Halloween: a social experiment

Like all wonderful facebook event descriptions say "Halloween is a night where guys can dress like girls and girls-the less clothes the better- and no one will say anything about it. The discourse lies in how the males either dress up as girls to make fun, or something "sexually clever," both of which are blatantly offensive to the opposite sex. Girls on the other hand wear pieces of material that cover less than some stratigically placed napkins would. And what is the purpose in that, because it certainly isn't offending the males. Clearly, that was rhetorical. We all know what the reason is. I'm not usually one to conform and expose, but I figured I its now or never being my senior year and all. While having a good time, I decided to make this into my personal experiment. Since guys go out to offend others, and girls go out to...well you know, I incorporated both gender aspects of Halloween into my costume. For one night, I went against all and everything I believe in and was Sister Snookie, taking the Jersey Shore and ascetism to a whole new level (may the Lord forgive me in the name of science and research). My friends and I headed out and the experiment began. I felt like I had stumbled into a Britney Spears horror film or Aaron Samuel's halloween party in Mean Girls. Girls were "creatively slutty" with their too-tight dresses and some form of a head garment. Men always want the things they can't have. It is human nature to want to pull the lever that says "do not touch." Well, Halloween night my costume made me a lever. How much more forbidden can it get but with a nun? I embodied that slutty virgin image that I discussed in a previous post. With all the liquid courage in the atmosphere, there were no qualms that people were speaking their minds. Most of the comments I got were very pointed. I met up with some other friends and we were just having a good time, as I was silently snickering. I did this to see what kind of attention girls get on a weekend basis and the behavior between the sexes in such an environment. I also came to the conclusion that trying to be clever and offensive didn't make much of a difference. If you show off your curves, at least at Juniata, most aren't really swift enough to care about the creativity behind it. Guys are horn dogs and some girls enjoy objectifying themselves for a good time. Myth busted. Guys can be offensive but girls will still want to dance with the dumbos. Perhaps the fact that there are 15 females to every one male on campus, makes girls less choosy. Its a dog-eat-dog girl world in here and no one wants to be chronically single.

The Real Message of Disney

When watching any of good old Walt’s animated films, most get that warm and fuzzy feeling deep down that can only be attained through either putting on jeans right after they came out of the dryer or Disney. When one takes a certain Peace and Conflict Studies class with a certain professor who doesn’t feel the same sentiments towards Disney, one realizes the bright colors and goofy characters are all a façade for some pretty dark messages. So, let’s talk about a few. I will start with Snow White and the evil queen from “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” because that was the example analyzed in class. Snow White: the epitome of all that is good and pure (even from her name, we get this sense of virginity), the extreme opposite of aggressive and strong, the most fragile (in my opinion) of all the Disney princesses (just for the record, Disney did not write/create the story of Snow White, its a Brothers Grimm fairytale). Just look at her in her delicate form, listen to her weak little voice, and understand why said professor doesn’t allow her children to watch this film. She teaches us to ap
ologize for “being a burden,” sing when things are bad and it will make everything better (right, I wish crooning Journey really made all my cares go away), and cook and clean for men. Hm… She physically takes up very little space with her petite body (she can’t be more than a size -2 in waist and maybe like a child’s size 4 in glass slippers). When she is on the screen, light flutes (very nonthreatening instrument) play as she effortlessly glides across the forest floor. Now don’t get me wrong; I don’t think Snow White is entirely full of bad messages. She is nurturing by being a friend to all animals. And look at the animals she befriends—the deer, bunnies, birds, squirrels—cute, cuddly and fuzzy ones. She is quite motherly to the dwarfs. And in the end, she gets a pretty fine prince (is it weird to think Disney characters are attractive? Oh well. If we're goin' there, I'm more of an Aladdin fan to be honest.) But for the purpose of playing devil’s advocate, Snow White is a bad example for little girls—don’t let your kids watch her or you are a bad parent. Pretty soon little 6 yr. olds are going to be apologizing when a boy knocks their books out of their hands (and watch, in 15 years, that same boy will be the girl’s prince charming because that is just how this world works), and 25 yr olds will be apologetic for national debt! You know what, I even caught myself saying sorry to someone as we both grabbed for the door at the same time. Why?! I blame her. So, thank you Snow White for creating a contrite universe for women.

