Television in the 90's

As the decades continue to pass, television becomes more popular. Leading into the 90’s, TV shows had great effects on women (especially teenage girls). They watched how women became more and more powerful and they couldn’t get enough of it. Shows like 90210 and Melrose Place were the start of a new ear for “girl power” and the ratings soared. Critics didn’t believe any of these shows would be successful, but the show was number one and 69 percent who watched it were females.

Chapter two deals with the aggression of women. They think because “she is a women”, she should be more lady like or non violent. That just in not true. Women are just as powerful and capable of violence as men and it should not be amplified in the news when a woman does strike back. The violence should not happen in general but just because it does and it’s a woman it is blown out of proportion. The media should equally cover it.

The third chapter dealt with strong women who could kick butt. Growing up, watching Buffy was one of my favorite shows. I got to see a girl for change kick a bunch of vampire butt and no male could keep up. She went through love, sisterhood and dying and still, nothing could stop her. She was probably one of my heroes when I was younger.

Overall, I believe that the effort to make woman more powerful on television has gotten better but there is still worked that needs to be done.

Leading Post: The Many Depictions of Female Power

In the first three chapters of Susan Douglas’s Enlightened Sexism, she discusses how different components of female power have been construed and altered in the media. In the first chapter Douglas describes the beginnings of embedded feminism, or the façade of “girl power,” as a marketing scheme in order to capture the attention of teenage girls. Through numerous TV shows the media consistently links the idea of female power to consumption and male-approval, paving the way for enlightened sexism. For example, in the show 90210 the only type of family structure that is shown to last is one in which the father is the sole provider for the family. Moreover in this show teenage boys are made to appear innocent, sensitive, and sweet, allowing for the public to ask: “Who needs feminism anymore if teen guys are like this?” Douglas also describes shows such as Melrose Place and Murphy Brown in which the powerful women that enter the scene are unable to love or maintain stable relationships, proving that females cannot “have it all.”

In chapter three of the novel, Douglas describes another unrealistic perception of female power in the media, or that of the sexy warrior (a woman who contains a strong character/ physique, yet still remains feminine and beautiful). In shows such as Xena: Warrior Princess, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Charlie’s Angels, and Alias, gender roles are reversed, as women become the white knights for their men. However, the women that take on these superhero-esque roles do so at high personal costs, further proving that women who hold power do not experience love. Moreover, through the example of Janet Reno, Douglas demonstrates that in the real world, female “warriors” are unable to remain feminine in the public eye.

In chapter two of her novel, Douglas highlights another social construction of female power: their ability to castrate and emasculate men. In this chapter Douglas offers major news stories in which women use aggression or violence against men to achieve their goals. All of these incidents were known to produce a shock in the media since female (as opposed to more accepted, male) violence is seen as highly threatening to society. With the example of Lorena Bobbitt, who severed her husband’s penis after she claimed that he raped her, the media spent more time on her case than on her husband’s since her story was seen as more scandalous. Thus, in society today, while female aggression is targeted and amplified by the media, male violence toward women remains the status quo.

While aggression toward men may be one way for females to express power, I, for one, am not an advocate of violence. In my opinion both female and male violence are unacceptable, and I think that instead of physical transgression, women can promote equality through other means. Perhaps we can learn from Rebecca Walker who states in an excerpt from Becoming the Third Wave, that activism should directly come from our voices. Walker (and Xena and Buffy) beg women to turn their outrage into vocal manifestations of anger. Even though Walker’s except was short, it provided a wealth of substance for me to grasp onto and relate to. Walker was 22 at the time that she had written this piece, and her strong and solid voice (even at this young age) made me feel guilty for not fully standing up for myself/ other women when I have witnessed sexism throughout my life.

I also think that women more than deserve all of the points that were made in Baumgardner & Richards’ Manifesta for Young Women, some of which include: the elimination of violence against women, equal healthcare to men, freedom of sexuality, abortion rights, etc. Perhaps through true activism, this manifesta can be carried out, providing an Equal Rights Amendment for all women who hold power, and for those who are still trying to find their strength.

Conflict: A source of conviction

    It is clear from the readings we have read and discussions in class that the road to women’s equality has been a long, contentious, and arduous process. Furthermore, it is essential that we acknowledge that this struggle continues to exist today. Reading DuBois’ article “Old Wave and New Wave”, I found it interesting that the advancement of the women’s movement and the feminist agenda in the first and second waves of feminism have distinctively resulted from the divisions and conflict women experienced in their participation within other social reformist movements.

