periodically need to have a revolution of some kind which causes us to be re aware of certain issues. During Reconstruction, Giddings mentioned that a southern state had a black governor. How could we go from electing a black leader to then supporting Jim Crow laws, segregation and lynching. It doesn't seem to add up that we could regress so much in the progress that we made by fighting a war. I hope that not only in terms of racial equality, but also in the case of other issues that we struggle to fight for, we can find a way to make progress stick. 

Feminist Discussion

When I went to the lecture on Thursday, I expected the majority of the discussion between Paula Giddings and Beverly Guy-Sheftall to be about feminism and how they themselves identify as feminists. I was surprised that instead, it was about Ida B. Wells and her contributions to the feminist movement. I had learned about Ida B. Wells in a high school history class, but since then have not pursued her any further. However, when hearing Giddings describe Ida, and especially since I could hear the fascination in Giddings voice, I because really interested in Ida's story and even found a friend who will let me borrow Gidding's book to read! It was so interesting hearing Giddings describe how Ida's childhood affected her later life and led her to be such an activist. It definitely made me think a lot about how I've grown up and the women around me that have influenced me to be an activist.

The part of the lecture that I enjoyed the most was actually when questions were being taken from the audience. I felt like the audience asked really good questions and it was interesting to hear both women speak of their personal views and experiences. I especially liked when Beverly Guy-Sheftall talked about the ways that she was an activist and an academic when she was at various colleges and universities. She always put her views as a feminist first and she put her job on the line. I was so impressed when she said,"whats the worst that can happen, I lose my job." Most people do not think that way, losing their job would be the end of the world, but she is stands behind her ideals so strongly that losing her job would be less important than not standing up for something she believes in. I hope that some day I can be as passionate as her about a cause.

Thursdays Lecture

I felt that Thursdays lecture by Paula Giddings and Beverly Guy-Sheftall was very interesting, although not what I had expected. It was fascinating to hear about Ms. Giddings talk Ida B Wells book. The moment in the lecture that stands out to me however, was when Giddings was talking about when Well’s anti-lynching campaign started, there was little support for it in America, and it was not until she lectured in Europe that she started gaining vocal supporters. I did a little reading to learn more about this issue in particular, and found an article that explained that in the end, America’s concession to anti-lynching was not based on any desire to promote human rights, but to appeal to Brittan and greater Europe as a trading partner. At the time, America was desperately trying to build economic relationships, and in bringing her Anti-lynching campaign to Brittan, Ida B Wells managed to gain enough outrage that it forced the united states to take note and change its lynching policy.
This is once again a glorious example of society not changing unless being absolutely forced to, and for the wrong reasons. Time and time again, money is shown to be the universal motivator. While learning this particular example did not surprise me, its still extremely frustrating to me that major human rights issues are not seen as important until money is involved. And this is not a problem that we have overcome in the past century; to this day issues of humanity are not dealt with unless something profitable is at stake. There are dozens of examples, you need only think take into consideration every war we’ve ever fought for gains, and ever genocide we’ve ever ignored.

An intellectually stimulating and motivating conversation (about Black Feminisms)!

This past Thursday I had the pleasure of not only attending professors Beverly Guy-Sheftall and Paul Gidding's "A Conversation about Black Feminisms" but the private luncheon with them as well. Between both activities I had the opportunity to hear about how Seftall and Giddings became feminists, their personal experiences and the process and motivation behind Gidding's IDA: A Sword Among Lions. Out of the two, I enjoyed the luncheon the most. The luncheon was where the black feminist scholars spoke more on their journeys and personal experiences. There was more time for questions and although I did not ask any during the actual lunch, I did spend a good amount of time speaking with both of them afterwards and then again after the conversation. Not only was able to speak more with Gidding's about her new biography but we laughed over the similarities about our mothers and how they would never call themselves a feminist but have so many obvious traits! When talking with Sheftall I learned a lot about Spelman College (a school I was always considering to attend) and what it's like to teach Women's Studies courses there and I even left with a great topic for my research paper for my Black Political Thought class.

