Enforcers of their own oppression?

Susan Douglas’ chapter “Lean and Mean” examines the relationship between the unforgiving standards of femininity that women are subjected to, the promotion of cosmetic surgery and procedures to attain this untenable image, and the impact these standards impose on women’s personal relationships and self-esteem.  Women are told through various forms of media, television, and advertisement that they must conform to the “size-zero, slim-fit, big-breasted” conception of beauty, and are encouraged to pursue such an ideal image through their consumption of cosmetic products, unhealthy dieting, and surgery.  However, obtaining such an image is often unattainable for many women and unsustainable for all. There exists a wide gap between the image and reality of such a construction of beauty, and an impossibility of bridging the two. 

The frustration that arises from failing to meet the unrealistic expectations of beauty mandated by our society is a source of true anger and has produced significant adverse effects on women’s health and self-esteem. Douglass describes this frustration as an “illegible rage”, a redirection of anger and frustration towards themselves and against one another, and this redirection is reinforced through the emergence and abundance of the “mean girl” image. These societal pressures compel girls to police themselves according to patriarchal standards of beauty and punish those who fail to live up to such expectations. I found this to be particularly interesting because of its resonance with Douglass’ notion that girls have learned to be “enforcers of their own oppression”; their participation in this patriarchal culture by adhering to this idealistic standard of beauty perpetuates their own oppression in society. If it is indeed true that women are enforcers of their own oppression, as Douglass states, I’m curious as to what actions she believes constitutes for women’s liberation, since them being “enforcers” implies that the responsibility is in their own hands.  

Leading Post: Meanness and Leanness

I both agree and disagree with Douglas's chapter on "Lean and Mean". She talks about how beauty standards help empower women and turn men helpless. I don't think that is true for all guys. Many guys want someone who is real and they will take that over someone who acts like the "queen bee" because frankly they can be huge bitches. Douglas talks about the power of the relationship of being lean and mean but how many of these girls are selling out to look like barbie? She says places like Victoria's Secret and Hooters are based on breasts and size zero waits. I think this can be very true but I think these places can also make women feel comfortable as well. I like Victoria's Secret because it can make you feel good about yourself, you don't need other people to know what your wearing as long as your comfortable. Also, Hooters I like to eat there because I think it shouldn't be considered a guys place just because of what the waitresses have to wear.

When it comes to plastic surgery I tend to agree with Douglas and the problems she talks about with surgery. Many women get it done for the wrong reasons but there are right reasons to the surgery as well. For example, women with back problems because there breasts are to big can be a physical health problem and surgery can help. Also women who because of hormonal imbalance look more like a boy with barely AAA cups should be allowed some help to feel more like a women. You also can't forget gender transformation. These extreme cases allow these women to live better lives, where as the normal cases I don't really agree with. Stress can be hard on women, especially in college when it becomes harder to find time to exercise and we can't forget about those freshmen 15. These emotional issues can make women resort to eating disorders hoping that it will make them feel better about themselves but in reality it just makes them more unhealthy. Shows like Swan, transform normal looking women to someone they don't even recognize. Men said "they loved the women and thought they were pretty much just fine the way they were, but that the relationship, and especially their sex lives, were suffering because the women had no self-esteem" (224). You will obviously come across some men who think this idealistic women should be for everyone and they make fun of people that aren't but we should give them more credit. Not all men are that shallow. Women face the stereotypes when they have large breasts and they are blonde. They are considered dumb but sexier.

So what about this queen bee problem. IS is really that bad? I think it is unrealistic that just because you are popular that you are necessarily a bitch and bully people that aren't. I think it is about the personality type of the girl. There are girls who are popular and do bully but there are also non-popular kids that in turn bully the popular ones as well. It is a vicious cycle of growing up, being different, and hormones. I think bullying in general is a problem but I don't think it is based on just popular kids. The example they give with "Mean Girls" is very unrealistic and also a cliche. They forget to mention when Janas forms a plan to get Regina and starts this whole War.

This leads into the article by Fausto called "Hormonal Hurricanes". This article talks about how women's hormones are the source of blame that men place for their logic reasoning of why women don't deserve promotions, raises, the same pay, ect. One excuse that I love and think was so outrageous was that we "don't eat as much and therefore can't think as much and are biologically less intelligent and have smaller brains". That is so false. I think men can get threatened by powerful women so they need a reason to get them out of the way. They also blame PMS for the disturbances and why women lash out and kill their boyfriends. Did you ever considered that maybe those women are just crazy?

Overall, I agree and disagree with Douglas's points on meanness and leanness. Also, I believe Fausto's article brings to light many issues that men have with women and what their rational really is.

The Dangers of Wanting to be Barbie

I really liked Douglas’ chapter, “Lean and Mean,” where delves into an anger-induced, and personal attack on the media for its fantasy-like conception of beauty standards. As is reiterated in her “Sex ‘R’ Us” chapter, perhaps one of the most unfortunate consequences of the achieved strides of sex-positive feminists is the over-exposure and over-emphasis on female body parts that has become the norm in society today. Women are constantly reminded of the need to be “perfect,” physically, given that the consequences of not following this expectation are seemingly unsuccessful lives devoid of love and happiness. Thus, women flock to dieting companies and plastic surgeons to look like Barbie (even though it is a known fact that Barbie could not exist in real life because her boob-body ratio would cause her to literally collapse).