    The abolitionist movement, a social reformist movement grounded on the fundamental tenets of equality and the abolition of slavery, served as an outlet and medium through which women could participate in and support because of the shared ideals of equality that coincided with women’s suffrage and rights. However, their participation was limited, representation marginalized, and voice muted by the same men who purportedly sought to pursue the ideals of equality and freedom. Women’s contributions within the Abolitionist movement were confined to menial tasks and secretarial duties, whereas decision-making processes and important responsibilities were reserved for men. Their needs, desires, and interests were relegated as secondary and trivial. The abolitionist movement gave way to the passing of thr 14^th and 15^th amendment, but both disregarded the status of women and excluded them from considerations of equal rights.  Women’s discrimination had transcended its occupancy within the local into the federal domain and national level.

    It became apparent the the oppression of women was not a top priority in the agenda of men, thus; women had to take initiative and fight for their rights independently of men. This contradiction in the purported goals of equality within abolitionist movement and the reality of equality achieved prompted women to engender a new social movement that addressed women’s equality as the foremost issue of social reform. Similar parallels occurred in their participation within the Civil Rights movement, where fallouts in their interaction with men prompted and reinvigorated the feminist cause.
The very sources of conflict and division experienced by women in their participation with other social and political movements gave impetus, conviction, and a sense of unifying vigor that enabled them to make substantive progress and headway towards the ultimate goal of women’s equality. There is still much more room for improvement, and much more headway to be made in the battle for equal women’s rights. Perhaps similar conflict is what is necessary for the third wave of feminism to finally achieve it.

Can't Count on Men

The first feminist wave occurred between 1835 - 1920. This was around the time where women were fighting for basic rights and to be equal with men. They were sick of not being able to voice their opinions and not being taken seriously. They started to join abolitionist movements and to fight for their rights by collecting signatures on petitions to Congress. One women who believed in these equal rights was Elizabeth Candy Stanton. When she and Lucretia Mott were invited to the Anti-Slavery Convention in 1840 they were not allowed to be considered delegates like the men but observers, so they refused and walked out. Stanton devoted the rest of her life to achieving women's rights. She fought for married and the single women around the world. She did not believe that once you were married that you belonged to your husband and that what he says is what goes. If she was single and owned land then the government taxed her so she couldn't make a profit. These are just a few things that she fought for and believed in.

Another women who spoke out and joined the abolitionist movement was Sojourner Truth. She not only fought for women's rights but for colored rights as well. We discussed in class how hard it must have been to chose which side to fight for because she was not welcome with the white women but also not able to speak among the colored men. She gave to speeches that were epic for women's rights. One line that I find important is "you need not be afraid to give us our rights for fear we will take too much, for we can't take more than our pint'll hold" (64). This to me says that the men were using excuses that if women were given too much power then they will take over everything. Sojourner was assuring them that we will only have as much power that you give us, no more. Being equal is fine but one sex more powerful then the other is what the problem is.

Finally, Dubois concludes that you cannot not count on men's help in the fight for women's rights. Even abolitionist men like Douglas would speak out for women but not very strongly and it never did anything. Phillips said that "there time would come", but 2 years later the Amendment based on race was passed but women were once again ignored. They spent the next 40 years fighting for their rights without the help of men. If you want something done right, do it yourself.

Together We Stand: The Links Between Major Racial and Feminist Movements in History

Without the abolition of slavery, would women’s suffrage have occurred?

Ellen DuBois addresses this question in her article, Feminism Old Wave and New Wave. Perhaps the most striking aspect of DuBois’ review of the major feminist upsurge in America from 1835-1920 is that it grew out of another national movement, or that against slavery. I found this historical fact to be highly intriguing and filled with irony. DuBois explains that even in the face of the abolitionist movement, which strove to promote equality for all, women were still thrown under the bus. Women were unpaid for their work within this movement, and they were seemingly brushed off as lesser than those who had been placed at the lowest rung of the social hierarchy at the time: slaves.

While black men were being freed through the words of the fourteenth amendment, white and black women were still asked to obey their masters, thus maintaining their role as objects, or property. Therefore, in the act of freeing one group of oppressed persons, another was left to takeover the rank of slaves. However, it was, in fact, this extreme injustice that sparked the female uproar at this time. Thus, without the abolition movement, perhaps women would not have been driven to fight for their rights until later in history.

