Sex positivity

I'm really glad we got to read about this in class because it was always something that I kind of knew, but in a kinda sort of way - basically, I never knew how to put it into words. I loved the wikipedia article because it finally gave me the words I want to use when I wanted to argue how porn is not an anti-feminist medium (can we call it that?). Well, it can be, but that all depends on the type. I know that it can represent sexualized violence against women, which isn't feminist at all. But at the same time, there are more ~friendly version that give women the position that men have in the porn industry. "Sex-positive feminists argue that access to pornography is as important to women as to men, and that there is nothing inherently degrading to women about pornography. Anti-pornography feminists however disagree, often arguing that the very depiction of such acts leads to the actual acts being encouraged and committed." See? It's still so conflicting to agree with either one of these views because I can see truth in both of them! But like I said, I guess it all depends on the type of porn that's being watched? Ugh, this is one of those things that I wish had a straight yes or no answer, but there's such a long gray area in between that makes me question one opinion from the other. So, where should I stand with this? On the one hand, I agree that it is a form of expression of women and freedom of speech. But on the other, seeing as though the porn industry is dominated by men, we often get the degradation of women (not saying that all men are misagynist but you know...). SO I'M CONFLICTED AND CONFUSED! But at the same time enlightened. Sigh, welcome to feminism I guess.

(Reflection~).

The World of Advertising is Screwed Up

I've been trying to think of the perfect time to introduce this video to the class, because I really like it, and after reading Peggy Orenstein's Cinderalla Ate My Daughter, I finally found the opportunity to think so. The video is called Toy Ads and Learning Gender by YouTuber Anita Sarkeesian focusing on the double standard and sexist advertising targeted to young boys and girls. It's a great video that shows just how early gender roles (and also masculinity vs. femininity) are established by the advertising world.

This is another video of Anita that focuses on LEGO and how they clearly target boys and girls differently, where a boy gets to build a castle and defend the land, and a girl gets a pink house where she can bake and look pretty.

(P.s. this is the hyperlink!)

Boys Will Be Bo--Oh shut up.

I absolutely agree with every point Jessica raised in her post. My favorite one had to be the quote she chose with gave light to the fact that these authors were only focusing on one type of "boys" and generalizing it for the whole gender. Like she said, it is unfair and excludes the rest of them. I know that different cultures teaches their boys different ways of behaving, however, I also know that in the end, the "boys will be boys" mentality is still there. I guess what I'm trying to say is that there are different ways to get to that mentality, and these authors are talking about just one: being a white, privileged boy who grew up in a setting where he was surrounding by people who are like him. How are Black boys, or Hispanic boys, or Asian boys influenced by all this? Is it still in the media for them? Or is it in the way that they are raised? Lets not forget about those boys who are gay. Where do they fit in all this. Do they still have to follow the Boy Code and give into the pressure placed on them and act "manly"? I find this whole ideology of masculinity (yes, I do think it's an ideology and not in our nature to be violent - I don't speak for my whole gender, but look at me; I've never been in a fight, and I cry whenever I want, dammit) ridiculous and I'm so glad that I managed to get a new perspective on it; the feminist perspective. I can finally see how feminism can be one (and maybe the only) way to eradicate the idea of masculinity.

In the end, I agree with the initial point that Jessica raised in her post. We need to see studies done on many types of boys (race, sexuality, backgrounds), and then come back and tell share your findings. Because that is fair.

(Oh, this is extended comment btw~)

La conciencia de la mestiza

Here are a few quotes from Gloria Anzaldua's La conciencia de la mestiza: Towards a New Consciousness that I found quiet striking.

"A counterstance locks one into a duel of oppressor and oppressed; locked in a mortal combat, like the cop and the criminal, both are reduced to a common denominator of violence. The counterstance refutes the dominant culture's views and beliefs, and, for this, it is proudly defiant. All reaction is limited by, and dependent on, what it is reacting against. Because the counterstance stems from a problem with authority--outer as well as inner--it's a step towards liberation from cultural domination. But it is not a way of life. At some point, on our way to a new consciousness, we combatants somehow healed so that we are on both shores at once and, at once see through serpent and eagle eyes [...] The possibilities are numerous once we decide to act and not react."

 I really liked this quote because, to me, it explains what the beginning of the journey for a mestiza could be like: you can be the hunter or the hunted. By that, I mean that you can either let yourself become a victim to the words spoken to you by your oppressors, or you could fight back and not let yourself be caught in the beak of the eagle. But in the end, that doesn't get much done. Just like it says in the end, it isn't enough to react -- this is going to send us into a cycle that never ends where we fight each other because of opposing views. Instead, we need to do something about the things that we are fighting about and find a middle ground where both of the people standing on opposing river banks can coexist without shouting at each other.

"As a mestiza, I have no country, my homeland cast me out; yet all countries are mine because I am every woman's sister or potential lover. (As a lesbian I have no race, my own people disclaim me; but I am all races because there is the queer of me in all races.) I am cultureless because, as a feminist, I challenge the collective cultural/religious male-derived beliefs of Indo-Hispanics and Anglos; yet I am culture because I am participating in the creation of yet another culture, a new story to explain the world and our participation in it, a new value with images and symbols that connect us to each other and to the planet.

This is what it means to be a mestiza. You are and you aren't part of a culture, you are not simply making yourself part of one - you are creating a whole new way of living through which you, as a mestiza will be happy. You are leaving (and at the same time experiencing) the oppression of the current culture of which you are trying to rid yourself of.