Douglas states that enlightened sexism tells us that these beauty standards are “empowering” against women and against men. As is demonstrated in films and TV shows such as “Mean Girls” and “Gossip Girl,” the characters who look a certain way areallowed to behave negatively toward others, mainly because they are “hot” enough to do so. Douglas emphasizes that this connection between looks and unruly behavior can be very dangerous for young girls. In fact, one of the most disturbing points from this chapter was her allusion to a suicide of a high school teen due to a girl-on-girl manipulative prank.

Further dangers of the connection between leanness and meanness are present in psychopathologies within young women. It is known that women tend to fall to depression more so than men do. However, perhaps a more pertinent problem (especially in our college-aged generation) is the pathological body obsessive-ness seen within women today. Last semester I took an abnormal psychology class in which the topic of eating disorders was a major source of discussion. In this class I learned that while anorexia nervosa is related to biological causes, social, personal, and cultural factors ultimately can have a greater influence in triggering the disease. In fact, it was found that even certain personality traits, such as perfectionism, can raise one’s inclination for the disease. Another personality trait that is associated with anorexia is high self-objectification. The term “self-objectification” refers to an individual’s relationship to his/her body in which he/ she views his/her own body as an object. Sound familiar,Douglas- scholars? With the increasing objectification of female bodies, women have no choice but to encapsulate this feeling of subordination, thus allowing for increased pathology.

While in this class we also brought up many statistics from the Colgate Campus Life Survey in which feelings of body hatred/ shame in female students were overwhelming. Thus, even at Colgate, a predominantly athletic and healthy campus, females feel the need to constantly cut back on eating, further reduce their waist sizes, and generally “look a certain way” for acceptance. Overall, I think that all of these (perhaps mainly media-induced) ideals point to the fact that something needs to change regarding the relationship between women and their bodies, not only for the health of women on campus, but for that of all women. Sadly, if this does not occur soon, we will be heading toward a Barbie-fantasy land, where women will not be able to stand because of their socially-mutilated proportions.

The Differing Social Taboos of Same-Sex Sexuality

In her article, “Toward a Global History of Same-Sex Sexuality,” Leila J. Rupp describes some of the history and implications of same sex interactions within differing cultures. Perhaps the most striking part of this article that stood out to me was Rupp's description of cultures in which male-male/ female-female sexual activity is institutionalized. For example, in ancient Greece, adult male citizens used sexual acts as a form of dominance. These actions were not necessarily ones of lust or pleasure; instead, they merely formed an establishment of hierarchal power in society based on age and experience. Similarly, Rupp describes many cultures of New Guinea in which boys are not allowed to grow into men without the incorporation of the semen of older men into their bodies via anal sex, oral sex, or skin smearing. In this example, the semen of older men is supposed to produce masculinity/ warrior personality in young boys. I found this description to be an interesting contradiction of our current conception of same-sex behavior. In fact, today, many would believe that these actions would make men less masculine than their peers, rather than more “warrior-like.” However, I also think that in this day and age it is becoming more socially acceptable (dare I say, “popular”) to be a homosexual man.

In the media, there is a reign of attractive and successful gay couples who are thought of as chic and cool by the masses (i.e. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, Brothers & Sisters, Brokeback Mountain, etc.). Meanwhile, as is discussed in “Cumpulsory Heterosexuality and the Lesbian Experience,” the lives of lesbian women are rarely seen in popular culture. Instead, lesbian women are often downtrodden by both men and women, and are even demeaned in a pornographic sense. For example, when it came out that Cynthia Nixon (otherwise known as Miranda from Sex and the City) was a lesbian, I witnessed differing reactions from both male and female perspectives. Many of my guy friends were excited by Nixon’s news on the prospect that they would see some girl-on-girl action via HBO. My female friends, on the other hand, were “freaked out” by Nixon’s newly-outed sexuality. Perhaps due to Rich’s coined “compulsory heterosexuality” (or the inherent social view that female heterosexuality is more attractive than homosexuality and is necessary for female economic survival), these girls found it “weird” and “uncomfortable” to watch Nixon on SATC. There is extreme irony in this feeling of female weirdness, however, since the basis of this TV show lies in the perpetual- though non-erotic - bond between four females.

So, why is it ok for us to be threatened by homosexual male activity, socially treat flamboyant gay men as acceptable, be turned on by girl-on-girl action as men, or have to look away from lesbian affection as women? It seems that yet again, those who drift from Western cultural norms are pushed out of society and are made into abnormal examples of existence. Thus, it is important to remember that, much like Fausto-Sterling’s example of the gender continuum, there lies a continuum of sexuality as well, and no human should be made into a spectacle because of where they happen to fall on this scale. Instead, to be able to grow as individuals and as a society, we need to recognize the widespread incidence of same-sex sexuality, and establish this behavior as another cultural norm.