Most importantly I was motivated by these women. There was was overwhelming amount of intelligence and passion they exuded about black feminism and feminism in general. Yes this is reflected in their work as writers, professors and activists, but it was a pleasure to see and hear about it first hand. While they repeatedly encouraged me to study Women's Studies further then this Intro class, they may not have realized that I was already encouraged just by listening to their discussion. I'm really glad that they came to Wheaton and that I had the two opportunities in one day to get to know them, have questions answered and gain motivation in staying strong and true to who I am and open to growing physically, mentally and spiritually as a young black woman.

A Black Feminist Conversation

I thought that the conversation that Paula Giddings and Beverly Guy-Sheftall had was amazing. I learned a lot from it, especially about Ida B Wells. However, one of the things that struck me the most was when they were asked to define feminism, and later, womanism. It was Beverly Guy-Sheftalls definition that I thought was the most interesting. I liked how she described feminism as being "the politics," not the beliefs about equal rights for all people. Or, as she put is, "the politics that say we will not tolerate any oppression." Instead of just saying oppression, she described it as racism, sexism, and any othter sorts of isms that can oppress people. I completely agreed with her, especially when she continued that it was also a "commitment to eradicating" all oppressions. They then both agreed that men can be feminists, and that womanism is a part of feminism, but also something that can be potentially used to get black women to disassociate from feminism. Their discussions about feminism and Ida B Wells were very interesting and made me think about the "F-Word" papers that we wrote earlier in the semester, and how their definitions of feminism compared to the ones that I wrote about in my paper. The other part of their discussion of feminism that really caught my attention was when Guy-Sheftall was explaining how she identifies herseflf. She said that she doesn't call herself a womanist, but a feminist, and if pressed, she will sometimes call herself a black feminist. I thought that this was also very interesting because of the title of the discussion, which had black feminism in it. Overall though, I thought it was a fabulous discussion and they were incredibly fascinating women.

A Conversation about Black Feminism (optional post)

The conversation between Professor Beverly Guy- Sheftall and Paula Giddings was not at all what I was expecting. I thought it was going to be some sort of debate or a conversation about what it means to be a black feminist in today's world. Although it was not what I what I had been expecting to hear, I found it very interesting. During the conversation about Ida B. Wells I really felt like I was learning something- as though I was learning an important part of history but in an interesting and personal way. I also find it easier to understand a historical figure through discussing their life and what they did and why they made history. Ida B. Wells is a name I have heard many times throughout my education but it was not untill sitting in the Holman room that I really felt like I was learning about her. Sheftall and Giddings dialoge was very personal and honesty. I did not feel like I was watching a presentation or hearing a lecture and I think that is what I found the most powerful about their conversation. It was so surprising to hear that it took twenty years to write and publish the book! That really empishised how much time research and effort goes into writing a great book. Overall I thought the discussion was extreamly powerful and interesting to witness. Not only was it intersting but it was also informative and I left with more knowledge than I had when I entered.

Optional Post on Giddings and Guy-Sheftall

The part of Paula Giddings and Beverley Guy-Sheftall’s presentation that I found the most intriguing was when a member of the audience asked what they considered to be the definition of feminism. I really liked and agreed with Giddings response which was along the lines of it being the struggle to eliminate all of the –isms (sexism, racism, etc.) that oppress people. The broadness of the definition, and the fact that it takes a multi-faceted approach to oppression are two aspects that I think make it both practical and effective. Including all –isms, and making the clear statement that it is not just sexism that the feminist movement is trying to eradicate is a huge step in de-mystifying the Feminist Movement in today’s society. There are so many stereotypes and narrow perceptions of what the Feminist Movement means today and who it represents and I see Giddings’s articulation of what feminism is as putting these misconceptions to rest. I also thought this definition was interesting because we studied Feminist Criminology in my Criminology class last week. Both Feminist Criminology and bell hooks look at the interlocking systems of oppression that include race, gender, and socioeconomic status. While these are only three of the “identities” (or things off of which –isms can be created) that Giddings’s sees feminism as working to eradicate, I feel that both bell hooks and Feminist Criminology are taking the right steps in looking at feminism as being about more than just sexism.