Now what about the opposite of our sweet little protagonist? Does the evil queen represent anything good about femininity? On the contrary, she actually embodies many masculine traits. Her head garment, restricts us from seeing her hair (or maybe she is just going through chemotherapy and is embarrassed that she is bald). Most
princesses and queens have very delicate tiaras, but this queen wears a rather masculine crown with pride. The use of color in the queen captures her dark persona. Her low voice and bass music when she is on screen adds to her sinister description. She also takes up a lot of physical space. With her draping cape and tall stature, she shows power. Power. It’s all about power. Her regal status along with her control even instills fear in the big brawny hunter. Why is he afraid of her? He is the one with the knife and bow and arrow. After her huntsman fails to carry out the task of killing Snow White, the queen mentions how she can't trust a man to do anything right, and if she wants something done right, she will have to do it herself. She exudes confidence and she is powerful. I wouldn't want to get on her bad side.

Let's take a look at some of the other Disney princesses. What do Belle, Aurora, Cinderella, and Ariel all have in common? All of these ariyan princesses (there's one: they are all white) have porclian skin and delicate features. These cartoon characters are so sexualized. They all have these tiny little waists and flawless complexion. And for rated G animation, they are pretty busty too. They are also never in pants. Princess Jasmine is the only
exception who doesn't have pale skin or wear dresses, but she is probably the most provocative one in the bunch. Remember that scene where she disracts Jafar by coming on to him or the scene on the balcony with Aladdin? Sexual Power. Also, look at their theme songs: "Somday my prince will come," "Once upon a dream," "Part of your world," What are all of these songs eluding to? That's right, Mr. Right. Their lives are incomplete in some manner because there is no man in it. When you take a moment to look at the male Disney theme songs, they are usually about power and control or their future: "Just can't wait to be king," "Go the distance." They aren't sitting around locked in a tower or scrubbing floors waiting for their princess charming. Who ever heard of a male DID: Dude in distress? It just doesn't happen.

That is why my favorite Disney princesses are Pocahontas and Mulan. They are depicted as strong-willed, independant, capable (more capable than their male counterparts), yet at the same time attractive, young women. Bot
h of them stand up for what they believe in against their fathers and authority. That takes courage--something that Disney robs the other princesses of for the most part. Their songs are about the harmony of nature and self image. Wholesome things child viewers should appreciate. We have talked about how men just "have" respect while women have to earn it. It is not an easy process and much hostility is shown toward these women who are speaking out. Both of these princesses try to instill the message to their little girl viewers that it is ok to be who you really are and stand up for what you believe in. There is more than one way to "bring honor to your family."

Now, I am not having children nor do I have this undying desire to get married (maybe I will adopt, but thats another post for another day perhaps), but if I did, I would let them watch Disney. I don't think a 5 year old would go up to her mother and question the objectification of Princess Jasmine, so I think its safe. Also, Disney is doing a better job at portraying their female characters as more independent, less DID types. I haven't seen it yet, but there is a lot of talk about how this new princess in Tangled is more like the latter of the already existing ones. So, if Disney impresses me with their more neutral approach in the representation in gender roles in their films, maybe I will just change my mind altogether and have kids just so they can watch good, wholesome motion pictures. ...though that's highly doubtful.