Same-Sex and Lesbian Existence

When reading "Toward a Global History of Same-Sex Sexuality" by Leila Rupp, it got me thinking about the difference between then and now. There seems to be much evidence of same sex relations that have not been determined to be sexual acts or not. The reading seemed to imply that just because you have a relationship with the same sex it doesn't mean anything. People used it as religious purposes, or defining manhood, or even for pleasure. They never considered it sex because a penis was not involved. I wonder, what if we thought of it that way? Maybe not in such terms but in the irrelevancy of same sex relations. I mean it in a way that it shouldn't matter who your with and you shouldn't judge people on their relationships. If we were less considered about who was with who, there might be more peace among people. People in the 19th century respected people who could have multiple relations with same sex and because it showed class and respect. Gender was never an issue until now. Why are people so concerned with who is sleeping with who or who is gay or not? It shouldn't be the question that comes to mind. It should be more like, is the person happy with that person?

Adrienne Rich's article "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence" explores violence of men against women in physical acts such as rape. I think as a society we should be more concerned with that question of Why, then of homosexuality. Rich says "it becomes an inescapable question whether the issue feminists have to address is not simple 'gender inequality' nor the domination of culture by males nor mere 'taboos against homosexuality', but the enforcement of heterosexuality for women as a means of assuring male right of physical, economic and emotional access"( 26). Men are trying to control the situation, because more women are coming out as lesbians and therefore men are losing the power and control of a relationship. They cannot partake in a women and women relationship. You think they would be satisfied with what they have or man with man, but they are not. You wonder why more women prefer other women, because men are soo controlling!! Regardless of that not really being true it sure would be a great reason.

Sex Sells

While reading Douglas's chapter "Sex R Us" I found her view points on the media to be exceptionally interesting. She starts off by talking about clothing lines and their representation for the new sex age. Calvin Klein's ads had to be taken down and investigated for possible child pornography because they were wearing just the brand underwear. She then gets into the biggest clothing line that makes women feel sexy: Victoria's Secret. Stating that "sexual equality goes hand in hand" (157). Music has also come along way from the The Beatles risque song 'Why Don't We Do It in The Street' to Eamon's song 'Fuck It, I Don't Want You Back'. The difference is noticeable. Also, Jamie Lynn Spears at 16 getting pregnant by her 19 year old boyfriend and its plastered all over the news. Times are surely changing. Parents are also contributing to the problem with young 6 year old beauty pageants. Who do these children need to be sexy for? The media then switches over to magazines such as Cosmo and Maxim. These magazines basis is sex. Cosmo for the women's perspective and Maxim for the mens. Each exploit sex even in this journalistic red light precinct. There are two voices in Cosmo "the savvy female one who knows all about how to please him, and the voices of allegedly 'real guys' who also provide the inside skinny on 'his point of view' and tell you how to behave" (163). Either way its all about the guys. Maxim is every guys dreams: half naked chicks, beer and sports all wrapped up into one magazine.

Douglas then switches over to television and the shows starting from The Cosby Show and change to shows like Grey's Anatomy and 90210 which is all about the sex and mixture with drama. PArents were nervous and stopped watching some whos because of the time switching to earlier in the night when the children were around to watch. Who wants to explain to their 6 year old about three-somes? The problem is, that it becomes harder to block television and sex when its on the news. For instance, the Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky scandal. Now you have to monitor the news as well?

Collins take on Black Sexual Politics covers things such Beyonce and her butt to Destiny's Child and their butts. It seems to objectify women and their bodies but also incorporates racial slurs. All the women are back and their main features are their behinds. What about their voices and their acting abilities? Why are they not featured as the front line tag? Sex might sell but there should be less racial slurs to sell them in.

Sexuality in the Media

I found reading Susan Douglas’ chapter “Sex R Us” particularly insightful for her review and assessment of the increasing pornification of the media, and its implications on female sexuality, objectification, and liberation. As she describes, the 1990s witnessed two trends that gained considerable momentum: the degrading sexual objectification of women and the increasing sexualization of children. Clothing companies such as Calvin Klein and magazines like YM and Mademoiselle featured slim, white, and mostly blond pubescent models to market their products through sexual display and innuendo. Marketing strategies zeroed in on younger children, particularly females, with advertisements embedded with sexual display and references. The increasingly pornified media began to promote the message that through sex and sexual display women can obtain power and what they want. The result was the emergence of a new female icon: the sexpert. 

The emergence of this new “sexpert” image bore profound implications on female sexuality and objectification. At one end, the sexpert represented female sexual liberation and empowerment through sexual display; she knows “a lot about sex, is comfortable with sex, and initiates and enjoys sex on an equal footing with men.” This acknowledged females not as sex objects but as active sexual agents. (156)However, at the other end, the “sexpert” reproduced and perpetuated the misogynistic stereotypes that lead to their objectification. Women were told to seek power through the sexual approval and acquiescence of men. Thus, this image became ideal for the age of enlightened sexism because she represented features of both empowerment and objectification.  I found this delicate balance between female sexual empowerment and sexual objectification of particular interest because of its resonance to today’s society. I sometimes find it hard to discern whether the overt display of female sexuality is a feature of empowerment or objectification. If a girl goes out on a typical night out in a scantily clad dress and cleavage, does this represent a source of empowerment from her decision to exercise her sexuality freely, or does this reaffirm patriarchal objectification of women? I think it’s important to acknowledge that this can represent both; what one may see as an expression of sexuality may be interpreted as sexual objectification by another.