A Conversation about Black Feminisms

Today's luncheon and panel with Paula Giddings and Beverly Guy-Sheftall was amazing. Today was truly a day to remember because these women were phenomenal. During the luncheon they mentioned the role of an African American mother in the household is essential. They spoke personally about their mothers being possible feminist without the exact title. That a lot of what their mothers did illustrated feminism. I thought this was great. It allowed me to reflect on the ways in which my mother runs the household and I realize that a lot of what she does illustrate feminism also. So that assured me that I am becoming like my mother while learning about feminism in textbooks. The correlation that I am finding between the things my mother does and what is given as examples in textbooks is pure feminism without ever using the word or the exact definition. Also, the misconceptions that I have heard have been disregarded about feminist and feminism. I was never raised to believe in what others had to say about a certain group of people or movement I was always pushed to find things out on my own so that I can judge them for myself. So feminism to me is not negative at all, like Guy-Sheftall stated "it is truly liberating" and a radical way to fight all oppressions. Overall, this discussion was remarkable and it enlightened my thinking of feminism and being a feminist.

Blog Evaluation

I had a hard time finding a blog I wanted to write about- there were a lot of different options but I wanted one I could really analyze and evaluate! Eventually I came across one post on "Cruella-blog" the post was titled, "YouPorn and PornTube. Really." I was really interested in this blog because the porn industry (in my opinion) is a huge contributor to how woman are treated and thought about in society. After I read the blog I was torn; was it good or bad? The main problem I had with it was that the blogger did not reach any conclusion- she touched on a lot of good points but never seemed to carry them out or analyze them fully. There were definitly postive aspects about the post as well, it opened a space for dialoge on a topic that is often kept on the backburner and it looked at the legal aspects of internet porn as well as more general thoughts about it. Something that I learned doing this assignment was that the comments by others about the blog are a good way to get more information. I found that some of the problems I had with the blog were expressed by others in the comments. The author of the blog then responded to those comments which allowed me to better understand what the author wanted readers to take from her post. Overall, I found the assignment interesting and it got me a bit more comfortable with the blogging world!

Giving Head?

So I was browsing through facebook over October Break like I'm sure many of us were and I came across a very deplorable post. It was a commercial for Heineken. Heineken is a beer I often enjoy so I figured what the heck.. the post says its hilarious, I'll watch the commercial. Its just thirty seconds right? So the advertisement goes something like this. A man appearing in his mid 20's comes home with red roses. he reaches into the fridge and grabs two bottles of Heineken. He then runs up the stairs to greet his girl (couldn't tell what relationship they shared). He swings open the door to find her naked on her knees in front of a big muscular man aggressively moving her face back and forth into his crotch with his hands on the back of her head. The muscular man is smiling at the guy with the beer. The man with Heineken pops one open and says whatever. The commercial wraps up with a big Heineken logo and drink responsibility.

So my question about the original post and 29 comments left by people I knew and respected is where is the funny? I couldn't find it anywhere. This is disguisting yes filthy trash that should not be allowed a spot on the airwaves. What someone does sexually is their private business and I personally have no objection to blowjobs. However, this went a step beyond. It made women appear as if they were just some object to satisfy needs of a man. Furthermore, the beer is shown more respect than the women. This commercial clearly subordinates women. As someone with 7 sisters this was highly offensive and unlike the 29 other viewers I cannot see the humor in this. I also highly doubt that any beer company would shoot a commercial with the opposite scenario; a women receiving oral stimulation by another man as his girlfriend comes home. Men will not be made to feel like they are less important than a bottle of beer and a mere sexual object. Your comments on this are appreciated. The video is embedded below

The link is embedded here for those who wish to be disgusted for 30 seconds:

Mojo Mom

The blog I chose to examine and evaluate for this paper is titled “Mojo Mom”. This blog is authored by Amy Tiemann of Chapel Hill, North Carolina and is an extension of her book titled Mojo Mom: Nurturing Yourself While Raising a Family. According to Tiemann, “Mojo Mom” is about “exploring creativity, connection and action”. After reading the current blog and several archived pages, the purpose of the blog was clear. The blog was created to help women figure out their self identity after becoming mothers. The blog posts vary but, for the most part inform people about issues surrounding motherhood and child rearing, as well as identity. Tiemann accomplishes this through podcasts, numerous book reviews, interviews, and a close examination of related current affairs and news worthy events.

