She's Got to Be a Macho Girl

While writing my essay about the article "She's Got to Be a Macho Girl" by Kuczynski, I found myself wanting to say some things about the article that I could not stick into my paper so I figured I would just blog about it. First of all to summarize, the article is about how girls are becoming more aggressive at initiating relations with the opposite sex. It is thought that they have achieved this power from watching powerful women in the media and from feminist ideas that are taught to them at a young age.

This article does not convince me that this is occurring on a large scale because it was based on anecdotal information from what I believe to be a biased group. I believe it to be biased because it consisted of psychologists and counselors who generally only see children with some sort of problem. These children that they are seeing could be coming to them because they are dealing with issues related to sex whereas those who are not having sex might not be as aggressive towards boys. Since they are not having sex they might not need to go see them. This might be a stretch but nonetheless, I feel the research could be done in a better manner. This being said, I do not know that the article is even trying to indicate that this is occurring on a large scale but since I do not really feel that it is, I just wanted to point it out.

Furthermore, the article gives a positive and negative analysis of this situation. It is positive because girls are becoming more equal to boys in the dating world, but they are also becoming less sensitive and putting themselves in jeopardy. Is it really worth it for girls to take advantage of their sexuality in order to be "equal" to guys? Honestly, I felt really bad for the girls being discussed in the article and to me they did not seem empowered at all. The article says that they approach men in a sexualized manner because they think "this is all I have to offer" and that they are learning how to act from the predatory actions of women in the media. Also according to the article, girls do not associate love with sex anymore so that they will not get hurt. These different pieces from the article paint a very sad picture of young girls to me.

The article points out positives as well saying that girls are empowered, they will question everything, and they have more control in relationships. Are these positives worth the negatives? That is a matter of opinion. I think in order to lessen the negatives without losing the positives girls need to be taught empowerment and aggressiveness not by sexualized figures but by strong women who do not need to use sex to get what they want. Girls need positive figures in their life and in the media. The media really needs to change in order to give young girls the right idea about being strong women and if the media is not going to change, parents need to make sure that their children know that the media is corrupt. This, of course, is a hard task but parents need to make an effort or else young girls will continue to feel that they need to sexualize themselves in order to be on an equal playing field with their counterparts.

In addition to the negatives listed above, girls are also putting themselves in greater danger of getting pregnant or contracting STIs. Girls become so focused on being sexy and trying to please guys that they forget that there are serious consequences for their actions. This point brings up the question of are young kids receiving appropriate sex education? In the one case in the article, a girl that was acting like a "vixen" ended up getting pregnant and contracting an STI. She had not been taught about her body and the value of sex. Comprehensive sex education is vital in making sure girls know these things so that cases like these can be prevented.

Honour Killings: Saved from India's caste system by the Love Commandos

In this article, it talks about how men and women that fall in love are forbidden to get married due to the tradition of arranged marriage. It is not acceptable for someone to marry someone of a lower caste. A specific couple, Aarti and Sanjay, wanted nothing more than to be together, but Aarti's family would not allow her to marry this "lowly" boy. Because of her disobedience, Aarti was beaten by her family and her neighbors and was sold by her family 3 times! Luckily, a group called the Love Commandos, which consists of volunteers, provided the lovers with safety. Even though the two are technically married, they are still in danger and are under a sentence of death. The Love Commandos group formed after many brutal killings took place. They value love and want to protect others that do as well, even with their minimal funding and even if it means putting their life in danger.

Those who defend arranged marriages argue that people who fall in love before marriage and then get  married will end up falling out of love. Whereas, those who get married without first being in love will then fall in love later. So, parents think they are helping their children by forcing them to marry a certain person. So really they just are trying to do what is best for their kids, right? If that is the case, then why are they beating their child? Even if she is disobeying their wishes, that does not mean that they should be allowed to physically harm her. It seems pretty hypocritical to me to act as if you are just trying to give them a good life while at the same time causing them tremendous pain.

This article reminds me of a movie called the Wedding Planner. Jennifer Lopez's family continually tries to influence her into marrying this guy. She is not interested because she is not in love with him. When she gets angry with her father he confesses that his marriage to her mother was arranged and they were very unhappy about it at first. Over time, they grew to love each other and he wanted the same for his daughter. Jennifer Lopez almost goes against what her heart is telling her to do (marry a different guy) but realizes it is not for her. Just because it worked out for her parents does not mean that it would work out for her as well. Personally, I think that those in India that believe in arranged marriages need to realize that arranged marriages can work or they can fail and the same goes for marriages that are not arranged. By not letting their children decide for themselves they are only pushing them away and possibly losing them as a part of their life, such as in the case of Aarti.

Privileges

While I was writing my blog about transgender, I had mentioned that I was wondering what other privileges I have that I am not aware of. I proceeded to get into the topic a little too much so I decided I should just write another blog about it. One privilege that I thought about that I have but am unaware of is being right handed. The majority of people are right-handed so pretty much everything is designed around being right-handed. The first thing I thought of was the sport I play, field hockey. Field hockey sticks are designed for right-handed people and left-handed people have to use the same sticks. At least in baseball they have left-handed gloves as well but for my sport there is simply nothing left-handers can do except use the same sticks as right-handers. This is just a small example but there are so many more. I actually did a little research and read something that summed up some of these right-handed privileges that we often do not think about (unless you are left-handed of course).

In "The Right Hand of Privilege," Steven Jones, Ph.D. writes:

We shake with our right hands. We pledge with our right hand. We salute with our right hand. We take legal and governmental oaths with our right hand. School desks are set up for right-handed people. Most baseball mitts are designed for right-handed people. When computers first came out, the mouse was set up on the right-hand side. Cars are set up for right-handed people to drive comfortably. Notebooks are designed for right-handed people to write comfortably. Guns are designed for right-handers to shoot. Appliances open to the right, making it easy for right-handers to open. Punch ladles are designed for right-handed people. Most coffee mugs are designed for right-handed people to pick up and see the picture or words. If a left-handed person picks up the same mug, there is nothing there to see! I recently went into a store called the Left-handed store in San Diego, Ca. When was the last time you walked into your local Wal-Mart, Target, or departmental store and thought about the fact that you were in a right-handed store?