Leading Post: The Consequences of Too Much Skin

Oftentimes, freedom comes with consequences. Douglas begins her chapter, “Sex R Us” with a stipulation for female sexual freedom: women are now forced into mini skirts and revealing tops in order to obtain a seemingly liberated sexual existence. As Douglas illustrates, in this day and age, sex has completely flooded our airwaves. For example both males and females are often made into scantily clad sexual spectacles in many different advertisements. Open sexuality can be seen in many other aspects of the media as well. Cosmo has obtained its popularity merely through providing an emphasis on what men like in bed, and how to make a female’s body more fit to a man’s “wants and needs.” Sex has become the frontrunner in the music industry as well. Douglas points out that in almost any rap music video, women will be traipsing around the rap artist, competing for his attention via their bodies. Similarly, many TV shows openly promote the female body. The show Sex and the City has made some strides for women in that it presents very real women openly discussing their highly sexual lives (no double standard exists in the world of Carrie Bradshaw). However, this idealized NYC world is not a true portrayal of reality. And thus, even though it may seem more acceptable for women to embrace sex today, they are continuously objectified and subordinated by this increased flow of sexuality.

Similarly to Douglas, Patricia Hill Collins discusses the current rise in sexuality, however she specifies the effects of this rise for black women. Today, as a society we view black women as animalistic and wild sexual beings. Collins uses the example of a Destiny’s Child album, Survivor, in which three black women are shown in revealing animal printed outfits, singing songs like, “bootylicious.” In an interesting contradiction this group simultaneously promotes female power while playing into the stereotype of black female hypersexuality. Thus, Destiny’s Child parallels the Spice Girls, spreading the embedded feminist idea that black women have obtained true power while remaining sexy, when in reality, they are merely objectifying themselves.

Collins further points out that black sexual politics are filled with not only sexism, but with racism and class exploitation as well. She discusses shows such as Montel, Maury, and Jerry Springer, which use sex as a selling point for many of the episodes. In one episode of Maury, for example, a black women attempts to discover the father of her child through the paternity tests of nine possible males (none of whom were ever linked to the child). Thus, through the exploitation of the media, this woman is portrayed as hypersexual and reckless, therefore playing into these racial stereotypes that exist in society.

One price of this media overflow of sex is that overall, young girls are taught that the best way to obtain power in our society is to cater to what men want in a sexual manner. Thus, our media conveys that only when girls become an object of desire can they obtain true happiness. While this mindset not only unsparingly objectifies women, it can also lead to numerous health problems in society. Douglas and Collins demonstrate that sex in media causes young girls to have sex at highly young ages, before they have been educated in safe sexual practices. Moreover, the widespread sexualization within the media is often linked to depression, anxiety, and eating disorders in young females.

Personally, as an avid Sex and the City fan, I admire the writers of this show for their bold scripts and their ability to wash away (at least some of) the negative stigmas that are associated with female open sexuality. However, I also think that there should be a delicate balance between female sexual openness and female objectification. There is a distinction between being able to fully discuss and carry out sexual desires without becoming a woman in a cage, who exists for sole visual pleasure. I truly believe that one day it will be possible for women to be sexual beings without throwing away their intellects and without becoming sole body parts. However, it seems that there may be a long wait before this day comes.

Newsflash: Relationships with Facebook

There is no doubt that Facebook has irreversibly changed the way we interact, communicate, and identify with one another in the society we live in today. We can post photos and videos, create events, join groups; essentially, we are creating virtual representations of who we are and what we identify with. Moreover, throughout the past couple years the popularity of Facebook has grown immensely, reaching over 600,000,000 users, many of which vary in age, sex, ethnicity, nationality, religion, etc. With the ascension of social media as the dominant form of communication, interaction, and networking in mainstream popular culture, it is no surprise that the roles we traditionally play in relationships have changed too. In relation to the course material we discuss in class, I found it interesting to investigate how traditional relationships have changed with the emergence of social media, and how these differences affect said relationships both in the social media and in the real world.

Facebook has become an increasingly popular tool within younger populations, and its prominence within mainstream society has enabled it to redefine traditional modes of communication, interaction, and relationships. An article featured on CNN.com by Brenna Ehrlich titled “Boy meets girl: Facebook functions in modern romance” examines a study conducted by Seventeen magazine that describes the sort of influence facebook has had on modern courtship. The study polled 10,000 guys and girls from the 16-21 age groups, maintaining that facebook “plays an important part in how amorous teens make a connection.” According to the study, 79 percent of people click “friend” within one week of meeting a person of interest, and 60 percent of people stalk  their crushes profile once a day.  Ten years ago, such a common social practice would be unheard of and almost inconceivable. For instance, during my adolescence and early teenage years, expressing interest in a girl may have required the courage to speak to her, the wit to make her laugh, and/or the charm to make her like you. Nowadays, the emergence and prevalence of various forms of social media such as facebook has enabled people to express such affection through a digital medium at a distance or under anonymity.  The instant message or wall post has rendered obsolete the antiquated gesture of passing notes in class to the person you like or sending a written card to the person you love.
The relationship status option serves as another prominent feature which users love to use and change, and has profound implications on how we view relationships today. From “single” to “married”, users select from a range of options used to describe one’s relationship status and disclose it to the public. The article also mentions a study released by AreYouInterested, in which 21 percent of respondents said they would break up with someone via changing their status.  I found this claim to resonate well with a popular attitude towards facebook relationships; that is, “It ain’t official till it’s on facebook.” The notion that having your relationship publicly disclosed on facebook confers a sense of legitimacy to said relationship is one that I’ve always found ironic, but many of my friends and I have adhered to it in the past. However, if changing one’s relationship status can serve as a legitimate way towards breaking up a relationship, as noted in one of the studies, then the notion that having your relationship disclosed on facebook makes it official has some truth to it. This is because the way we identify with ourselves and how we portray ourselves on facebook have become so aligned, that being in a relationship without publicly disclosing it can almost be seen as a discrepancy or illegitimacy of sort.