What a girl [thinks she] wants

The other day, we watched this super depressing documentary. Women (but mostly girls) of all ages were interviewed about their thoughts and views on sex, makeup, and just womanhood in general. It was yet another example and further evidence of how influential the media is in the minds of these naiive little women (one of my favorite books by the way..actually jo's boys tops it..i digress). No but really, these girls are so brainwashed by the images of Brittney Spears and Myriah Carey, they use makeup before they need deodorant. Most of these girls were the same age that I was w
hen all those pop celebs were big. These same girls, let's say ages 13-14ish were trying to BE Brittney (pre-going crazy and shaving her head) with the clothes they wore and the makeup they used. I try to recall those awkward pre-teen days in my life and honestly, I was more concerned about hiding my body because I was teased for being too skinny. (I believe I touch upon this topic in another blog but just to reiterate a quick point: making fun of people who are underweight is just as messed up and hurtful as making fun of obesity.) I wore baggy clothes instead of Spears' cute little naughty schoolgirl attire with pig tails and knee highs. The girls in this documentary said they dressed and acted like these celebs because they were successful and pretty and got the guys. I was astounded when it was revealed that a former porn director also directed these music videos. That means that these girls are inadvertantly influenced by porn?! wow. Is it no concern that there were 10 year olds interviewed who said they think they will have to "confront sex" in the next two years? Does no one see anything wrong here? The are spending more time in the mirror, pointing out all the things they hate about themselves and covering it up with animal-tested foundations and mascaras. Heck, one girl used lipstick for eyeshadow because it "gives a natural shine you just cannot get from real eyeshadow" (or something along those lines). The only time I wore lipstick (on my lips that is) and all that jazz was for my dance recitals and competitions.
And the whole sex issue...it seemed like fiction at such an age. To my friends and I sex was like an exclusive club that only our parents ("ew ew ew bad mental picture"--because we also were ALL very immature and refused to believe that our parents do it...the stork idea was so much less gross) and famous people were in. When our older siblings or the older kids in band bragged about eating out and getting to the center of a tootsie pop, we thought nothing of it...until the proceeded to actually explain the meaning of those phrases where neither had to do with any real food. We made stupid pacts, quite the opposite of American Pie, where we vowed we would never let anything up our you know whats except tampons. We were completely disgusted by all that sex nonsense. These girls are saying things like "well i guess if I have to so he likes me..." or "I don't think I will be ready, but do I really have a choice?" They objectify themselves because they think that its the only way guys will notice them. It is sickening, and it is the reality. Children are growing up faster with the average 11 yr old having a fully functional cellular device on hand. And why is 5th grade health now sex ed instead of just the puberty talk and nutrition? Media, parental upbringing, adolescent influence, money, the list goes on. Regardless of the cause, we gotta find a solution. There isn't much positive female encouragement out there and the little that exists is bashed so much girls are afraid to follow them. Its easier and more convenient to be a Brittney than a gosh ya know what I can't even think of a singer or actress that isn't the size of a toothpick that is a good role model off the top of my head. Wow. Case in point. Can someone save these girls from themselves before its too late? I really hope so, but God knows we have a long way to go before that desired outcome.

ELK Country: Masculinity at its finest

Over Fall Break, my dad and I went backpacking in Elk County. They call it Elk Country for the obvious reason that it has wild elk--the only wild elk on the east coast. Since I have taken a few gender studies classes, not to mention that I am currently in one, I tend to be more receptive to comments or assumptions about gend
er. Elk County is your old-fashioned, no cell phone service, women in the kitchen, men go hunting for dinner type of town. They haven't realized that it's not 1950 and the US has progressed in many fields, especially with regards to women's roles. I had many a moment where I had to rethink the repercussions of punching a man carrying a remmington700 due to some...pointed remarks.

Larissa Hatch: a brief history. Back in 1989, Larissa Catherine was born to Denis and Elizabth Hatch. 2 years later, Jacqueline Theresa joins the family. 2 years later, well, mom and dad can't afford to have any more children. So, aside from pops there are no other males (except for Raif, my dog) in the immediate Hatch family. Well, my dad still wanted boys. So he did things like coach our softball team, take us fishing and make us hook our own bait (boy did we get over our fear for creepy crawlies really fast), encouraged us to join boyscouts (yes, not girlscouts-its called venture crew which is assoc. with BSA so stop arguing with me because i am not a girlscout), go hiking and stuff like that. Our dad even taught us some construction skills when we were building our house back in '95. Now don't get me wrong, I'm still pretty "girly" too. I'm a ballerina, my room is sickeningly tidy, and I change my earrings just as often as I do my underwear. 15 years after Larissa helped wire the new home, her father and Larissa (who has now taken several courses at Juniata College specifically focusing on gender studies) are on the previously mentioned backpacking trip, where her upbringing and current knowledge of gender issues makes it quite an interesting adventure.

Male elk are ani-man whores. The male elk, more commonly known as bull, prepare nearly all year for a less than 10 minute fight (referred to as a sparring match) which determines who owns the harem of cow (female elk). Most harems contain 20-50 cow, so no one fe
els special. The bull patrols the harem to make sure no one runs astray or tries to leave the herd. Submission by the harem, control by the bull...sound familiar?

