Notes from the unbound

Blog 12

2007-11-19T07:23:00.000-08:00

I was recently listening to Fresh Air on NPR and they were talking with a feminist writer named Katha Pollit about her new book of essays. One part of the interview struck me the most. She talked about the state of feminism today.

She began with an anecdote about how her daughter, in a college class, was one of only two people that identified themselves as feminists. Then she went on to discuss how the younger generation feels feminism has completed its mission – that it’s no longer needed. Then she discusses why feminism is still needed. She brought up body image, eating disorders, etc. saying that they are feminist issues even though many people don’t look at them that way. She remarks about how sites like Facebook illustrate the negative gender divisions. So many young women have lots of pictures that show themselves in a sexual manner while most young men look like slobs.

At one point, she was talking about how some people say there is no need for feminism because women are now free to “choose” whatever they want. When asked why she puts quotations around the word choose, she said something very important. She talked about how a woman might “choose” to have a breast enhancement, but there is a reason that she feels that a better body image would do her more good than something else. Social conditioning still tells women that they are more accomplished if they have a “perfect” body. Instead of choosing to do something productive, women choose to do what is rewarded by society.

She discusses many other things on the show so here is a link to the show online:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16112223

Blog 11

2007-11-12T18:01:00.001-08:00

Recently, I heard a news story on the radio about how in Seoul, South Korea there are going to be new women only subway cars starting in 2008. When you first hear that, you probably automatically think it sounds incredibly sexist, but not according to government officials there. They say it is to protect women. Why do women need this protection, you might ask. Well, because it is apparently fairly common for women to be groped or accosted by males on the subway so they need this type of “protection.”

I don’t really think this can be considered protection – and neither do many of the women in Seoul. This separate subway cars thing is pretty controversial because many women, and I think rightly so, think that to separate women is discrimination. I have to wonder how anyone can think that the solution to the problem would be to segregate women. Why not go after the men who commit the crimes? By separating women from the men, it’s as if they’re blaming the women. It’s like saying men can’t help themselves because women are somehow provoking the men.

What makes the whole thing particularly interesting is that in Seoul there is a law that says women are equal and have to be treated so, but yet, this is going to happen. I’ve done some searching online to find out more details because I wonder about something. I wonder if it will be mandatory or voluntary to ride in these cars. Either way though, I don’t think it should be happening. Officials should be cracking down on this crime by going after the perpetrators so that the men are held accountable for their criminal actions.

Blog 10

2007-11-05T08:06:00.001-08:00

This past weekend I went to a soccer tournament with my boyfriend who referees games on the weekends. After he was done for the day, I told him how I had overheard, for the first time, a parent tell her daughter to “play hard.” It’s something that I’ve heard quite a lot, but it’s almost always directed to boys. I’ve been to many of these tournaments now and each time I’m at them I inevitably start thinking about how girls and boys sports are viewed so differently.

One thing I’ve always wondered is why I so often hear people speaking derisively of the girl’s teams? I constantly hear people say that the girl’s games are “boring” compared to the boy’s games, and it seems that the only reason for this attitude is that the girl’s are less aggressive in their playing. I understand that there can be that difference, but I have to ask how anyone can reason that girl’s sports are inferior because of this. It seems absurd to me to complain that girl’s aren’t “aggressive” like boys when society continually tells them it is improper to be anything but polite. And why is aggressive behavior so valued? Sure it might make for a better time if you’re a spectator, but I don’t really find it entertaining to see boys being reaffirmed that being aggressive is what matters in life. Why don’t we value skill? I’m far more impressed when someone uses his or her mind to come up with some kind of clever maneuver.

Probably what bugs me the most though is that people constantly say sports are great because they “build character,” but the only thing I see it doing is cementing gender stereotypes.

Blog 9

2007-10-30T20:33:00.001-07:00

This past Friday, when I was on lunch break at work, my female co-workers and I were chatting about all sorts of topics as we always do, but then one woman brought up something she had read about in the paper. She had read about a local woman who had given birth at 50 years old. I kind of just smiled said, “Well, yeah?” Her feeling was that it was “just gross.” Then my other co-workers started talking about it. The general consensus amongst them is that no woman that old should be having kids.