It is transparent how facebook has redefined the way we view and think about our relationships by examining how we integrate this information and interact with it through social media. Just recently, Mark Zuckerberg decided to make some subtle yet profound changes to the options one can select when choosing relationship statuses.  In an effort to set a new standard for inclusivity within the social media, and to acknowledge concerns within the LGBTQ community, users can now select “in a civil union” and “domestic partnership" as options to describe their relationship status. Although this is a relatively small change that does not change the functionality of facebook, it bears profound implications on how people globally will assess and review their conception of what a relationship can or could be. By acknowledging these relationships and recognizing the differences that exist within LGBTQ communities, Facebook can even further reshape and redefine our cultural norms and social traditions. Continuing to take steps in this direction, towards inclusivity and equality, is crucial in both providing legitimacy to new definitions of social institutions such as relationships, and challenging the patriarchal systems that are often the norm and left unchallenged.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/social.media/11/19/facebook.modern.romance.mashable/index.html?iref=obinsite

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/social.media/02/18/facebook.relationship.status/

News Flash: New Health Care to be Passed

The Obama administration is deciding whether or not to go give women contraceptives and other family planning services for free with the new health plan. This could possibly remove the barrier on birth control for women, which has been a long term goal for many decades. It is said that this could reignite the debate on reproductive health care and the federal role over it. It was also mentioned that this could start a debate with the Roman Catholic Church about privacy. “The law says insurers must cover preventive health services and cannot charge for them. The administration has asked a panel of outside experts to help identify the specific preventive services that must be covered for women.” I think that birth control should be included in this. It could be a major help to our society, especially with the people who cannot afford it. It could really benefit the women and control unwanted pregnancies and abortion reduction. They wanted the administrative panel to make the decision about what to include in the free health care plan because they wanted the people to know that it was based on scientific reasons not politics. Many of the health services which include gynecology, pediatricians, and other doctors have called for coverage without co-pay to help out the people.
Gynecologist haves suggested that the health plan should include free contraceptives because then it will help with the preventive health care and it allows women to control the timing, spacing and number of births. This will overall help with the pregnancies and will reduce infant mortality and defects. I definitely agree with this statement because many young mothers who did not take the birth control do not know how to handle the responsibility and end up killing their child by accident because there is no one there to help them. The Catholic Church does not agree with this statement that birth control is a preventive service in the usual tense. Science and the Church have always had problems and do not see eye to eye frequently. One women from the church named Deidre A. McQuade who is also a spokesperson for ‘Pro Life Secretariat’ says that “pregnancy is not a disease to be prevented, nor is fertility a pathological condition. So birth control is not preventive care, and it should not be mandated.” The Catholic Church does not believe in abortion and killing a gift from God. I would argue that rape would be a great example of where this could be averted. The tragedy of rape in general is terrible but what if the girl got pregnant as well that is just an emotional crisis and psychologically can really hurt a person if they are against abortion. The fact is that one half of the pregnancies in the United States are unintended.
Kathleen Sebelius has come up with a ten year plan for the nation’s health care. One of those plans is to increase the proportion of health insurance to cover contraceptives and services. Many department and services have sought out to put there un-bias opinions about the subject to give it to the public. Giving the advice the guidelines for preventive health care should be in effect by August 1st. Nick Papas of the White House said “that it was too early to comment but we shall see when the study returns”. Congress was called upon to pay special attention to the needs of the women. I believe that this is the right way to go about dealing with the idea. I think by making it about scientific facts and passing it through governmental law people will come to realize that it was the right decision and support the idea. People need the facts to form an opinion and they are getting exactly what they need. The preventive care is also meant to cover annual checkups and health assessments for women. They will screen for domestic violence, heart disease and breast and cervical cancer. Also doctor visits for women who intend on becoming pregnant. This is also a great idea because I think they will end up helping a lot of women who slip through the cracks and become lost within the system. They might be able to get the women help that they need in all areas. The supplies should include both male and female sterilization with no co-payments or other costs. Normally, birth control can cost between $45-$60, sometimes more and the doctor visits for prescriptions. This can really affect many women on getting the birth control pills so this new health care should really benefit these women.
This preventive care will also make sure that the insurance companies will not charge women more than men. This has been common and premiums for women have been 25-50% higher than men. Once again women are having to pay more than men even though we don’t make as much as men. It can be really tough when things are not equal but hopefully if this health care passes that will change. It will be a start to equalizing things between men and women. The Planned Parenthood Federation wants to have coverage for not coat for families as well. This will include drugs and services. The American Academy of Pediatrics says “Adolescents and adult women need to have access to the full menu of contraceptive methods without cost-sharing”. This would also include education and counseling. Ms. McQuade of the church becomes more worried because the coverage violates the “rights of conscience” of religious employers and other people with moral objections. Some emergency contraceptives can act as abortion-inducing drugs. They said that the government should worry more about the diseases and babies and fertility are not diseases. I tend to disagree with this. I think the government is helping prevent certain things for happening which is a start. They do need to concentrate on diseases but unwanted pregnancies are also a major problem. People are also worried about privacy. By joining a family plan some parents might be able to see if there child is sexually active or not especially when getting tested for sexually transmitted diseases. Also, because of the new law children can stay on their parent’s policies till age 26 so the need for confidentiality is more important than ever. This health care can help with many help problems and even save tax payers money so I think everyone should be on board.
Overall, I really think that this preventive health care is a really great idea. I think it can save a lot of people from unwanted births. Also, allows people who do want children to be able to time it better and be more prepared. It helps with the mothers help as well as the child. It even can help men with certain things. I think it is a great idea to support this health care and it should be passed.