"'You are nothing but a woman'" means you are defective. Its opposite is to be un macho. The modern meaning of the word "machismo," as well as the concept, is actually an Anglo invention. For men like my father, being "macho" meant being strong enough to protect and support my mother and us, yet being able to show love. Today's macho has doubts about his ability to feed and protect his family. His "machismo" is an adaption to oppression and poverty and low self-esteem. It is the result of hierarchical male dominance. The Anglo, feeling inadequate and inferior and powerless, displaces or transfers these feelings to the Chicano by shaming him."

This is one of the things that in a world with the culture of mestiza exists, this is something that would be eliminated. I liked this quote because it shows how sexists men are so afraid of a woman who has knowledge and power and a mind of her own. And they do everything in their power to belittle that woman because their manliness or "machismo" is questioned, and in the end their self-esteem becomes lowered. When this happens, they assume their "dominance" and oppress women because of their feeling of powerlessness. In a mestiza culture, this wouldn't be much of a problem because mestizas themselves wouldn't be seen as a creature that is here to bring down the world.

Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence

After finally getting my head together after the reading, I think I have a pretty clear definition of what is meant by "Compulsory Heterosexuality" and "Lesbian Existence".

I'll start with the former. Heterosexuality has always been the "norm" in society. Which is pretty much why we have the concept of "coming out" when a person identifies his or herself as anything other than "straight". When it comes to Compulsory Heterosexuality, it is not only living in a world where "straightness" is seen as the main sexual orientation, but the concept of being heterosexual is thrust upon everyone; it is a "political institution". Even though this doesn't directly relate to heterosexuality in women (well, it certainly does seeing as though men are in some sick way benefiting from it), there were a few points made by Rich about what Kathleen Gough lists as eight characteristics of male power. This section alone made me understand the most  about the effect that compulsory heterosexuality had on women. How forced women are to act a certain way because men want them to in order to be looked at as normal. It was really interesting to see how each of these characteristics manifested themselves in every day life, and how overlooked they are by everyone who experiences them as well as cause them.

When it came to defining, or rather understanding, Lesbian Existence, I had a more difficult time. To me, Lesbian Existence is the lack of...existence in lesbianism. I might be complete wrong, but when I read the article,something that caught my attention was when Rich spoke about Nancy Chodorow's thoughts on lesbianism. She (Chodorow) was talking about lesbianism as an idea, as something that doesn't exist. That it's nothing but the reverse version of the Oedipus complex.  And once more, an anti-feminist form of the male form of homosexuality. Not as it's own thing, but a part of something that comes from men. When it comes to the subject of lesbianism, Rich wrote, it is something that feminists rarely focus on, and when they do it is not always something that they talk about in a positive manner.

Feminism and Economic inequity

I think economic inequity is a feminist issue because it's an issue of oppression. Like many of the issues that feminism takes under its umbrella, economic injustice affects not only people of color (and women) of a lower class, but it establishes a lower class to begin with. There are people who are unemployed and underemployed by many, making it harder for them to get the things that other people are not qualified to do. This in and of itself is unjust because it forces them to climb down a ladder in which they have no choice -- a ladder established by the upper class that oppresses those who make less than them.

Something I read on Sabrina's blog that I thought I could connect on to here was how women (and queer men as we read in Johnson's article) make a lot less money than heterosexual white men even if you have the same qualifications as them. This screams feminist because not only are women and queer not being treated equally, but it excludes them from the hierarchy that heterosexual men have created.

Economic inequity is a feminist issue because sometimes privilege is given to those who already come from it, and taken away from those who need it - there is no equality in how they are perceived and valued.

Group notes~

   These are the notes I took in class while we were talking about the assignment. It won’t be the most ~formal of document, but it’s just how my mind works. I found a really cool video that explains just slightly how he feels about the issue.

   Romney                                          Obama

·         As Jen eloquently put it, Romney seems to be very ~wishy washy~ about the subject. ·         When running for governor, he supported gay marriage, but doesn’t seem to even acknowledge it now. [Although in the video, he says that he’s never supported gay marriage, just ~gay rights (which really makes no sense because marriage is one of the rights we should have as human beings. ·         Jen and Hope talked about the incident he had with a gay woman where she was distraught by the fact that she couldn’t see her partner – she asked him how she was going to explain that to her daughter and Romney responded with: “I didn’t realize you had families.” [Obviously “you” = gay people. Also I didn’t do much justice to the story, my b~] ·         Believes it’s up the states to make the laws on marriage. ·         Cut funding to charity because it involved LGBT issues—terms from the LGBT community.

·         People were accusing him of using his campaign helper person (we didn’t know his title) John Berry for votes. At the moment Berry is the highest ranking openly gay official to work under any U.S. administration.   ·         He’s quite casual about gay marriage; is for gay marriage.   ·         Before running for president, he didn’t really have a stance until faced with the situation (i.e. once he had to bring it up to the public. ·         One of the questions – well, observations we brought up was: did he wait to state his stance on gay marriage to get votes???

Gay rights as a whole (things that we might want to talk about at some point, since we’re doing Gay Rights and not just marriage. It just opens up a whole umbrella.

·         Employment/workplace and the discrimination faced (e.g. salary, unlawful termination, etc).

·         State laws.

·         LGBT education in schools – or lack thereof.

·         Chris brought something up while we were in the group: he said that transgendered people would not be able to vote because of the gender they identify with versus the gender on their driver’s license, etc.

·         I don’t know how you guys feel about adding this in there, but I thought it would be interesting to comment on the religious views that affect gay rights. In other words, how they pressure people to think a certain way.

That’s all we managed to get in class. :3

HERE'S THE VIDEO!!!