Midday Saturday, my dad and I pass these two hunters. As common lovers of nature, it is only right to bid gooddday to these fellow hikers. These hunters went above and beyond the call of duty by addressing my father and my father only with "you know its hunting season right? you should be careful, especially with HER." and the "her" was so pointed, with such a negative conotation. They might as well have called me some profanity with such a tone in their voices. It is hunting season, but there are designated areas to hike and guess who was wrong. And we let just anyone carry a gun (thank you 2nd amendment). My dad will not start a fight for no reason so he kindly accepts their words of wisdom while my tounge is bleeding from biting it so hard (bite your tounge Laris, just they aren't worth it).

Here's my favorite. Scattered amongst the trail are homes of E
lk fanatics and those rich folk who have the luxury of having more than 6 homes spread throughout the country (I'm not bitter). By Sunday afternoon, I am exhausted. When I'm exhausted, I grow impatient and intolerant. We saw a little hunter's lodge with the sign "no doe club." Clever. I nearly chucked a hand grenade that I conveniently had in my back pocket.

After our successful 20.7 mile hike, we went to the new Elk visitors center. After some geocaching and a short film on the history of Pennsylvanian elk, I had to take a pitstop. Like any other public venue, the line for the women's restroom is excessively long. I got into this intense conversation with these two women about toilets. There really is a strategy to where they are located. We were talking specifically about how it is nearly impossible to find the women's bathroom at ballgames in football stadiums. Now I haven't done any extensive research on it or anything, but women's bathrooms are usually close to food venues. My logic would tell me that when a wife or girlfriend says she needs to go to the bathroom (and usually right when there is a big play she doesn't understand because girls just don't "get sports" right?), the male counterpart asks for another corndog or coors. Like I said, I haven't opened a full investigation, but my hypothesis has some probable cause to be accurate, no?

Now, amongst all of this, you have the usual door holding, eye rolling when they saw me pull up in a pickup, and uncomfortable whispering when I'm standing within a 3 feet and have incredibly good hearing. I could say I am used to it, and just brush it off, but then I wouldn't have such a good example of masculinity at its finest here in central PA.

Tough Guise: a 2nd time around

By taking Pyschology of Gender last year, I have already been exposed to this film. Last year, I watched it and focused on the biology-related topics. This time around, I took it from a different angle. Jackson Katz kind of questions what really makes manhood. He uses strong adjectives, like dominance, power, and control. According to Katz, masculinity and violence go hand-in-hand. They exude a confidence to put on a front. The documentary uses the analogy of the curtain in "The Wizard of Oz." Behind this big, intimidating force is a small not-so-scary man. Men hide their true feelings through violence, because it is not socially acceptable to express those emotions. A really interesting point Katz made was this idea of the invisibility of masculinity. When you read in the newspapers, woman raped... not once will it state in the article a man did it. Same for tragedies like Columbine; the boys are referred to as "students." Of course they give details on the perp but they never specifically say a male committed said crime. If you look at any crimes women committ, the headline will read something like Woman castrates husband or Teen girls killing spree. When you remove the gender from something, it shows a negative assumption for that group of people--in this case males. So, if a gender is not mentioned, society has programmed us to assume that the perpatrator was a male. And who could blame us for such an assuption when the statistics for male crimes are out of this world. 90% of the child abuse in the US is by men, 95%-rape, 85%-murder..you get the picture.

Last year, in that Psychology of Gender class, my semester-long project focused on the genderization of children's toys. We came up with some similar data to this film (and no, we did not take anything from the film; in fact, we watched it after our presentation). A big thing we noticed was the use of color in genderized vs gender-neutral toys. I bet you can guess what color the girls' toys were. Most supposed gender neutral toys were the primary colors (just like the boys toys). Without reanalyzing the entire project, we came to the conclusion that gender neutral toys were actually boy toys that just happened to be acceptable for girls to play with too. How nice of them to let us into the club. The use of space was very interesting as well. Girls toys literally take up less space which is symboic of real life. Women are meant to be petite, submissive, all those things that are quite the opposite of big and intimidating. Look at male toys: the action figures are big and muscular and the racetrack/truck toys can literally take up the entire living room. When we use the projection of power and body intimidation in children's toys ages 5+, what do you expect? Its all about social learning, and when the games you play when you are a toddler suggest masculinity, of course it is going to influence how we look at masculinity later on in life. It makes it seem culturally natural to let boys play with guns and fight when they are kids. What makes us expect that they are just going to one day grow out of that and turn on their emotions?