DuBois also mentions the uprising of feminism in the 1960’s paralleling the civil rights movement against racial oppression. This relates to Echols article, The Re-Emergence of the Woman Question. Women seemed to be fueled to fight hand-in-hand with civil rights activists, suggesting that the linkage between minority groups is strong and beneficial for eventual social outcomes. However, one difference between both of these highly revolutionary eras is the relationship that existed between black and white women at these times.

It is interesting to note that in the first wave of feminism, both black and white women had the same general agenda: to eliminate female oppression. This is evidenced in both Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Sojourner Truth’s excerpts from The Essential Feminist Reader in which both of these women call for female power and equality. However, Echols points out that black and white women were not necessarily on the same wavelength during the second feminist upsurge. Echols states that black women were often indifferent or opposed to feminism since black and white women lacked the, “trust necessary for a common cause.”

As we have discussed in class, there are countless different feminist groups today that exist, all of which are aiming toward the same general goal (as was sought in the 19^th century): female equality. During the first wave, black and white women realized that men would not help them with their struggles, and that if they wanted to witness change, they would have to bring it on themselves. Thus, perhaps the most important message to take away from these readings is to revert back in history to a time where all females (no matter what background, culture, race, generation, or sexual orientation) were united for a cause.

Is that All? : Leading Post

Simone de Beauvoir writes about the problem with modern women and how she influenced them with her writing: “The Second Sex”. She talks about the main question what is a woman? The first point she brings up that I find interesting is that when men present themselves as an individual they never identity themselves with a certain sex, it is always presumed. That is not the same fro women. We make it highly clear that we are female. This goes into the main problem that women face that “man can think of himself without women. She cannot think of herself without man” (255). We are then considered the weaker sex and by definition the other. They question that is asked by Beauvoir is whether this state of affair should continue? I personal think that it shouldn’t because I am sick of being looked at as the weaker sex and I think that we should be considered equal to men. This question leads into the reading by Betty Friedan because are women ready and willing to change? Men thought that the Second Sex was a joke and Beauvoir had no idea what she was talking about.

After WWII women went back to their role of being wives and mothers. They were told that if you wanted to be feminine then you should not want a career and a job, that you should want a family, a nice house and good husband. Women went to college to find husbands instead of for the educational purposes. They were afraid that if they were too smart that men would not want to marry them. This caused more then a 60% drop out rate by women to marry and a trend of younger marriages. Women felt alone and they needed to be busy, so having more children was one way to distract them and make them feel important. This caused a huge baby boom throughout the country. After a while many women began to worry because they felt like something was missing. They never voiced it because they believed they were the only ones that felt that way and that it was a wrong feeling. They thought that their perfect life should be well…perfect. It reminds me of the old show Leave It To Beaver. Every aspect of life seemed so perfect and clean cut. These women masked how thy truly felt in order to make others happy. These women really wanted a chance to break out and be free from the men. They wanted to have their own life and to feel important and useful to someone other then their families. This brought on the question: “Who am I?” (280). They were taking the next step in human evolution. Susan Brownmiller and Robin Morgan then concluded these two experts with articles about women’s femininity and the changes they made in their lives with movements and committees.

The Future that never happened

 Ariel Levy's "The Future that never happened" provides a brief yet insightful review of the history of the women's liberation movement and its current status, supported with numerous anecdotes and examples from several time periods. Her detailed account of the evolution of the women's liberation movement and the sexual revolution, movements which initially shared fundamental goals of advancing women's sexual pleasure and satisfaction, provided a much needed historical context through which an appropriate examination of the direction and future of feminism can occur.

As I was reading the article, what I found most fascinating was the fundamental schism that developed regarding interpretations on sexual freedom and sexual liberation. Sexual liberation was a key tenet and fundamental goal of the early feminist agenda and women's movement. However, this goal proved to be a divisive feature of the movement, as proponents split into "sex-positive feminists" and "antiporn feminists." What we see today, as Levy aptly puts, is "the residue of that confusion."

The establishment and growing popularity of events such as CAKE parties best exemplify the contradiction, hypocrisy, and lack of direction within the current day feminist movement. My sentiment towards such events echo that of Levy, "a garbled attempt to continue the work of the women's movement." CAKEs mission to redefine public perceptions of female sexuality through the overt display of sexuality, promiscuity, and sexual exploitation is ironically more effective at perpetuating chauvinist perceptions and female objectification than destroying the inequalities that feminism was created for. This is the embedded feminism that subtly yet powerfully corrupts and distorts the notion of female empowerment and gender equality in mainstream society.