I am sure the list could go on for a while but he definitely makes his point. This is another privilege I have that I am going to be aware of. Of course, there really is not anything I can do because I am not in charge of designing anything. I have to wonder if left-handed people recognize that they are disadvantaged. I think that they most likely do but at the same time, men are privileged over women yet I often do not think about their privileges. This is probably because a lot of the privileges of men are things related to careers and when they are a part of a family. Some of the privileges of men that affect me now though include men having less pressure to be thin, their emotions will not be blamed on "that time of the month," grooming costs are lower, and clothes are less expensive and usually are more likely to fit properly. I had to think a while though to come up with these because it is not something that affects me, at least consciously, on a day to day basis.

So now that I have become aware of some of these disadvantages I face, am I really any better off? Maybe I was better off not knowing and living in bliss. Actually though, I think I am better off being aware because I was starting to feel bad for having so many privileges. It is no ones fault that they are born with privileges but it is good to be aware of them and considerate of those who are disadvantaged. Ideally, being aware will help us slowly even out the playing field in these different areas. Whether that is realistic though, I am not sure.

Transgender

Prior to this presentation I did not know a lot about transgender. I now know that transgender means that an individual has a difference between their sex and gender meaning that their biological sex does not match up with their socially perceived set of characteristics. I never realized how much transgender people have to go through on a daily basis. These are things that cisgendered people, like myself, take for granted. There is a long list of privileges that cisgendered people have that we are unaware of; for instance, i do not have to worry about not being able to use a public restroom, being addressed with the wrong pronouns, or be afraid to go to the doctor in fear of discovery. In a previous blog I wrote about privileges I have because I am white and little did I know that I also have another list full of privileges for being cisgendered. This make me wonder about how many other ways I am unknowingly privileged.

During the presentation we explored different models of gender. One model is set up in a way that puts male and female in opposition to one another. Therefore, you can be masculine, feminine, or somewhere in between. This model does not work because it does not account for people that are high in masculine and feminine traits. Another model has the two as separate spectras which fixes the problem of the first model. This model, however, is still rather simple and binary. A new idea for a model accounted for attribution, identity, and expression. In this model, each category consists of 5 spaces that can be filled in as masculine, feminine, or neutral. Attribution describes what others view you as, identity is how you feel, and expression is how you choose to express your gender. Although this model allows for a very fluid explanation of gender, it might be too fluid. The model could be constantly changing in multiple aspects of a person's life. However, one way to use it is to observe patterns. I am not too sure about the attribution category though. If someone attributes the wrong gender to me and tells me, then that could hurt my feelings. I am not sure that this would necessarily change my identity and maybe not even my expression. Furthermore, if someone attributes me the wrong gender and I do not know about it, then it does not affect me at all.

I particularly enjoyed the part of the presentation in which a guest speaker, Andy, came in to talk to us. I have seen Andy around campus and prior to earlier this year I did not know that she was transgendered. Even when I learned that a couple weeks ago, I did not know what that entailed. A lot of people instantly assume Andy is a male that wears skirts and do not care to learn the truth. I am so glad that now I have an understanding of transgender because I want to be respectful of other people and their feelings. However, I also do not want to assume someone is transgendered by looking at them because that could be disrespectful as well. I guess the only way to be fair is to not assume anything at all and actually get to know people. This, however, I know would be extremely difficult to do. It is unreasonable to ask every person you meet about their gender considering a majority of people are cisgendered. So, although I cannot stop assuming gender all together, I am more aware and can be more respectful.

Contested Spaces

In the three poems by Wong, Rushin, and Carrillo the authors expresses their anger and/or resentment towards whites that comes from their experiences of being a minority. Wong wished she was white instead of dark throughout her whole life and constantly strived to fit into that mold. Rushin is tired of being the only black friend of her group and she explains all the ways that others rely on her for this reason. Carrillo writes about how "white sisters" just do not understand what it is really like to be dark skinned and about their misconceptions. They may have pictures of a black woman but they do not actually have a black friend.

Macintosh's article helps explain the anger that Carrillo shows toward white men and women. White people have a privilege that comes along with being white but they do not realize this. Because they do not recognize that they have an advantage over minorities, minorities become resentful. Macintosh says that if someone is privileged but does not know that they are then they will not be able to work at ending it. Personally, I know their are times when I forget how privileged I am that I am white but their are times that I recognize it. Even when I do recognize it though, I feel as if there is nothing I can do to help fix it. The best that I think that I can do is to try to maintain awareness and to not use my privilege to further disadvantage those that are not privileged.

The article by Macintosh also relates to the poem by Rushin. It seems to me that the white friends of this black individual rely on her to be their link to the black world and make them feel better about themselves because they have a black friend. Even though they are priviliged, by having a black friend they seem to be trying to show that they are equal and not privileged. By having one black friend they are not proving anything about equality. Actually, they are just causing aggrevation to their black friend because of their inability to see that they truly are privileged.

Wong's poem can also be analyzed with the help of Macintosh's article. Wong recognizes the privileges of white people and longs to gain such advantages. Instead of expressing anger, Wong expresses her enviousness of whites. It is a shame that she must feel this way because she even says some things that she was proud of about herself when she was young, like her intelligence. Unfortunately, others have put ideas in her head that being Chinese is not as good as being white. It is true that whites have privileges but minorities should be happy with their selves just the way they are. However, I know this is easier said than done due to the world we live in.

Reaction to Articles for Thursday Presentation

My reaction to the first article, ABC Links American Christans to Anti-Gay Death Penalty in Uganda, is mostly just shocked. The American Pastor with extreme views, Scott Lively, and the Ugandan Pastor Martin Ssempa said some very awful things about homosexuals. Feelings against homosexuals in Uganda are so strong that the potential law could result in the death penalty for some. It is crazy how influential a group of Americans can be on another country. As a country we need to be careful about the messages we are sending to others. I hope that these pastors did not intend for something so extreme to come from what they said and that being the case I hope they will be more careful about what they are portraying to other countries.
In the next article, Ugly Betty is Gone. Now Where's the Latina TV?, they talked about the scarcity of Latina actresses. I do agree with the article that it must be hard for Latinas to find roles in TV but I have to wonder what the difference is in a ratio form because I would think that there are probably a lot less Latinas than Caucasians trying to break into the industry. I would like to know the percent of each, whites and Latinas, that are trying to achieve roles and do or do not succeed.