Another huge issue this documentary highlights is the acceptance of women/homosexual haters. Personalities such as Rush Limbaugh and TV shows such as Family Guy only encourage the negative behavior. It makes these groups of people into the laughing stalk; it doesn't make light of a situation. It is even in the movies...and we laugh right along with all those snide remarks. Box offices are makin bank on the degradation of women or "the not normal male." Like in the movies, it occurs in real life too where one gains power and respect by disrespecting others. And how is any of this ok? How come there are more Limbaughs in the world than Jackson Katz? He makes such good points in this film, but who is his audience? I would assume the feminists and those who work for social justice have seen this, but it needs to reach the unattainable audience. The bad boys and the tough guys need to see this. I am not saying that it is not beneficial for anyone who cares about these issues to watch this, but it needs to break out of that circle and be exposed to those that need to change in order for social change to occur. Idealistic? Just a tad.

The sisterhood of feminism

Tuesday, we started learning about the different types of feminist thought. To continue with this theme, we read about even more variety when it comes to categorizing feminism. Amongst our liberal, psychoanalytic, care, postmodern, and 3rd wave feminists, we are exposed to a few new ways to think. Radical feminism are the extremists. You have the revolutionaries, the ones that are against pornography to the point where they are trying to make it illegal--or at least make the women that participate seem immoral. They are all about getting into the system and changing it from the inside. They believe that if the legal structures are altered, they will win the battle against sodomy laws along with the issues surrounding abortion laws. They want to remove oppression from the picture. Whether individuals agree with these laws isn't the problem; so long as women as individuals have the option to chose what they want and that added pressure is removed, the radicals' goal is met. At the same time, they use the biological aspect as liberation. It seems contrary to the ideals of oppression, but sex objectifies women, and instead of calling that oppression, radical feminists view this as a mechanism to reclaim control. Freedom of sexual expression is "good." So, my take on things? I'm all about equality and an oppression-free society, but hypocrites are in fact my biggest pet peeve (aside from people who leave the lights on when they leave a room). I wouldn't consider myself an extremest in any aspect of my life (except avacado-eating) so no...I would not say I am a radical feminist. case closed.

Eco feminism is kinda neat. It showed the link between man and nature. I did not read this section, but the group that presented highlighted how women are more frequently "one with nature" as opposed to men. Men are more focused on mind and reason whereas women use their body and emotion. Men kill (war) when women literally give life. Looking at the judeo-christian religions, all of which
were established by men. Women are more spiritual and see the interconnections within. Human destruction of nature can be compared to women oppression by man. The authors mentioned Carson's "Silent Spring." I read that book so long ago (back in my "I'm a boyscout and I am going to save the world" days) I don't recall much, but I do remember Rachel had such a passion for the conservation of nature. Maybe I'll go check it out again. I wonder if there were any big ecofeminists on the production team of Avatar.

The Marxist/socialist approach is pretty straight forward. Your class determines the amount of power exuded and the struggles within class only exists among genders differences. According to these feminists, materialism is the reason for women's expression. The division of labor keeps women in the domestic sphere and they feel that a revolution would equalize the workplace for women. They want to make domestic labor public. They feel trapped by reproductive limits. These feminists see children as an economic gain instead of human beings with potential. It is a very detached stance. There are not many emotions attached. I can't imagine having a family, in this day in age, for the sole puropse of more hands on the farm or the chance of getting more welfare. The blackeyed peas can help me out with this one, where is the love? it undermines family. It is more about capitalism--money for family or marxism-money for community, than social connections. Another critique is the question of what a revolution would actually do. If we look at past revolutions, true there is a chance for social change, but nothing happens over night. And history hasn't showed that much progress of you look at average pay rates of men vs women. I have never been a big fan of Karl or his theories, let alone his influence on feminism.