...

It is obvious to me that one of the goals of this blog is also to raise the spirits of women after motherhood. Tiemann acknowledges motherhood is difficult but also offers many inspirational stories to let fellow mothers know they are not alone. One such story was on Kim Clijsters, who made a comeback to win the U.S. open women’s title after coming out of retirement and tackling injuries and burnouts, all while raising a toddler. She is a hard working woman and the message is simple: if she can do it well, so can the rest of the women.

Although the content of the blog is great, the overall visual design is lacking and dull. There is a white background with simple black text. The usual blog roll and guest interviews on one side with podcasts. The information is rich in content for the intended audience and I think if I were a woman and were to become a mother I would benefit from this very much; I suspect in the future as a father I will also. The content makes the blog in this case. The plain Jane look does not help attract attention nor does it hurt the blog because there are not many distractions from the text. The authors repeated use of pictures also keeps one zoned into the stories as well. There were no advertisements on this blog other than a twitter and a facebook solicitation. I feel this also helped give the feeling of a very intimate blog for mothers and parents alike; not one that was meant to solicit but one that was truly meant to help guide mothers toward raising children to be independent productive young adults, while regaining the sense of personal identity that can sometimes by forfeited because of child rearing.

Blog Response

A blog titled “Lesbian Soldier Denied DADT Discharge Now Seeking Canadian Asylum: Autostraddle Interviews Pte. Skylar James” caught my eye among many of the other posts on feministing.com. While reading the article with an attached interview with Skylar herself, I couldn’t help but feel completely disgusted and disappointed with the United States Military system. Skylar is a homosexual female serving in the US military, from a young age she never questioned the importance of defending and protecting her country and she even mentioned her intent “to make her parents and her country proud.”
Skylar’s experienced physical and emotional abusive treatment for her sexual orientation by her peers and superiors. This is a brutal example of the corruption that remains present throughout our country. It is especially disturbing to read about this type of treatment within a group which stands for unity. In a time like this, where our country is at war, I would have thought that the army (the US army at that) would embrace everybody and anybody who was physically qualified and willing to serve. Sexual orientation should never affect anybody’s right to defend their country.

Blog Evaluation

For my blog evaluation, I looked at pandagon.net. This blog was easy to understand, as it was written in an everyday language with very few academic terms thrown in (ones that a non academic would not understand). I loved the style that it was written in, a sarcastic, humorous, yet informative voice, as well as one that was easy to connect to. The posts were funny, and extremely informative. I learned quite a bit from this blog. I had previously read blog entries on other blogs about the National Cupcakes for Life Day, and when I came across an entry on pandagon I figured it would be the same type of entry, just laughing at what the pro-lifers were trying to do. Instead, I read the entry and came out surprised. Rather than look at the messages that the cupcakes were trying to send, the entry explored the reality of the cupcakes health effects, and the messages that the cupcakes were sending to children through their nutrition. I loved how it was written, giving the basic background information, and then blowing the whole cupcake idea apart, blasting them for their consideration of women's health - none, and their suggestion for another national "blank" day, one for pro-choicers against diabetes, something that the entry suggests the pro-lifers don't really care about.

For a blog that is funny, informative, and a good read, pandagon.net is definitely the right choice.

Blog Evaluation

I enjoyed this blog evaluation assignment because it gave me a chance to learn more about blogs. I came across a couple of blogs Feminist Law Professors, Jezebel, Bitch Ph.D and a few more that I will occasionally refer to get informed on what is happening. These blogs share amusing post, for example,I came across this column on Bitch PH.D WHYAMITAKINGCAREOFAFUCKINGCATIHATECATS.