However, it is also true and important to acknowledge that this is a manifestation of the sexual liberation and freedom that the traditional feminist agenda sought to accomplish; thus, the power to exercise sexual freedom, even in the most overt and inappropriate sense, still falls under the scope of the women's liberation movement.  Who are we to condemn those who exercise the freedom women fought for years ago? It is not my place to judge; however, I do firmly believe that promoting events such as CAKE parties as the face of modern day feminism, or "feminism in action", represents a misconstruction and misrepresentation of feminism to the utmost degree.

Abasement and Eve: The Influence of the Bible on Female Other-ness

In an excerpt from Simone De Beauvoir’s The Second Sex, she discusses the woman as the "Other" in society. She claims that women have been oppressed throughout history, so that even "the most mediocre of males feels himself a demigod as compared with women…” She suggests that this oppression stems from the biblical creation story of Adam and Eve. In another class at Colgate (JWST 208), we discussed that the bible is perhaps the most influential book that has ever graced human society. This class had a strong emphasis on the connection between the bible and the public realm, and it concentrated on how scripture can act to positively or negatively mold societal beliefs. More importantly, through this class I learned that these biblical-related societal views are often misconstrued, since scripture is often contradictory in nature.

In fact, there are two different literary interpretations that can be gleaned from Adam and Eve’s account within Genesis: the Yahwist and the Priestly versions of scripture. The Yahwist translation is demonstrated in Genesis 2 and states that man, or Adam, was created in God’s image, followed by Eve, who was sprung of the rib of Adam. It is tempting to read this version of creation as one with Eve being an afterthought of God, making her subordinate to Adam. Conversely, the Priestly version of Genesis, or Genesis 1, clearly states, “male and female he created them,” suggesting that men and women were created simultaneously, and are thus of equal status.

Throughout history, because of the Yahwist creation account, women have often been marked as inferior to men. De Beauvoir reiterates that many members of society solely focus on this version of Genesis, and thus further assume that man has a higher societal rank than women. Lastly, she suggests that this societal view is enhanced since women are also blamed for original sin from for eating from the tree of knowledge.

One example of how this version of the text has been depicted within our society is through art. Michelangelo clearly used the Yahwist creation story in his work on the Sistine Chapel ceiling since there is no woman in his piece. Thus, even though this work is revered in our society, it does not portray the entire biblical creation text. Because of this disconnect from the Priestly version of scripture, Michelangelo’s interpretation of the creation story has some major implications for modern society. Whether it was his intention or not, Michelangelo’s powerful image of man descending directly from the touch of God sends the message that men are the most dominant beings within society. Viewers come from all over the world to look at the ceiling of the Sistine chapel, leaving awestricken and speechless, myself included. Thus, it is almost impossible to be unaffected by art, even when this effect becomes dangerous for certain minority groups. While Michelangelo’s masterpiece is a profound work, it can also be viewed as an incomplete reading of the bible. Therefore, I think that it is extremely important to educate the public on the discrepancies within these two Genesis texts in order for students to understand the full background behind the unfair subordination of women, therefore allowing for re-examination of female inferiority in society.

PC Police

      I can recall many times in the past where I’ve witnessed, overhead, or experienced stereotypical remarks or racist comments from my surroundings peers, classmates, or strangers. However, I cannot truthfully claim that I’ve responded to these comments in an appropriate manner that was conducive to effective communication and open dialogue. Nor can I claim that I’ve always spoken up when hearing friends making racist or sexist jokes. The reasons for this are varied. Sometimes I hear these remarks in passing and feel it is not my place to intervene; other times I feel that the remarks emerge from a humorous context and jovial manner from friends which doesn’t require “political correctness” policing. Often times, I’d find myself in a difficult situation deciding whether it is appropriate or worth the effort to respond to ignorant remarks, especially if it doesn’t personally affect me.  Jessica H. Greenstone effectively communicates this struggle in deciding when it is appropriate to speak up, “I have often found myself torn between wanting to be liked and knowing it was not worth compromising my beliefs.” I found this struggle something that many people can relate to and empathize with when issues of racism or sexism emerge in everyday conversation, especially when personal friendships and social dynamics can potentially be compromised. However, it is important to be able to distinguish the fine line between humorous and offensive, and acknowledge when that boundary is trespassed. When it is, it is imperative to speak up and defend one’s beliefs and identity, 

Spice Up Your Life: Reponse

When reading Zoe post I liked how she put the Spice Girls as her main focus because I agree that they have greatly affected young girls lives in my generation. When reading Douglas’s work she states that women have to compromise. That they can “play sports, excel at school, go to college, aspire to get jobs perversely preserved for men, be working mothers, and so forth. In exchange we obsess about our physical features or lack other things”. I believe that the Spice girls show that you don’t have to compromise and that you can “have it all”. An example that I give would be my Aunt. She is in a reverse of roles with my Uncle right now. She is the one working and providing the money for the family so they can live in a nice house and still be around to be a mom, while my Uncle is now the usual “stay at home mom”, by cleaning and doing all the chores that men see as “women’s work”. I respect them both for the fact that they can live harmoniously with this role reversal because people still today look at that is being abnormal.