The multicultural/global feminist is super interesting. In the United States, every woman experiences her identity and status differently. It isn't just these black and white labels like in other parts of the world. There is more weight to mother or caretaker than just provider of children; same goes for career woman--it has more dimension to just that simple blocking together of women. At the same time, this challenges female essentialism. Is our essential role to cook, care, and clean? In that case, might as well bang our heads against a wall a million times to get rid of all those worthless brain cells. The term "workplace" sounds glamorous here in the US, but workplace for most abroad means sweatshops, house cleaner, etc. This devalues the idea of women in the workplace. The ongoing debate of feminism vs. womanism continues. We all understand the fundamentals of feminism, so I won't go there; however, womanism (at least in our class) is a new term. It creates a distinction for black feminism. Because of that other dimension for black women, it is safe to categorize them differently. BUT, if we categorize black women differently, and we are talking about feminism on a global level, shouldn't we do the same for all races? And there lies the discrepancy. Then lies the challenge of uniting women cross-culturally. Realizing a sisterhood exists isn't enough. We must accept and embrace that we don't all do things the same way and just because it isn't our way doesn't mean it is wrong (the common American mentality). The hard part is how to bridge that gap. Education seems like the obvious answer, but American women have the most agency to travel and educate/learn from others. Some women will never make it out of their hometowns, so their role would be to accept the strange woman into their home and listen and speak of their different worlds. In my personal experience (though it only goes as far as Latin America...and Canada is that counts), women are very prideful of their roots and traditions. Some do not see it as oppression, because it is all they know.
My host mom for example was stunned when I told her I really had no desire to get married or have kids. I told her I see my life as one to share with others in a different way--in my NPO endeavors. She questioned my faith and my femininity, and told me a woman's work is in her house for her family. Though I was boiling inside, I realized where my dear mother was coming from and I respect that. Her only experience was to have a family and do just that. When we got divorced, she struggled because she did not have her own education to fall back on (she relied on her husband completely). She is a very successful--don't be surprised--chef/cake decorator. And regardless of her unsupportive nature toward my dream career, I love her dearly. I do not know if it is my place to step in and raise the red flag. At this point, I have only shared "the American way" (and who is to say if we are even doing it right?) by telling my stories or hopes and dreams. So, is having the luxury to travel to 3rd world countries a waste of an opportunity to bridge that gap or do we ultimately just widen it?

Wait! There is more than one type of feminist?!

For Tuesdays class, we split up the reading assignment on the different theories on the Feminist Thought. I was part of the group who had to read and analyze the psychoanalytic feminist theory. Freud uses the story of Oedipus to categorize how women think. There is father identification, mother identification and the collaboration of the two. According to the infamous psychoanalyst, a son's desire for their mother's attention drives the rest of their thoughts and actions. The same goes for a daughter's need for her father's attention. The oedipal phase is a theory that is meant to direct a child towards heterosexuality. In Oedipus, the protagonist kills his father where he thereafter sleeps with his mother. In this story, Oedipus is unaware of the familiarity relations, but it does show the jealousy uprooted by the same-sex parent and its possible dire consequences. It is an attempt to explain the biological and psychological drives of the unconscious. It sets up to explain the development of the id, the ego and the super ego. We are fundamentally sexual beings, and allow this to motivate a lot of our actions. Then there is the thought that repressed sexual memories control our future actions. Our class used the example of SVU or those Law and Order shows. I have never watched said style of programming, but apparently the basis is that sexually repressed teenage women go crazy and kill other teens. They don't even realize they did it until the plot is revealed and the main characters play detective and figure out the "who-done-it." I made a connection that in fiction and the real world, the mother is blamed when a male commits a felony. Look at the Columbine, or even local news. The first accusations were/are usually against the poor connection between the guilty party and his mother. The media depicts the mothers as poor nurturers and unstable human beings. So essentially, we don't even blame males for the crimes they commit. How fair. The other big missing piece or fault to Freud's work was that he failed to include social agents. The idea is that there are different agents that influence a woman's role or respect toward a woman or women in general. Agents exist such as family, religion, law and politics, education, socio-economic status, culture, tradition, the list goes on. In Freud's theory, he says that ultimately, it is the parental control which shapes and influences an individual's upbringing which according to Freud is preferred heterosexual. Our group came to the conclusion that those other social agents do have a large effect on an individual. Maybe Freud just hated women.