After they talked for a bit, I decided I would share my own thoughts on the matter. First, I told them that it is pretty common and it’s not a big deal. To which, they replied that it may happen, but “that doesn’t change the fact that she would probably die before her child even completed high school or college. When I pointed out that women live longer than men generally, they had no reply. Which then led into me asking them it is okay when a man has kids with a younger woman when he is older. One woman said, “Well, men do that because they want to feel like they’re young.” Then I started talking about how that’s ridiculous to say it’s natural for men to have kids when they’re older but not women. Why should men get to “feel young” while women just “get older?”

Because my co-workers are mostly female and we’re all pretty close, we tend to share our ideas, and often, I’m the only one who brings up the feminist side of anything. It’s kind of disheartening when week after week I hear that reaffirming sexist thinking and trying to justify it even when given a different perspective. Maybe after a while, they’ll begin to see things differently.

Blog 8

2007-10-23T10:32:00.000-07:00

I was really excited when I got Newsweek in the mail last week because the cover proclaimed that the main story of the issue was “Women and Power.” There a lot of stories covered in the issue so I haven’t been able to read all of them, but those that I have read are very interesting and speak a lot about some of the same issues that I’ve read about for this class.

What one might term the “preface” to the articles was a short description of some of the most famous female rulers in history. It was nice to read about some exceedingly powerful women, and have their abilities spoken of as equal to men and at times superior.

After that there is a long section of short “Oral Histories” from lots of different women who are leaders. The women that they had write these essays are in varied professions such as writers, CEO of music and television companies, public officials, designers, and scientists. All of them were really interesting. Some women spoke about the obstacles they faced as women. One woman wrote how she thinks many women are afraid to become powerful because they’ve been taught it’s not something they’re supposed to do.

The one thing almost all of the women discussed was failure and determination. It was inspiring to hear the stories of women who worked hard to achieve their goals even if they failed many times along the way. The single most inspiring thing was to hear so many women speak about how they were confident and determined no matter what problems they faced during their journey to success.

Blog 7

2007-10-09T19:28:00.001-07:00

Lately the news has been all about the presidential campaign, and this time it’s kind of exciting because of Hillary Clinton. It’s cool to see a woman running for president especially considering how strong her chances are. While it’s awesome that there is a woman running, it’s great that she can’t be reduced to just “the woman” running for president. She’s got ideas and intelligence as well as popularity for a host of other reasons. One thing that concerns me though is that many people seem to absolutely loathe her without much reason, which makes me think it is based in sexism.

Whenever I have asked people why they hate Hillary so much, they never are able to give me a definite reason. It’s always rather vague with phrases like “I just don’t like her,” “she rubs me the wrong way,” or other various nonspecific things. Those who actually give me a definite reason are most assuredly sexist. I’ve had several people, male and female, who have told me that they don’t think she should be the president, or any other woman for that matter, because if a woman were to be president the rest of the world would not respect the United States. They say it’s not in woman’s nature to be leaders (they say they aren’t sexist though because they think women can be leaders on a small scale). It’s an asinine argument. Not only have there been many female presidents and prime ministers throughout the world, there is also the basic principal behind that argument that is totally flawed. To say that a woman can’t be president because others would not respect her, gives power to that sentiment. It endorses it and perpetuates that idea.

Whether someone wants to vote Democratic or Republican doesn’t really matter, but to not vote for someone based upon their sex is a shame.

Blog 6

2007-10-02T18:58:00.000-07:00

So I was listening to a mixed cd in the car today, and this old 80’s song came on. It was Sheena Easton’s song “Morning Train” and it made me start thinking about women and music. The song is about a woman who loves her man who goes to work everyday and provides for her. It’s just a lovely little pop ditty. It would be easy to just say it is music so who cares, but I do care. Music does have power. Almost everyone listens to music on a regular basis, and there is always some kind of story or message in a song. That song was a perfect example of art that, at best, fails to recognize what kind of stereotypes it reinforces, or worse, it purposely means to convey a woman’s happiness being dependent upon a man who is a provider.