Reference:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/03/health/policy/03health.html?_r=1&scp=9&sq=women's%20rights&st=cse

Intersex

You would be surprised how many intersex births occur yearly. With the Harvard Study, they came to the conclusion that 1.7 percent of all births are intersex. With a population of 300,000 that would be 5,100 people. That is more then albinism which is about 20,000 babies. So parents ask what to do when they have an intersex baby? Doctors say that it depends on many different tests that they can run in order to pick the "right" gender. But how do you know your actually picking the right one? If you pick a girl and she becomes lesbian, did you pick wrong? Or is that just her preference? These questions can worry many people. Doctor Money suggests that "all humans are gender neutral at birth" (67). His method was proven wrong by Doctor Diamond and the story of John/Joan. When at the age of 2 John had his penis removed in an accident so they made him a girl and with therapy made him believe he actually was a girl. When he turned 13 he felt wrong. He walked, talked, and acted like a boy with girl parts. So they changed him back and now he is married living happily. Diamond believes that gender is assigned to you when your born and you can't just change it. So how do you know if you are making the right decision? Sexual and gender are connected. Just because you are a certain sex, it doesn't make you a specific gender. Doctors believe that "gender role and sexual orientation are more strongly influenced by biologic factors than is gender identity formation" (71). I think there could be a new gender forming and we don't have to have two sexes only.

News Flash: Feminism in a Glass?

http://www.time.com/time/2002/wdrinking/story.html

It is a typical Saturday evening, and my friends and I are getting ready for a night out on the town. We spritz and primp our hair, apply mascara, and slip into excessively high heels. Before leaving, one friend comments that we are going to have to buy more vodka tomorrow. Another takes a final swig of her corona before we leave.

This behavior is not only what has become socially typical of college-aged females, but recently, it has also reached an unprecedented level. In an article from TIME Magazine, “Women on a Binge,” Jodie Morse discusses the rising phenomenon of female binge drinking behavior. Morse illuminates many differing theories behind why this behavior has grown exponentially within the past decade, and she also relates this phenomenon to many ideas that we have discussed in class. Morse begins this article by describing Lisa Diebold, a typical Syracuse undergrad, who has one major goal for her senior year: to be able to out-drink her guy friends at this institution. Diebold explains, “To be able to drink like a guy is kind of a badge of honor. For me, it’s a feminism thing.” As is exemplified with this statement, Morse argues that perhaps this upsurge in female alcohol intake can be viewed as a mode for women to competitively “equal” that of men. Thus, this alarming rise in drinking becomes an example of a Douglas-esque “fantasy of power,” in that more and more women seek empowerment through beer and shots.

However, there are countless problems with this way of thinking. For college-aged females especially, this upsurge is incredibly frightening due to health reasons alone. Morse illustrates that in 2001 at Syracuse University twice as many women as men were taken to the hospital for intoxication-related injuries (some had alcohol poisoning, some had been violently sexual assaulted, and some had extreme bone fractures due to drunken falls). Morse also states that heavy drinking increases for women have even been documented in all-female colleges, according to a study published in The Journal of American College Health. This research further shows that for women who binge drink, there is a 150% increase in “unplanned” sexual activities, date rape, and incidences of sexual assault, when compared to women who do not.

Perhaps even more concerning than this documented rise in college-aged female drinking behavior is that of a similar rise in young females. It was found that girls at disturbingly young ages have increased their alcohol intake to match that of their male peers. In fact, by 1999, 10^th grade girls had narrowed the gender gap in alcohol intake to within two percentage points from their male classmates. Morse states that young girls often start to drink merely to impress boys, because of the socially accepted attitude that girls who drink (and who drink copious amounts, at that) are more attractive than girls who do not. This mindset, which is clearly activated at a young age, has many implications and serious problems attached to it for women across all different age groups.