The third article about gender role perceptions the author talks about the stereotypes that Asian-American women must face. They are thought to be either captive prostitutes, submissive, fragile China dolls, sex pots, or housekeepers. Asian-Americans respond to the societal stereotypes that are put on them by internalizing them which causes them to be part of their attitude and behavior. The gender roles are transmitted through family and other aspects of socialization. In all, gender role perceptions and intergenerational differences are determined by an interaction of macro, micro, and developmental factors. I knew that the gender roles of women were affected in these ways but I had not really considered it through the aspect of race. The lack of diversity of portrayal of Asian-American women in the media negatively affects them because they are forced to take on these stereotypical roles.

Oppression

In class we broke into groups and tried to first define oppression. My group described it as being the opposite of equality and we said that one agency is limited by another. We talked about how someone higher in a hierarchy oppresses someone that is lower in the hierarchy.

When we talked about oppression as a class, we started to become unclear over the difference between discrimination and oppression. The example given of saying that only people with glasses would get A's really cleared the concept up for me. Since wearing glasses is not part of a bigger system in which wearing glasses is discriminated against, the example does not describe oppression but rather just discrimination. The trait that is being considered has to be identifiable outside of the oppressed status. Another misconception that we talked about is that if harm is being done to you that you are being oppressed. This is incorrect because someone must also be benefiting in order to consider this harm to be oppression.

We also talked about in-group/out-group discrimination. When you are a minority and you do something wrong, others will blame the whole group and attribute that particular characteristic to everyone in the group. When you are not a minority and you do something wrong, the whole group does not get blamed or stereotyped. I think it is really difficult not to do this especially in cases where you only know a few people that are a part of the minority and they have a certain trait. I think people often believe misconceptions like this because they have one experience with a certain race in their life and assume that the rest will be the same. People do this all the time, not even just in regards to race. For instance, if one time a person goes to say Olive Garden and they have a bad experience they will assume that Olive Gardens are all going to result in this bad experience (unless they have previously had many good experiences). People really need to be more open minded in this aspect because if not, they will miss out on a lot of good experiences and miss out on getting to know good people.

Our Racist, Sexist Selves

In class we were given this New York Times article by Nicholas Kristof called "Our Racist, Sexist Selves." The author states that he is a racist, at least according to an online test. This interested me so I went on to his blog and took one of the race tests. In my test first you had to categorize white faces and black faces and then good words and bad words. Then the categories are grouped and you put words either in the white and good category or black and bad category. Finally, they switched the categories to black and good and white and bad. I scored strong automatic preference for white. I am not very convinced by this technique though because of the order in which it was presented. I think I would have scored much differently if they had first grouped black and good together and white and bad. A lot of the time, I do not even recognize someones race when I talk to someone I do not know. For instance, the other day I was at the mall and one of the employees helped me get something off a high shelf. When I was at the register, the lady asked me if someone had helped me and I said yes. She asked me who it was and I said that I was not sure of her name. She then asked me if she was black or white and I did not know the answer. Regardless of this though, it is likely that I do hold some unconscious bias considering where and how I grew up, considering media influences, and because I am white.

The article goes on to discuss the role the unconscious is playing in politics not only against blacks but against women as well. Racism appears to be easier to overcome than sexism. Unconsciously, women are thought of as warm and friendly which could be why voters feel a female candidate for a political position is not the right person for the job. Friendly and warm are not typically thought of as attributes of leaders but rather they should be strong and tough. I do not even need to take the test on gender to know that I am biased when it comes to this. I would like to be able to break that bias but it is so ingrained in my mind that I do not think I would be able to.

Sex Education

For our presentation we told the class to read two articles. The one article was called "How to End the War Over Sex Ed." This article was about a county in South Carolina where they are teaching kids in an abstinence plus style meaning that they are teaching about abstinence and safe sex practices. For the program, a teacher administers two classes, one of which is based on sexuality and the other on decision-making skills. She teaches about STIs, pregnancy, contraceptives and also encourages them to delay sexual activity. This program runs from middle school throughout high school and they keep the same teacher throughout it. Because of this, the students can feel secure with this teacher and are able to ask her questions. This program appears to be effective since the birth rates at this school have decreased. Although this program seems to be working, it would be very expensive to implement it in lots of schools. The difference in this comprehensive program from previous ones that were not as successful is the new focus on behavior while emphasizing that not having sex is the safest choice.

In our second article, "Sex Ed in Washington," it discusses Bush's policy priority of abstinence-based sex education. After 15 years of a decline in birthrates, they increased earlier in this year. A lot of people blame the abstinence only programs but that is not logical. If you blame this increase on the programs, you must also give them credit for 15 years of improvement. This does not appear to be the case according to the data. In fact, the data indicate that neither abstinence only nor comprehensive are very effective at improving statistics. This article also says that the debate should be kept at a local level instead of requiring the federal government to make the decision for everyone.

Personally, I do not think that the second article's idea to decide on sex education programs locally would be very effective at improving statistics because it is hard to generalize values in any given area. Just because one area is typically more religious, it is not right to just assume that abstinence only is the way to go. Not everyone in that area is going to share the same values and so they need to be taught about other options. I think that the first article shows that a combination of promoting abstinence while also explaining safe sex practices is the best choice for everyone. If this combined program was implemented it would give students of all different values the encouragement to delay sexual activity as well as the information they needed in case they decided not to.

In my school, I did not receive much sex education. The only time I remember talking about sex in school was one year in my high school health class. This did not negatively affect me but I think that the high teen birth rates of my school indicate that the sex education needs some work. Because the school didn't provide us with adequate information, students had to rely on their parents. I do not think that this is a wise strategy because kids are often too embarrassed to talk to their parents about it and are too afraid to ask questions. Personally, I think that schools should be required to teach sex education. As of now, 17 states do not require this but I would like to think that this number will decrease over time.