While listening to that song, I started to think about other artists that I enjoy, and what their music has to say. I have a strong affinity for Helen Reddy. Her song “I Am Woman” is great although almost cliché at this point, but its intent is great, as are many of her other songs. She uses her music to present complex independent women. The song “Best Friend” is all about learning love yourself and recognize your own worth as a person, not as someone’s spouse or partner. Another person I really admire is Nina Simone. She has so many beautiful songs, but her most powerful are forms of protest. She often used her music as a way to combat racism.

I can understand that people just want a catchy tune, and I certainly don’t think that music needs to be didactic; however, that doesn’t mean songs that reinforce patriarchy ought to be what we deem valuable. Below are some lyrics I believe represent art with political consciousness.

"I wish I could share
All the love that's in my heart
Remove all the bars
That keep us apart
I wish you could know
What it means to be me
Then you'd seeAnd agree
That every man should be free"

- Nina Simone, “I Wish I Knew How It Would Feel To Be Free”

Blog 5

2007-09-25T18:37:00.000-07:00

So I watched this show called “Flip This House” and this husband and wife were remodeling a house together. The husband wanted to do the house as cheaply as possible, but the wife wanted to do some more costly designs. So when the wife circumvented her husband’s authority and bought some expensive materials for the kitchen remodeling, her husband went ballistic.

The whole fight that ensued between the two was a great example of machismo. They fought verbally at home one night, and he kept yelling at her because she “didn’t get” the basic principles of business. And one of his biggest peeves was that she did something without his approval. When I was watching it, I kept wondering if he always sought her advice before doing something major. And then brought that up. He had no reply.

The next day he showed up to the construction site and destroyed the lawn and acted like a total maniacal jerk. Crazy aggressive. One would assume that his wife would be horrified. No, she was won over by his “passionate” display of conviction.

One thing I wonder as I watch this is whether most people watching it think the relationship is dysfunctional, as I do, or if they think it is a good example of “compromise” making a relationship work.

Then I was watching another episode (I’m kind of addicted to these shows) with another husband and wife. It was interesting. They did argue at times, but they always talked things through. Never actually fought. They listened to each other and they managed to get their work done. To me they were a much more exemplary couple; they compromised after discussion and looking at things from the other person’s point of view, not by giving in to a tantrum.

Blog 4

2007-09-18T18:05:00.000-07:00

One of the things that we’ve read about in this class is ableism, which is something I had not really thought much about prior to this class. But then this week at work I was presented with a situation that I thought really was a case of ableism.

About a month ago, a young woman who was working in my area began to have some convulsions because she is diabetic and the work had been particularly grueling and hot that night. At least, when I was told that the incident was due to her being diabetic, I assumed it was due to the exhausting work conditions. But then this week, my immediate boss came up to me and told me that the supervisor had just come to her to tell her that she should pay particular attention at break time to the woman who had fainted to be sure that she was eating and drinking. The supervisor had determined that everyone needed to watch this girl because, according to the boss, the girl reportedly had not eaten or drank much at break – like diabetics are supposed to. So the boss deduced that the girl must have purposely sent herself into some type of seizure.

To me this seems definitely like ableism because why would you just assume that someone with a disease is using it to her “advantage.” Besides, would a person really do something life threatening in order to avoid having to clean up some marshmallow machines? Highly improbable. So at break I sat down with my immediate boss and told her that I thought it was absurd to listen to the supervisor because it was obvious a bias. The whole thing made me think about how often I have heard people say that so and so used an illness or a disease to get out of something, yet whenever a “normal” person randomly gets sick no one ever accuses them of anything but bad luck.

Blog 3

2007-09-11T16:25:00.000-07:00

It's funny that when people think of academia, they think of people with broad knowledge and experience, but it seems that is somewhat of a myth. In the last couple of weeks I have been witness to and heard of two extremely sexist professors’ remarks.