Because of biological differences alone, women cannot physically handle as much alcohol as men can. In fact, Morse states that women’s bodies have a higher ratio of fat to water than men do, so alcohol becomes less diluted in women than in men when it enters the bloodstream. Research also shows that women have lower levels of an enzyme that helps to break down alcohol than men do. Moreover, it is known that girls who begin drinking in their early teens are more prone to alcoholism later in life as opposed to boys. Furthermore, it has been found that women are more prone to depression than men, and heavy alcohol abuse can easily affect this disease’s eventual prognosis. Lastly, women are known to develop liver disease 10 to 15 years earlier than men, even if women consume only a portion of the daily alcohol that men do.

Even with the prevalence of these health risks, society has made it very easy for women to strive to drink men “under the table.” It is common for bars to host drink deals for women, thus enabling them to get drunk quicker than men. Many examples of binge drinking behavior are also seen in the media, which further relates to Douglas’ ideas of enlightened feminism. There are countless ads for liquor and beer in which attractive women are selling the product. Moreover, in glamorous shows such as Sex and the City, the main characters are constantly seen drinking together, with little to no consequences. In shows targeted for younger audiences, such as Gossip Girl, drinking is also seen as a symbol of status and power of the elite.

In society, female binging is further perpetuated by the social construction that it is expected for men to provide women with drinks. For many women, this phenomenon can be construed as a symbol of power since they often brag of or strive to receive free beverages. However, the inherent problem with this façade of power is that even though women obtain a sense of freedom from being catered to, this behavior is, in fact, placing them further into their metaphorical cages, as is discussed by Marilyn Frye. Thus, this social expectation can be viewed as a component of male hegemony, helping to allow for the patriarchy that exists in our world today. As was discussed in class in relation to Allan Johnson’s “Patriarchy, the System: An It, Not a He, a Them, or an Us,” hegemony is the ability of a dominant group to remain in power and maintain it by convincing subordinate groups to accept cultural norms that place them in their position of inferiority. Thus, men provide free drinks for women, and by convincing them that this is a form of flattery, they are further able to maintain their supremacy in society.

In reality, however, this behavior is not complimentary to women at all. Since men are expected to pay for multiple drinks, this action becomes an expression of male wealth, and it is thus playing into society’s expectations that men dominate the labor force. Moreover, women are often anticipated to “pay men back” in a sexual sense for these free “rewards,” and thus drunken women become symbols of sex and vulnerability, nowhere near ones of intellect. Lastly, as was previously stated, because of the general effect that alcohol has on the body, women who drink heavily are more prone to violence and sexual assault from men. Therefore, instead of viewing drinking as a symbol of empowerment, women have to recognize that this behavior is, in fact, a regression from feminism, since it further oppresses and subordinates them in society.

Overall, I found Morse’s article to be extremely interesting and pertinent to what I witness here on Colgate’s campus. I often observe female friends attempting to match their male friends in drinking games or competitions. I also feel that women are frequently pressured to drink heavily in a college atmosphere, perhaps due to this idea that alcohol is a source of dominance for women, or that it is at least a release from their constrained weaknesses. I think that women often mimic male behavior in reckless ways due to gender-related ideologies present in our culture that elevate men to their dominant reign over society. Moreover, I think that the current, self-confident, “girl- power feminist” generation views alcohol as a mode of being set free (perhaps due to the media’s association between glamour and alcohol). Thus, women drink to raise their self-confidence and to enable themselves to take control of social situations, attempting to replace men as social aggressors.

It becomes increasingly important for these “girl-power”-infused feminists to remember that remaining sober, or refusing to accept a free drink from men, is not only allowed, but should also be further endorsed in the media. Moreover, women who binge need to realize that being able to drink like a guy does not make one like a guy in any respect, especially because of the physiological consequences that can stem from this behavior in females. Overall, “girl power” will never come from out-drinking a man; instead, I think that today, it would take more power for women to resist taking drinks from men. Thus, as women, we need to begin to step off of the path of least resistance when it comes to drinking behavior, not only for our own health and safety, but to enable us to free ourselves from our cages of subordination.

** Morse also brings up the point that women often drink incessantly in order to lose their inhibitions around men. However, they also tend to be self-conscious about the large amount of calories that they consume from alcohol, and at times, they will deny meals for themselves if they plan on binge drinking later in the day. This behavior further perpetuates an extremely unhealthy lifestyle for women, since eating less before drinking merely promotes getting exceedingly drunk. Attached is a video of this phenomenon deemed, “drunkorexia”:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7022647n

Works Cited

Douglas, Susan. Enlightened Sexism: The Seductive Message that Feminism’s Work is Done. New York: Times Books, 2010. Print.

Frye, Marilyn. Oppression.

Johnson, Allan G. Patriarchy, the System: An It, Not a He, a Them, or an Us.

Morse, Jodie. “Women on a Binge.” TIME Magazine. 1 April 2002: 1-3. Web. 01 Feb 2011.http://www.time.com/time/2002/wdrinking/story.html.

.

Boys Don’t Cry: The Problems That Arise From Infant Genital Surgery

In chapters 3 and 4 of “Sexing the Body,” Fausto-Sterling discusses many of the ways in which inter-sexed individuals are unfairly treated in today’s society. Even though Fausto-Sterling found that 1-2% of births are inter-sexed (making this event much more frequent than is commonly thought), these individuals are immediately molded and mutilated by surgeons, in order to conform to society’s accepted standards. Fausto-Sterling conveys that oftentimes this genital surgery is done unnecessarily (in that it is not obligatory for infant survival), and it is never done with patient consent.