Presentation: Gender and War

During the Gender and War presentation we split into groups and discussed certain topics relating to the articles we read for class. In my group, we discussed female suicide bombers. We tried to decide whether the fact that women were partaking in suicide bombing was or was not a gain for women in the particular culture being examined. Since women are taking on this job that was previously only performed by men, it would seem that women are becoming more equal to men; however, we felt that because women are still seen as victims in the situation of suicide bombing that it really is not a gain for them and does not make them more equal to men. Because this occurrence is still a phenomena, when it happens we do not attribute the wrong doing to the women but instead to others that somehow caused these women to do such a thing. If this were to become more common of women we believe that it would be more of an equalizer than it is currently.

Another topic that was explored in the presentation was rape as a weapon of war. Rape is such a terrible tactic that tears apart communities and leaves victims scarred with anxiety, stress, depression, and other detrimental effects. I was extremely appalled to learn that US female soldiers are frequently sexually assaulted and raped. What is even worse is that these women refrain from reporting these instances because they are afraid of losing their career. I would think that other women who want to join the military and know about this would be deterred from joining and I certainly don't blame them. It really is a shame that women have to fear their fellow soldiers possibly more than they fear the enemies.

The behavior of US soldiers committing rape and the women not reporting it is a bigger version of what occurs in every day life. Examples of this same behavior can be found all over the United States, even on the Juniata College campus. Women are too afraid to report what has happened to them because they feel like they are to fault. This is probably a result of women constantly being seen as inferior to men. When someone is superior to you, it is extremely difficult to tell them they did something wrong even when it is something small. In this case where the wrong doing is extreme, it would have to be even more difficult to admit.

Gender Roles

The presentation on gender roles was very interesting to me, especially since it really got me to thinking about the dynamics of my relationship with my boyfriend. I would say that I would classify our relationship as egalitarian but with some traditional values. For us, we maintain some traditional values because we like them but not because we expect that of each other. For instance, when we go on dates my boyfriend often pays but I do not expect him to and I offer to pay for myself. Sometimes I even pay for both of us on a date and that does not cause any gender role issues. Because we both do things in our relationship because we want to instead of because we have to in order to fit into certain gender roles, we do not get into fights about those little things. From listening to others talk in class about examples of parents that get mad for having to fulfill certain roles it seems to me that this can be the cause of fights that are unnecessary. For instance, one mother would get mad that she is expected to fill the motherly role of doing laundry. In an egalitarian relationship this duty would likely be shared thus preventing a fight over it. In an egalitarian relationship with traditional values, the woman might still fulfill this role but because she enjoys it rather than because she has to which would also prevent fighting. In my relationship I know that I would take over this role because I wanted to not because I was expected to. Also, I know that if I asked my boyfriend to do it for me, he would. In reverse, he would fulfill certain male roles such as doing yard work because he wanted to and if he asked me fill that role for him, I would. So at least for me egalitarian with traditional values is the ideal relationship which is probably a result of the way in which I was raised. My mother and father fulfill normal gender roles in most things but they both seem to be content in doing so. I am sure if I had been raised in a different household, my idea of the ideal relationship would be different.

After writing this I realized that when I was referring to the woman I used the word "motherly" to describe the roles she was fulfilling but for the man I just used "male" to describe his roles. I thought about going back and changing it but then I decided not to because it just shows how ingrained it is in me than women are identified as mothers and men are just men, not fathers. I have to wonder if as gender roles change and men and women become more egalitarian if people will continue to still view women as mothers and men as just men or if it will move more towards women as mothers and men as fathers. My guess is no but I am sure it is a possibility. I just think that because women are the ones physically giving birth that we cannot help but view them as mothers. The woman will have to care for her child throughout pregnancy whereas a father could just get up and leave.

Material World

In Valenti's chapter "Material World" she explains that despite popular belief, women are still getting paid significantly less than men. This was somewhat surprising to me but the real shocker was that the Bureau of Labor Statistics stopped reporting on women's wages because it wasn't a priority. Luckily, the Senate passed an amendment that required BLS to continue collecting data on women's wages. Also, some claim that the difference comes from women working part time or taking time off to take care of family even though statistics that indicate that women get paid 76% of what men get paid were based off of women who work full-time.

So how can we fix this problem? One way would be to get more women in higher positions in companies because it is shown that when this is the case, women workers make more money. However, it is hard to get women in these higher positions due to sex discrimination. Walmart, for example, has 70% women making up the hourly workers but less than a third of the management.

As we have already figured out in this class, the media lies. Valenti points out another instance in which this is the case. The media has started this idea that women "opt out" of work to stay at home. This is not the case and in fact most women cannot afford to do so. When women do choose to stay at home, they are under appreciated for their work which would amount to a salary of $134,121 a year.

Social and political forces are telling women that all they are good for is having babies yet the cost of doing so is not even manageable for some. If women are supposed to want to have babies than why is it so hard to do and why is there no incentive for doing so? The government could at least fund for pre-schools or provide paid leave for new parents.

Valenti proposes an interesting question: Are women more likely to choose low-paying jobs or are jobs low paying because they are jobs predominantly chosen by women? I have no idea what the answer to this question is nor a way to test it. Considering women get paid less when they hold the same jobs as men I would have to guess that the second one has to be at least somewhat true but I am not saying I do not think the first part could be true to an extent as well.

What does it mean to be secure?

In class this week we tried to answer the questions, "What does it mean to be secure?" and "How should we think about defining security?". In my group we came up with a few things to describe security:
-Comfortable with self and surroundings
-Having power over a situation
-People of power are the ones providing security
We defined security by:
-Cultural norms
-Protecting rights and freedoms
-Variation cross-culturally
-Economics and power

When we combined as a class, we added to these answers. Being secure also means:
-Sameness
-Protection against unknown hypothetical threat
-Ability to meet basic needs
-Individual/collective sense of security
-Political, physical, mental, and emotional security

In class we got to talking about the way security is gendered and how men obtain security from their body while women obtain security from other people. Personally, I would have to agree with this because I feel much more secure when I am with other people that I trust than I do when I am alone. Part of the reason I came to Juniata was because I knew I would be able to feel secure here since it is small and you have the privilege of knowing most of your classmates and professors. I will probably never live alone just because I am too fearful of my security when I am alone. This feeling of insecurity of being alone is probably a result of feeling (and being) physically weaker than other people (men). On the brighter side, at least I know that I can take classes to better prepare myself for encountering an attacker. The field hockey team actually took one of these classes together last year and I hope to do so again so that I can feel more secure when I am alone.