The first instance was in one of my classes in which we are reading a Jane Austen novel. The professor began discussing Austen’s own view of feminism, and according to the professor, her view on feminism was more advanced that “some” (meaning all) feminists today. What was Austen’s view? According to this professor, she viewed the oppression of women as also creating oppression for the men of society. And the reason this is an advanced feminism? Because “some” (again all) feminists today believe that men have had their turn to rule the world and now women should have complete power. To add to the loveliness of this narrow view of feminism is the professor’s constantly talking about celebrating diversity.

The other occurrence of sexism from a professor happened to my best friend when she went to a professor to ask for some advice. She had emailed the professor telling him that she wanted to meet with him because she wanted to do some more in-depth work in her field of study and he is one of two professors at IPFW that works in that area. So she met with him for about an hour, and she had what she considered a decent meeting until right at the end. Before she left, he felt the need to tell her that in her email she came off as overassertive and arrogant. One might wonder in what way she was overassertive and arrogant; well, apparently she had told him in her email that she was “very determined” to succeed in her field. That’s all it took for the professor to think of her as overassertive. I find it hard to believe that if it were a man who went to a professor with an assertive attitude that the professor would feel it appropriate to advise him that a more docile attitude was needed.

Both of these professors are huge disappointments to me. These two men make me think of the quote by Sir Francis Bacon that “knowledge is power” in a new way. With knowledge one can become helpful or with it, one can also stifle others.

Blog 2

2007-09-05T15:09:00.000-07:00

For the last couple of weeks I have been reading works by and doing research about Charlotte Perkins Gilman, who was a socialist and feminist activist in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. She’s really a fascinating person because she used literature to expound many of her feminist ideals. She’s definitely most known for her short story “The Yellow Wall-Paper,” which is a very wonderful story that still has relevance today.

The story is written as the diary of a woman who has been taken to a country estate for a “rest cure” for “nerves” which resembles something more like depression. It’s a complex story about how the nameless narrator is treated by her husband and by other males – mainly they tell her what to do. As she sits in this old empty house, she starts to see things in the wallpaper. What drives her toward madness is the presence of a woman trapped behind the wallpaper fighting to get out. The end of the story doesn’t have a happy ending – the narrator goes completely mad, but Gilman as an author uses that to make a point. She used fiction to make her audience understand that women’s subjection to male dominant culture destroys the identity of the individual – she never really formed one.

The story is relevant because, just as the wallpaper symbolically trapped the narrator, women and other groups are still barred from developing their individuality. It’s really incredible to me that the story was written over 100 years ago, and yet the subject still has meaning for audiences today. For anyone who hasn’t read it, I highly recommend it. It’s very much like an Edgar Allen Poe story, but with great social significance.

Blog 1

2007-08-28T17:22:00.000-07:00

A couple of days ago I was watching TV, and an advertisement that I saw really grabbed my attention because I'd just finished doing the readings for class. This ad reminded my about the essay titled "Denials of Inequality" because it was for Clorox Bleach and it presented housework, or more specifically, laundry as being almost strictly feminine.

The ad starts off showing a woman from probably the early 1930's doing laundry and it talks about how your great grandmother did laundry with Clorox your grandmother, mother, an occasional man (1), and now You. The ad was so rooted in typical gender stereotyping that it kind of caught me off guard. It seems like it's only a minor thing, but it does have broader implications. It carries on the "tradition" of women being servants to men and families and it seeks to legitimize the notion of separate male and female tasks. I also find it interesting as a man because the gendering of the task makes it implicit that a male doing laundry is in some way atypical, or should be.

Overall though I just found it to be interesting because pretty much everyone, female or male, has to do laundry so why does it need to be considered a gender specific role? In an age where gender equality is supposedly so prevalent, why do such blatant stereotypes still permeate the airwaves? It’s probably true that women statistically do actually perform more household duties, even today, than males do, and that advertisers are trying to tap into the largest possible consumer pool. That in itself is one reason that the ad is so aggravating – it’s, in a way, reflecting what people still believe and want.