I could not help but laugh while reading it! A post on a blog similar to this one is an example of how freely narrated postings on blogs can be. Postings are very opinionated and should tell an experience about an experience that a reader can relate to. However, postings are also self-censoring, it is critical to be cautious of what you say because blogs are open to the public. This leads me to the most essential part of making a post and commenting, target the idea and not the individual. Making a comment on a post that targets the idea allows for further discussion where as targeting the individual diminishes character. The blogger of the above column truly hates cats and so do I, so I can relate to some of the things she states. The responses to her blog relate to other persona experiences and are also amusing.

Blog Evaluation

For my blog Evaluation I looked at Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog. This is a blog dedicated to answering the FAQs about feminist ideology. While there is human percpetion and opinion involved, all blogs and comments are as to the point and straightforward as possible. The site has a lenghty introduction page that shows readers how to use the site and offers reasons for why they may bave been referred there (maybe they were asking questions that feminsts were tired of answering, or wanted to refresh on the principles of feminsm).

The layout of the site was somewhat academic, in that there were few graphics and the font was basic. Several posts quoted existing materials, but did so with proper citation and within the context of their argument. Interestingly. I could not find any advertisments on the site. I do not know why this, and could not find a monitor or who was controlling the blog either. I found this interesting because I would think that the site would have to have some sort of financial backing to be able to stay online.

If you're someone looking for basic information about feminist ideology, or looking to learn about some issues encompassed by it, then this site is a great one.

Free-Write 1

She's Gotta Have It, discussed in bell hook's Talking Back, was one of the more disturbing things I have come across since the last Women's Studies class (Michael Douglas raping someone over a couch...not cool for so many reasons).  The "whose pussy is this" bit is disgusting because it's not only enforcing, as bell said, the idea that it's up to the woman to make an act of violent violation enjoyable, but also because it's like the male is teaching her a lesson.  She "learns" that her being sexually liberated is "wrong" and decides to marry the rapist like a good girl.  What she should have done is answered truthfully, her pussy's her own.  And marrying the guy?  How about turning him over to the cops so he can go to jail-showers and answer the question: "Whose ass is this?"

This reminded me of a post on girlwpen.com in which there is a list of things to help prevent rape.

Sexual Assault Prevention Tips Guaranteed to Work!

1. Don’t put drugs in people’s drinks in order to control their behavior.

2. When you see someone walking by themselves, leave them alone!

3. If you pull over to help someone with car problems, remember not to assault them!

4. NEVER open an unlocked door or window uninvited.

5. If you are in an elevator and someone else gets in, DON’T ASSAULT THEM!

6. Remember, people go to laundry to do their laundry, do not attempt to molest someone who is alone in a laundry room.

7. USE THE BUDDY SYSTEM! If you are not able to stop yourself from assaulting people, ask a friend to stay with you while you are in public.

8. Always be honest with people! Don’t pretend to be a caring friend in order to gain the trust of someone you want to assault. Consider telling them you plan to assault them. If you don’t communicate your intentions, the other person may take that as a sign that you do not plan to rape them.

9. Don’t forget: you can’t have sex with someone unless they are awake!

10. Carry a whistle! If you are worried you might assault someone “on accident” you can hand it to the person you are with, so they can blow it if you do.

This struck a bell with me because, as above with the rape in She's Gotta Have It, most assume that preventing rape is up to women.  That we need to follow certain protocol or else it's our fault for being reckless when in fact we should be able to walk the streets at midnight because we are human beings and the only reason we can't is because of predatory male instincts for domination.

I'm tired of women needing to be the victim and the hero at the same time.  Rapists, if you need to fuck something into submission, your hand's right there.