Many Faces: Women Confronting War

In reading this article I was shocked to learn that civillian women are more likely to be killed in war than soilders. Even though people typically equate war with men, since they are more likely to serve in the armed forces, women are involved and affected just as much if not more. Women are also more likely than men to be refugrees and victims of sexual violence in war. Another way women are negatively affected by war is through an increase of domestic violence in wartime. This information was a little more surprising to me because it is something I would not have linked together. This increase is thought to be due to an increase in available weapons and because of the soilders or former soldiers due to their frustration and aggression. The media promoting violence for conflict resolution is another possibility for why domestic violence increases during wartime. The loss of family in war affects men and women but because women are particularly the primary care givers they are affected in a gender-specific way. A few other ways women are affected by war is through loss of work, destruction of the environment, and military spending because it affects their ability to provide for their children.

Women can respond to war in different ways. They can join although they tend to occupy feminine roles. They can also work in the defense industry even though these are found to be some of the lowest paying jobs in the labor force. Militaries often use propoganda that links motherhood, nationalism and militarism. By enlisting women it urgers their husbands or boyfriends to enlist. It is not socially acceptable for these men to not enlist because men are supposed to be the tough ones on the relationship. If their women enlist and they do not then they will be seen as weak. Some women respond to war by mourning their losses in public as a protest against war and some women resist war through other types of anti-war organizations.

This article discusses something we've talked about some in class. It talks about the debate about whether women are distinct from men when it comes to their biological nature. Although research shows that men and women do not have an essential nature, conservatives and some feminists use the claim that women are different from men which is why they should not have to fight in war. Since the data indicates that women are not biologically different when it comes to things like aggression that would indicate that they should have to fight in war; however, since they have been cultured to be different from men they are not necessarily programmed for fighting in war.

Halloween

This Halloween I really got to thinking about the way girls and boys act on Halloween and how that relates to what we've been talking about in class. First of all, most girls (referring to college age) on Halloween dress somewhat provacatively to put it nicely and if not then they at least dress cute. Then again, girls can and do dress like this at parties on any given day but just not to this extreme. On halloween, some boys also sometimes take the slutty costume route but the difference is that guys are not allowed to dress like that all year round. Halloween is the one night guys are actually allowed to play dress up. I even saw guys wearing girls costumes on Halloween which is something that would certainly not happen any other time of the year. On the other hand, I did not see any girls wearing guys costumes but why? I think that girls dress up slutty because they know that is what guys want to see. If a girl wears a costume that de-sexes her appearance then guys are not as likely to be interested. At the same time though, guys talk about how slutty girls dress on Halloween and girls do not typically want to be called sluts. So this leads to the dichotomy that girls are constantly faced with. If they are not dressing sexy enough then guys do not want them but if they dress sexy then guys are going to think they are slutty.

After writing that first part it got me thinking about they way guys dress at parties. Guys never have to expose their bodies in the way girls do to be sexy. Typically a guy at a party is going to be wearing jeans and a shirt which covers most of his body. A girl on the other hand is probably going to be wearing either a low cut shirt, a short dress, or something along those lines. So why don't guys have to try to attract females by exposing themselves? I think it is because girls are first of all trying to attract guys and then guys will pursue these girls if they are interested. Then ultimately the girl will make the decision about whether she is interested in the guy pursuing her and whether or not she will hook-up with him. I think that guys do not have to expose themselves to attract girls because for the most part girls are not going to be the ones to make the first move. This is at least what I have come up with from what I have observed here at school.

Female Aggressiveness

Today in class we discussed aggressiveness in girls. There is certainly a distinction between the ways in which girls and boys exhibit aggression. Boys tend to be physically aggressive whereas girls are usually indirectly aggressive. In a way, I think this type of aggression is even worse than physical aggression. Girls can be very coniving towards one another and in some cases they will secretly be harming other girls. When one girl is angry at another she might tell everyone a rumor about the other girl in order to hurt her emotionally. At least when guys are aggressive towards one another they know it is happening.

In the movie clips we saw some of the different ways in which aggressive women are portrayed. The clips got me to think about other movies that have aggressive female characters. The one movie that instantly comes to mind is Mean Girls. In this movie, the girls all partake in aggressive behaviors. Their aggressiveness is also done in an indirect and coniving way. When the one girl decides to take out the alpha girl of the group she decides she needs to do a few key things to destroy her. These things include turning her friends against her, ruining her body, and getting rid of her guy. So basically this girl is taking away all that which the other girl defines herself by. I highly doubt that a guy would plot to destroy another guy's life in this way.

Okay, so Mean Girls is just a movie and it is somewhat exaggerated, but this type of behavior certainly occurs, especially in high school. In fact, the movie is rather similar to events that took place in my high school. Anyone who thinks girls are not aggressive should pay a little closer attention to the actions of high school girls.

Ecofeminism

For class I read chapter 7, Ecofeminism, which introduced me to another type of feminism that is brand new to me. Ecofeminists think that because women are culturally tied to nature, ecofeminists argue there are conceptual, symbolic, and linguistic connections between feminists and ecological issues. They also believe that beliefs, attitudes, and values are shaped by patriarchal framework. All ecofeminists believe that women's and nature's liberation are a joint project.

As for the roots of ecofeminism:
Although environmentalists all believe that human beings should respect nature the reasons for doing so are broken into two groups. The groups are human-centered environmentalism (shallow ecology) and earth-centered environmentalism (deep ecology). Human-centered believes that when we harm ourselves we harm the environment and that the environment is instrumental to our needs. Human-centered views nature as a machine. It is criticized for being arrogant anthropomorphism. Earth-centered reverts to ancient conceptions of nature as an organism. They believe that we should preserve integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. Criticism of earth-centered poses the question of what is the source of nature's intrinsic value?