Amongst the other type of feminist thoughts we read about and discussed in class, the other other I found to be very intriguing was the care chapter. The argument lies in the ethics of the category. So its a matter of ethics in terms of justice versus the ethics in terms of care. It can be described as the difference between maternal practice and the actual situation of motherhood. Assumed roles versus desire or want to fulfill responsibility. Eventually, one must bring the care in private spheres to a public place for more support (aka: women cannot raise their children alone). According to Ruddick, one of the authors, there are three dimensions which preserve life for a child: war, sex and societal roles/expectations. There needs to be an equal balance amongst the three for a child to be "raised right." Self-interest, productivity, and efficiency should not take the center stage in areas of education, health, environmental protection, etc. I find that relatively contradictory to his previous statement. I can understand the idea that yes war, sex, and societal expectations are not uprooted from self interest, but aren't all three of these things productive for society and efficient for the sake of said society? Kittay says that we much make the workplace more hospitable for caregivers of both sexes. I think we are progressing with female nurses but what about women doctors? We've got a long way to go.

Like a virgin, touched for the...38th time.

Basow and Valenti have totally opposing approaches to telling us the same messages: Women will never (at least in this day and age) win. Ever since Dr. Widman came to class, and we talked about Hookup Culture and all these other things, I have become obsessed. I observe, experiment, and find myself saying and doing things I probably wouldn't be if it wasn't in the back of my mind all the time. But, I mean, look at it: Valenti never holds back and unfortunately, she always speaks the dreaded truth we all desperately ty to avoid the existence of. She mentions throughout this chapter that women, girls, and pre-pubescent teeny boppers behave in ways they may not even personally feel comfortable with; however, we theorize that if we sit around at home reading the Bible, or even riskier--watching a PG13 movie on your own, you will remain alone. We live in a society where one must literally leap out of her comfort zone and take chances to find companionship. Valenti says its bs that [we] do things just to fit in or please someone else. She emphasizes that we shouldn't succumb to these social pressures, and we should not do anything that we would not do if those social pressures were not present. For "all the single ladies," thats so much easier said than done. Let's play pretend! I'll pretend I'm a virgin, and you pretend you care about me< typical dialogue minus words right? Valenti has this one point where we must wax, pluck, strip, and suck whether we want to or not. She makes an effort to argue that it is not inherently feminine, but we are limited by our sexuality and must pluck and suck unless we would rather be pluckin "he loves me, he loves me not" daisies and suckin on capri suns until youre 40 and then you result to e-harmony. And oh my God, what about this double standard we have to live up to? We are expected to all be hott virgins. How the heck did that become the reality? AND how many of us are actually that? Then when you actually succeed in the impossible and don't give it up, your rep is still shot. We just cannot win. I like to compare it to an old childhood favorite--Candyland. Its almost as if [we] get stuck in Gloppy the Molasses Monster's (which is ironically enough, a depicted as a male character) gooey, sticky, controlling, yet delicious substance and we can't get out. One little taste, and you're stuck. What a gentleman. It may be a ridiculous analogy, but I think it can work. Basow tried to be nice about it and say that women do have roles outside the kitchen, but its all enviornmental. You see these horticultural and industrial societies where women play bigger roles, but it is based off of their child-bearing capibilities. Sometimes I wish that movie with Arnold Schwarzenegger, Emma Thomson and Danny DeVito (fantastic cast) was realistic. Our role in society is completely revolved around the fact that women can bear children and men cannot. I wish just for one day the whole male population on earth (sans the underpriveledged who have enough to deal with) could get a little taste of what it is like to feel the social pressures of looking perfect all the time, to have the to have unwanted sex, to have the risk of becoming pregnant from unwanted sex, to have a time of the month, to understand why biologically we are so emotional, and to bear children and give birth. I'm not one to sit there and cry "oh woe is me," but reading Basow and other authors in this class get me a little steamed about how it is so difficult for women...all the time! On the same note, we are working on our project in which we decided to focus on women's roles cross-culturally and it annoys me even more when I see the roles of women in Latin America, the Middle East, small tribes in Africa, etc. And we think we have it bad...at least we aren't plhysically forced to perform unwanted tasks. I don't know what seems more terrifying: to have 8 babies because your husband wants his offspring to continue his "good genes," to be considered property of your husband and you are used at his disposal fully aware that he is having an (or several) affairs, or to be a the mother of a bastard child (not to mention that she is continually raped after being circumsized) in whom the father is your country's enemy. You can argue that our society and these environmental factors limit women, but I would have to say that this time the grass is greener (maybe because it is sod in this consumer nation representing fake contentment if you will) on our side.