I want to be a doctor someday (and a un-biased one, at that), and thus, Fausto-Sterling truly got me thinking as to why our society feels the need to carry out painful and potentially dangerous medical procedures on inter-sexed babies, immediately after birth. She suggests that this phenomenon could be due to the “threat of homosexuality” that exists today. Fausto-Sterling points out that homosexuality was thought to be a disease in society up until the 1970s when it was removed from the DSM. Many religious organizations also viewed homosexuality as a behavioral “choice.” However, through the research of Simon LeVay, it was found that there are neural ties to homosexual behavior, and thus, it is highly ignorant to deem this behavior as a decision or as abnormal in any respect. Overall, since ambigious sexual desire in inter-sexed individuals threatens our constructed norms, perhaps it can be seen as a part of this inherent stigma against homosexual behavior that is present in our world.

Similarly, when inter-sexed surgery goes awry (aka when constructed females begin carrying out masculine behavior, or visa versa) our society is threatened. I witnessed just how uncomfortable social groups can become from gender-ambiguous behavior when I was in middle school. An older classmate of mine (I will call her Jen) was known to be a female when she was developing as a child, but when she hit puberty she began to identify more with the male-sex. Jen cut her hair and solely dressed in men’s clothing, and was then incessantly gossiped about in the cafeteria. It was not known to my classmates what her status was as an inter-sexed individual (i.e. whether her underlying chromosomal layout was truly inter-sexed, or whether she was a cross-dressing individual); all that was known was that she had a girl’s name and dressed as a boy. I constantly felt awful for Jen because she was repeatedly made fun of for no other reason than how she choose to present herself.

As Fausto-Sterling illuminates, Jen’s story of gender-ambiguity is highly common in society. Since one’s gender identification comes from both his/her environment AND his/her neural wiring, it becomes impossible for anyone but the individual to make a choice regarding one’s gender. Overall due to this problem, I think that in order to combat society’s completely accepted genital mutilation and (at times, seemingly arbitrary) gender assignment, inter-sexed individuals should be able to make up their own minds about genital surgery once they reach the late stages of development (as is discussed in the novel by Cheryl Chase, the founder of Intersex Society of North America). Thus, instead of becoming human experiments, these individuals will be able to make a decision themselves, not based on who they are socially expected/ molded to become, but based on what they feel deep inside.

Dualisms: Male vs Females

Anne Fausto-Sterling discusses the dueling dualisms between makes and females. She starts with Patino failing the sex test for the Spanish Olympic team because she had an Y chromosome so they considered her not a women. She eventually fought the ruling because her body never developed the male characteristics. If it were up to Pierre de Coubertin she wouldn't compete at all because "women's sports are all against the law of nature" (2-3). Obviously that is a very sexist comment because we have many equal sporting teams for women and men today. Examiners said testing still must be done, but they wanted women to parade around naked to see the physical evidence that they were "actually women". Women found this degrading just to prove their femininity. The line that "boys perform better then girls because of their gender" is outdated and incorrect and as proof, three women beat a man in an Olympic event of the high jump.

In the 1970s women achieved "full economic and social equality once gender inequality was addressed in the social sphere has faded in the face of a seemingly recalcitrant inequality" (4). I don't think equality was ever achieved in these aspects. President Bush changed then title 9 rule so that it made it easier for colleges to avoid the equal scholarship rule and this was in 2005. Some questions that Sterling was asking can be answered in a couple different ways. She asks: why we surgically remove one sex organ if a person is born with two? She gives the answer of maintaining gender divisions. I believe that, that is one answer but what about the emotional aspect? Deciding what gender you want to be, because of societal reasons of being different. An example, would be in Grey's Anatomy where a 15 year old girl found out she had testies inside her, so she could potentially be a male if she wanted. She always felt out of place and different so she wanted to try to be a boy. How does that effect her friendships with other, or her family? It can be emotionally tasking when your different. So when doctors catch it early enough, I can't see it being all bad that they remove one or the other in the sake of the emotional reasoning.

Sterling also talks about the rating scale and the complexity of the variables that deal with sexuality. One person might not be fully heterosexual or full homosexual, there are different in between stages and degrees. This is not uncommon, even back in the Greek and Middle Ages there were always different forms of sexuality, just sometimes society of the different periods deal with them differently. Sterling talks about the two general patterns of essentialism and constructionism and the historical record of each. To "declare oneself "gay" in the United States is to adopt an identity and join a social and sometimes political movement" (18). I don't know if this is necessarily true because people hide that their gay so they wouldn't be in the political movement if people didn't know about it. The real dualism comes along when you are comparing sex/gender, nature/nurture, and real/constructed. There is also the theory of mind over body which many people use in sports. Your not tired, it doesn't hurt, you can play through the pain. Usually you can't but there are times when you can. If you tell your body something doesn't and get yourself to truly believe that, then it won't. In most "public and scientific discussions, sex and nature are thought to be real, while gender and culture are seen as constructed" (27).