There are a few different types of ecofeminism:
Spiritual ecofeminism embraces a religious, Earth-goddess view.
Transformative ecofeminism believes that women's connection to nature is socially constructed and ideologically reinforced.
Global ecofeminism states that women are more engaged in the work of sustaining daily life and are more concerned with elements (air, water) because they need to raise healthy kids.

Ecofeminism faces criticism:
Nature ecofeminism is criticised for being reactionary instead of revolutionary and for reducing women to mere bodies.
Spiritual ecofeminism is scrutinized for substituting religion for politics and for being too out there. For instance, they are said to spend too much time "dancing in the moonlight."
Transformative ecofeminism is said to be too demanding for the degree of activism.

Some of the points of ecofeminism make sense such as how women are culturally more tied to nature but I think some of them go too far. For instance, one ecofeminist said that if we do not control our population then the government should do it for us so that nonhuman animals have enough food and space. Of course I want animals to have enough food and space too but you cannot just allow die backs as one critic said. You cannot control the population in any humane way that I can think of but perhaps there is something I am overlooking.

What a Girl Wants

Today we watched the movie, What a Girl Wants. In this movie, several girls between the ages of 10 and 15 were interviewed. Some of the statements of these girls were pretty shocking and rather concerning.

In the interviews the girls talk about different teen role models including Britney Spears, Mandy Moore, and Christina Aguilera. One of the girls said how these stars were perfect and that it made her lose confidence. What kind of role model makes you feel bad about yourself? This tells me that young girls need better role models that show that they have imperfections just like everyone else.

It was amazing to me how these young girls could identify how something in the media was ridiculous and degrading but at the same time they enjoyed watching it. For instance, one girl was talking about the Thong Song, how its just a booty video and just how it was ridiculous, but then at the end she said yeah I love that song. Even though these images make young girls feel self conscious and create unrealistic ideals, young girls cannot help but like them. Why? If they realize that the media doesn't portray realistic images why don't they just ignore them? I think that it is probably because they have to like these things in order to fit in and be cool. They simply cannot escape the culture that we live in.

I find it appalling, but not surprising, how so many young girls think they are too fat. With "premature toothpicks" as the one girl said, as role models of course they are going to feel bad about their own appearance. I know when I was young I thought I was too fat. It is sad that even though we as girls can recognize that it isn't realistic to be perfect like the girls we see in the media, we still get down on ourselves for it. These ideals are so ingrained in us that we cannot even help it.

In class we discussed whose fault it was for these problems, the media or parents. As in most cases, I would have to argue that it is some of both. Clearly the media does not give young girls the best messages and a change in this would be very beneficial. However, it is not likely that the media is going to get better any time soon. Parents can control what their children see to an extent but they could never prevent them from all of the inappropriate messages out there. I think it is important for parents to make sure they talk to their kids about certain things they see in the media and hear from their friends in order to let them know which messages they should not listen to. Even still, it is impossible to overcome our entire culture.

The Playground Gets Even Tougher

This article by Pamerla Paul really hit home for me. One day, when I was in the 7th grade, three of my best friends suddenly decided they hated me. Actually, one of them decided they hated me and convinced the other two that they should take her side along with anyone else she could persuade. What possible reasons could one 7th grader hate another? Well, looking back I guess it probably was a result of parenting. For instance, the article says that the mother of a mean girl would probably say things like "you don't look nice today." I am almost certain that this girl received this type of criticism. At the time, however, I was told all sorts of ridiculous reasons for them not liking me such as my shorts were too short (not true), I was a slut (even though I had a boyfriend?) and that I jumped from friend to friend (this really made no sense to me and was not true). One day, this girl got on the bus and pulled out a list of things about me that she did not like. Most 7th graders are pretty insecure and want to fit in so to sit there and listen to a number of things that I now had to be insecure about in addition to whatever I already was insecure about was really hurtful.

It was a constant struggle to put up with the hatred coming from these girls because they were everywhere, in my classes, on my sports teams, on my bus, at any parties I was invited to, just everywhere. Even when I was at home I wasn't free from it. One day, they called me and pretended to want to be friends again just to further torture me and rub it in my face that they didn't like me. In order to deal with the harrassment I cried a lot and even kept a journal to let out my anger and sadness.

This issue of young girls treating each other in this awful way is a serious issue, in my opinion. The effects are long lasting which I can attest to. I am constantly afraid that my friends do not like me or are going to turn on me. Because of this I often do not allow myself to get close to others. I often do not speak up about my feelings because I do not want to give someone a reason not to like me. It may seem ridiculous to feel these things due to something from so long ago but it truly was scarring to me. I guess I don't know for sure that I am like this because of these past events but I think it has certainly contributed to it.

I think that there are a few things that could be done in order to help this problem. Perhaps the topic of bullying could be addressed in school at an earlier age. Like the article said, children are maturing sooner which is increasing this behavior at an earlier age therefore it should be addressed sooner. Since parents are a part of the problem, somehow addressing them could help fix the problem. However, I cannot think of a good way in which this could be done. Maybe parents of students in elementary school could be required to recieve instructions on how to prevent and deal with bullying. Another way that could possibly lessen the problem would be to provide television that does not have socially aggressive characters which was thought to be a problem in the article.

Boys Do Cry

I was happy to see another reading by Jessica Valenti on the reading list since I really enjoyed her first one. In this reading, Boys Do Cry, it states that men are affected by feminism too. I am sure that a lot of people probably do not realize this, me being one of them prior to this article/class. Men are expected to be masculine and thus not feminine. The problem is that violence often gets tied up into this idea of "manly." There is a lot of pressure on men to act a certain way and in particular the media promotes the tough guy exterior. For instance, the article talks about how in one commercial a man who acts girly gets killed by a beer can. This type of message just reinforces how dangerous it is for a man to step outside of the box. A man who acts girly may not actually be killed in real life but they will most likely experience harrassment and might even get beat up.