Makoni and Taking Action

I think women in America often get blinded to some of the higher degrees of inequality facing women around the world. Women are here in the states fighting for equal workplace opportunities, equal educational opportunities, and just equal respect in general. However, the global struggle for women’s rights is one that has to overcome situations far worse than we are facing here. One of the blog posts on the Clio website caught my eye in how different the severities of sexist treatment are globally. The July 2008 post about a woman from Zimbabwe, Betty Makoni, was the most memorable of the five or so posts that I read. In her country, they haven’t even had the chance to fight for women’s higher education. From the Penguin Atlas, we saw on page 81 that fewer than 75% of girls in Zimbabwe who start primary education complete it. They struggle daily to survive without getting raped, tortured, or hurt by men in authority. I can’t imagine a life where as a young girl I wasn’t safe from sexual violence at my elementary school. As women, we should be concerned with the well being of our entire gender, not just the issues that directly affect our daily lives. I realize that problems with sexual violence are prevalent here in the States as well as abroad. However, I think it is safe to say that there is a very different focus of the daily feminist struggle from country to country. As Offen states in the title of this particular blog post, we can inspire people by not only seeing this obvious problem, but by taking action.

The US is Overrated

I found The Penguin Atlas of Women in the World to be the most interesting [in a shocking kind of way] piece we’ve read yet this semester. Although it was very informative I was honestly more disgusted than anything at most of what I read/saw. Here I was living in my own little world believing women were practically equal-- a clearly naïve thought. I had always thought the United States was so advanced in the majority of aspects of life, in comparison with other countries; to find that we weren’t is what concerned me the most. For example in the “In Their Place” section, the United States is equal to places like Libya, Sudan and Nigeria in its “religious fundamentalism and nationalist pressure on women, resulting in heightened legal and social restrictions (late 1990s – 2002). And as of May 2002 the United States was one of the ONLY countries (1 of 3) to have signed but not ratified the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). The United States also has the second highest (behind South Africa) amount of “actual number of rapes estimated to occur each year” at 700,000. These statistics are bewildering to me and I can’t believe I thought so highly of the US for so long.
What bothered me the most in the book though, were the statistics on death from illegal abortions in Africa; almost 50% of the deaths that occur from illegal abortions occur in Africa. If you compare these numbers to the number of available contraceptives in Africa, you can see a lot of these deaths could be prevented so easily [not to mention how much basic sexual knowledge and contraceptives could aid in the fight against the HIV/AIDS epidemic].

The Penguin Atlas of Women in the World

The first section of this book is titled "States Against Discrimination". Does it make sense for the United States to be the only country which has signed but not ratified the CEDAW Treaty (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women)? Countries like Saudi Arabia, Iraq and South Africa have not only signed this Convention but they have also ratified it. I find it very hard to believe that countries in which women are not allowed to drive cars or ride bicycles, where women may not confer citizenship, where women need permission from their husbands to leave the country and even where women are offered by their families to the men who rape them in order to preserve family honor, have signed off on this "Treaty of Equality". I can't help but find humor in the fact that the very first page of this book is a lie and that the United States appears to give women less rights than women in other parts of the world who are being secluded, raped and even killed by their husbands.

The Penguin Atlas of Women: Global Feminism

The Penguin Atlas of Women was a comprhensive view of just about every possible issue that face women today, most of it quite disturbing. The section that struck me the most were the pages dealing with rape. It seems that of all the crimes against women, rape is the most univeral and often goes unreported and unpunished. Rape is present in every country around the world and in some places it is even legal in certain situations; in most of Africa and Asia men are allowed to rape their wives. What makes this most heinous is the absolute perversion of marriage. It should be an institution of love and trust, but so many women are forced into marriages they don't want and made to consumate the marriage against their will. That a man could force himself on his wife, a painful and hateful act, is unacceptable.

Two things about the map I found especially interesting were a) the lack of data concerning the number of rapes in the Middle East and Asia and b) the fact that America has by far the largest number of reported rapes. As to that first observation, it is interesting because both those areas are notorious for arranged marriages and widely accepted abuse of women in general. It made me wonder if there wasn't any data because women simply do not report the rapes because no one will care? The second observation, about the 700,000 rapes in America each year, is just absolute shock. America is only third in line for largest popukation in the world, so that can't be the reason. It is illegal for a man to rape his wife. So why does America have so many rapes? I don't have an answer, if anyone wants to make a suggestion please write a comment.