To back up Douglas on the previous quote, I would tend to see how people would see that women have to compromise one thing to get another because of the media. Women who are usually in higher positions in shows often have a major problem in their life. For example, on the show Bones, the main character is a women and an anthropologist who worked her way through education and received great honors, was considered the best in her field, and writes numerous books but lacks normal social skills. She doesn’t understand sarcasm, jokes, and really has no friends besides her colleagues. Douglas expresses the give and take in this relationship and that you can’t have it all unless you are “superwomen”.

These two examples support and go against Douglas’s quote. I cannot decide which direction I want to back up completely, so I will keep an open mind on both sides.

Spice Up Your Life: Views on the Media's Influence on Feminism in Today's Society

The highly interesting and humorous introduction to Susan Douglas’s Enlightened Sexism begins with a brief overview of how women are currently portrayed in the mass media. Douglas first discusses the idea of the Spice Girl, or “girl-power,” generation, and she questions whether this pop -group had a positive or negative influence over women in our patriarchal society. The cultural phenomenon of the Spice Girls is important since it greatly affected the lives of many young girls around the globe, including myself. On one hand, these five women can be viewed as heightened sex symbols for young teens, dressed in, “Wonderbras, bare thighs, pouty lips, and top-of–the-head-ponytails,” thus allowing for female sexual objectification. However, this heightened sexuality is juxtaposed by the group’s song lyrics, which call for male respect toward women.

This contrast of ideals exemplifies a major problem for modern feminists. Douglas states that the Spice Girls serve as a powerful image of new-age feminism, in which it is thought that sex or sexual objectification is freeing/ empowering, and that it is therefore a way to reach full equality with men. At the same time, however, Douglas states that women such as the Spice Girls can be viewed as fantasies of power, in that through their lyrics, women are falsely portrayed as having total male admiration in today’s society: “Now the media illusion is that equality for girls and women is an accomplished fact when it isn’t.”

Thus, women have come to live in a dreamworld of equality, or an extreme fantasy that they are on the same level as men within society. In fact, Douglas exemplifies that women still only make 75 cents to a man’s dollar, and that as of 2007 the most common jobs for females are secretaries, nurses, teachers, and retail salespersons (as opposed to common male positions in finance, medicine, or law). Therefore, in the age of (as Douglas so aptly labels it) “enlightened sexism,” the media may be acting to reverse many of the accomplishments achieved by past feminists by presenting strong and powerful women in male positions.

The truth of the matter is that we live in a world led and run by men (and white men, at that). As Adrienne Rich explains in a convocation speech for Douglass College (an all-female college), the material that is taught in prestigious institutions is essentially male-based, and that even the sciences are patriarchal in nature. Being a neuroscience major myself, I have often been one of the only females in my classes, since it is considered unusual for women to participate in the sciences in today’s world. Rich further states that because of such bias in society, all women have the responsibility to “claim” an education, thus demanding to be taken seriously as an intellectual force.

Personally as a pre-medical student, I take both Douglas’s and Rich’s feminist voices extremely seriously. I am going into a field that is relatively devoid of female power, and I definitely have concerns that some of my goals may not be met due to my gender. As Douglas explains, there is a façade of female equality in the medical realm that is portrayed in the media (e.g. through shows such as Grey’s Anatomy or ER), thus taking away from the reality that much remains to be accomplished for women in this field. Therefore, the “enlightened sexism” of the media can be seen as extremely dangerous since it can disable apt individuals from pursuing a profession that is purely meant to help those in need.

Overall, both Douglas and Rich discuss the importance of feminine strength and male/ self- respect in today’s world. Douglas explains that we cannot let the media trick us into believing that all is said and done in the world of feminism. Rich explains that women are required to take responsibility in society in order to allow for much needed change. Both of these feminists demonstrate that whether we like it or not, men hold the reigns in society, and thus it is up to our generation to take what is presented in media with a grain of salt, and to allow for full gender equality for future generations.