There has been a resurgence of boyhood being the cool standard opposed to how it used to be cool to take care of your family. I would assume that this degression is probably related to increased feminism awareness. The more powerful women become, the less powerful men become which goes against what they think it means to be a man. This loss of power in men is then probably related to an increase in violence against women. Violence is a way to show power and it is conceivable to claim that the less power men feel they have, the more likely they are to be violent in an attempt to gain power.

Valenti says that in order to fix the problem, the whole concept of masculinity has to go. This sounds like a great idea but I cannot come up with any way in which it could be done, at least not all at once. The only way I think men can get rid of the extreme pressures to be manly is through a slow and gradual change in the way we define masculinity. One thing that could help, at least some, would be a change in the way the media portrays men. If the media portrayed it as acceptable for men to avoid violence and be sensitive, perhaps that would help.

Types of Feminism (Liberal, Psychoanalytic, Care, Postmodern/3rd wave)

For Tuesday's class each group was required to read a chapter from Tong's book that corresponded to a different type of feminism. The 4 types of feminism were liberal feminism, psychoanalytic feminism, care focused feminism, and postmodern and 3rd wave. In class, each group explained their type of feminism to the rest of the class.

Liberal feminism:
Liberal feminists are against sexism and oppression. They believe that differences in men and women come from women not having the same opportunities and that racism, classism and heteroism contribute to sexism. They focus on equality and economic independence. This movement was sparked by the industrial revolution. Some examples of issues that liberal feminists would pursue include equal pay, women in the military, and assumed roles in careers. Liberal feminists are criticized for being anti-male and one-sided (white middle class).

Psychoanalytic feminism:
Psychoanalytic feminists have used Sigmund Freud's writings to better understand women's oppression. According to Freud, children go through psychosexual developmental stages that ultimately determine their gender identity. Men that develop through these stages normally will have masculine traits and females that develop normally will have feminine traits. According to Oedipal phase the son rivals for the mother's attention and the daughter rivals for the father's attention. This points the children towards heterosexuality. If children do not resolve the Oedipal complex there will be conflict. Some examples of psychoanalytic issues include upbring of children, men being able to adopt, incessed, and vitually any episode of law and order. Psychoanalytic feminism is criticized for not including social agents.

Care Focused Feminism:
This type of feminism focuses on how ethics for men are in terms of justice whereas for women ethics are in terms of care. They believe that the care of private spheres needs to be brought to the public sphere. Schools need to teach about the power of sympathy, empathy, and imagination in order to equip students with caregiving skills because people that think maternally are more likely to promote peace and sustainable economy. Care focused feminists are criticized for being too focused on personal relationships.

Postmodern and 3rd wave feminism:
Postmodern feminism is based on the rejection of ideas based on an absolute world that is male in style. These feminists reject feminist thought of having a single explanation for why women are oppressed. They believe that there is no single formula for being a good feminist. They are criticized for their indivualistic nature which makes it hard to form a movement and for being too abstract.
Third wave feminists push to take feminist thought in a new direction. They accomodate diversity and change and welcome conflict. They are criticized for having no core values.

I had never heard of these types of feminism prior to this class. Actually, I did not know of any specific types of feminism. I found these different types of feminism to be interesting but a little too extreme for me. Although I recently determined that I am a feminist after reading the Jessica Valenti article, I do not think that I can classify myself as any of these types of feminism.

Men as "Gendered Beings"

When I look into the mirror I see a woman just like the white woman from the article," Men as 'Gendered Beings'." According to the article I do not see a white woman  because being white is like being raceless. I do not see a human being because being being female is not like being genderless as is being male. This is something that we previously discussed in class and we said how black females unfortunately are not raceless or genderless. So what is so great about being genderless or raceless? the answer is that tools that which grant us privileges are often invisible to us. Thus, white males are privileged for two reasons and black females are oppressed for two reasons. I must say that in thinking about this I realized that when someone describes another person to me they do not include race if the person is white but they do include it if they are black. I agree to the reasoning behind this to a point, however, I think that part of the reason is also just because the difference in population. I know personally I grew up in a predominantly white area so when referring to someone, race was only mentioned when it was different from the norm. I would assume that in predominantly black areas this would not be the case and perhaps even reversed but I honestly would not know.

Towards a Gendered Understanding of Conflict

In Bryne's article she attempts to utilize feminist thought in order to execute a gender analysis of conflict. She objects the essentialist views and suggests ways in which conflict redefines masculinity and femininity.

She points out how men and women are not only both victims of war but they are also actively involved in either supporting or protesting violence. I think a lot of people probably overlook this and simply equate war with men. Women can be victims of sexual violence in war but they can also partake in the violence. Furthermore, not all men choose to participate in war nor are they all inherently aggressive. These facts contradict an essentialist view of males and females.

Although there are men and women that go against the norm in war situations, they are faced with consequences. Women are often "de-sexed" when they take active roles in war whereas men are harrassed or even killed for not fighting because they are not being manly enough. As we have stated before in class, the worst thing a man can be is a woman and in this case not fighting is typical of women thus it is unacceptable for a man to make that choice. Also in class we said the worst thing that a woman can be is a woman. Although I am sure women are not always easily accepted into these positions in war, it becomes more acceptable if they are "de-sexed" losing their femininity.

Gender plays a role in interventions in conflict situations which the author makes clear stating that "no intervention can be regarded as gender-neutral." For instance, distribution of resources will affect gender relations and ultimately reinforces where men and women stand. In analyzing intervention situations it becomes clear that women are often excluded such as in decision-making. Because conflicts are a time of change, it is possible that positions of women could worsen. However, a gender analysis can help prevent that from happening.

Peace and Women's Rights

Before reading "Women and Peace: The Meaning of Peace for Women," I took a moment to jot down some things that came to mind when I think about the word peace. I came up with getting along, without problems, calm, no conflict, and not at war. This reading showed me that my definition does not come close to describing the complexity of this term. First of all, I have never heard of negative peace and positive peace before. This reading not only explained these terms but it proved to me that the distinction is necessary when researching peace. The discussion of the word negative and positive peace is clearly summarized in a table that breaks it down into negative peace, two levels of positive peace (indirect violence leading to a shorter life vs. reduced quality of life), unorganized violence and organized violence. These conditions form six boxes that the author claims are independent from one another meaning that it is possible to have one of the boxes occurring or multiple in various combinations. The author says that it is possible for connections to exist between the boxes. I think it would be interesting to explore that idea further however it would require some extensive research.

Reading "Women's Rights Are Human Rights" reminded me how fortunate I have been in my life to not have experienced any violence and hardly any inequality. Even during my short lifespan there have been major changes to women's rights. The reading discusses how in 1993 women's rights were brought to focus due to the Global Campaign for Women's Rights. The conference lead to some important changes. States were required "to prevent violations where possible, investigate them when they occur and punish perpetrators." Not only has there been great progress in addressing violence against women in the US but internationally as well. In the last decade, international treaties have provided governments with guidelines on how to deal with the problem of violence against women. Although I know there are still places in the world where women's rights are not what we would consider just, the progress that has occurred internationally thus far gives me hope for these places.

Biology's Role in Gender Differences

I really enjoyed Dr. Widman's presentation to the class. It was especially interesting to me because we spend a lot of time thinking about how culture plays a role in gender differences but we do not put a lot of thought into the biology behind these differences. Not only are there obvious physical differences to men and women but there are mental differences. For instance, Dr. Widman spoke of the differences in the hypothalamus. He said that there was a clear difference in the nucleus (males being organized and females not). The study also found that homosexual males actually tended to lack a clearly defined nucleus. He provided more evidence along these same lines that indicate that homosexual males possess different mental features than heterosexual males. The research has caused Dr. Widman to conclude that homosexuality is not a choice. Although I think that this research is interesting and I somewhat would agree with it, I think that despite these mental differences culture plays an important role. This is the idea of Nature vs. Nurture in which I believe it is a combination. I lot of people want to figure out what percent of behaviors are a result of nature and what percent is from nurture. I think that this percent varies between different people and between the behavior being studied. I also think that it would be nearly impossible to accurately measure this because they are so intertwined. I do not think finding this percent is important.

Another part of his presentation that I found interesting was about the selection of mates and how it differs for males and females. Within this discussion he talked about how in one study they found that women did not like hookups but felt that in order to get more attractive males they had to partake in them. This topic links back to when we talked about how women are expected to be pure and not just engage in random hookups but then they are also expected to be sexy and live up to expectations from the media. It seems like we always come back to this idea of women having to face contradictions. There seems to not be nearly as many double standards for men as for women. I do not understand why that is the case.

Gender Issues

In class on Thursday we discussed a model that is broken up into the three criteria of a conflict which are issues, behaviors, and attributions. From there we broke down the issue criterion and explored all of the different types of issues related to gendered conflict. This list was quite extensive as it was first broken into five categories each with several examples of each although I think it would take a very extended period of time to encompass all of the possibilities. The types of issues included facts and data, interests, communication, values, and basic human needs. When we were exploring the topic of basic needs we discussed how identity is something that males and females need to establish and if they do not then they will be in conflict. This discussion brought up a question of whether or not a change in the "female box" would cause a change in the "male box." If the definition of what it means to be a female changes then does the definition of what it means to be a male also change? The conclusion to this question was that a change in one box will result in a change in the other box because the boxes are by definition in opposition to one another. This became more clear to me when thinking about how the spectrum and masculine and feminine traits are separate from each other and you can have many traits from one and none from the other, you could have many from both or various combinations.

Week 2

This week in class I was introduced to a lot of new terms. The skit on Tuesday was not only entertaining but it really helped illustrate some of the key concepts. Micro-interactions is one of the terms that was much easier to understand after watching the skit. Something as subtle as eye contact is a micro-interaction that males and females do differently. This became clear to me when the "female" maintained eye contact and the "male" tended to look away (opposite of the norm). Because this micro-interaction was not in line with what we would consider the social norm, something seemed wrong about the skit. It is amazing how much of a difference such a small thing can make.

One question that stemmed from this idea of men and women following the socials norms was can you choose not to follow them? For instance, men typically claim power and women get it indirectly but what if a woman tries to claim it? Although there are some exceptations, I think men would usually be taken back by an aggressive woman and would probably prefer to be in charge. Thus, when individuals go against social norms they tend to be less appealing to others when it comes to relationships.

Something I found really interesting in Thursday's discussion was the term body-reflective practice. I have heard that women live longer than men and I always just accepted it but never really thought about why this is the case. Now it makes sense to me because men tend to have more labor-intensive jobs and are less likely to go to the doctor for minor problems because they don't want to appear weak. I hope we explore this topic further next week.

Feminism

Before reading "You're a Hardcore Feminist. I swear." I have to admit that not only would I not have considered myself a feminist, but I also had a rather negative outlook on the topic. As Valenti discusses, girls’ heads, including my own, are filled with negative stereotypes about feminism keeping us from ever really understanding what it means. Valenti explains that most women actually support feminist goals. These women, however, do not claim the feminist title which is hard to do since it has such a negative connotation. One big misconception that I had was that being a feminist means that you have to constantly fight for equality for women and persuade others to agree with your feminist beliefs. I also thought that I could never be a feminist because I don’t contribute anything. Valenti corrected my thoughts by writing “Chances are, you’ve probably done stuff that makes you a feminist. You don’t have to be a full-time activist to be an awesome feminist.” As she goes on to give examples and upon reflection of the whole article, I realized that I am more of a feminist than I had known.

Gender and Race/Subjectivity and Identity

In the article "The Social Construction and Institutionalization of Gender and Race" the author explains that gender and race are not just biological facts but they are determined by social beliefs. I found it very interesting that the term gender came about in order to "free our thinking from the constrictions of naturalness and biological inevitability attached to the concept of sex." The expectations of each gender differ from one another and these expectations continue to change in society. This article also introduced me to relationality which is the idea that race and gender consist of categories that can be ranked which gives them meaning in relation to one another.

In Chapter 6, "Issues of Subjectivity and Identity" the author writes that identity is thought of in different ways. Identity can either be thought to be something that we possess or it is entirely cultural. Although I think identity is heavily dependent on culture, I am not sure that I would agree that it is entirely cultural.