The Impractical Use of Western Feminist Ideology and Rhetoric in Foreign Situations

Abu-Lughod's article really resonated with me because I read it a day after I heard a fascinating presentation from a classmate of mine in my Gender, Justice and Environmental Change class. She discussed how Western feminists incorrectly apply their ideology and rhetoric to women in the Middle East, specifically Afghanistan and Iraq. She described how many Western feminists use a "one size fits all" mentality to these women, and then they ultimately misunderstand the situation at hand, like in the case of Laura Bush. Abu-Lughod points out that doing so often comes off as quite patronizing -- these Western scholars think they're superior to anyone else and their reasoning and solutions are the best. However, they don't have first-hand knowledge, much less experience of what it is like to live in these diverse, unique cultures; they only know what works in the West, for the West. This colonial approach is tried and tired, and is fairly arrogant.

Rather, it's necessary to partake in a post-colonial approach. That is, utilize a more participatory method whereby Western scholars work WITH residents of non-Western countries. They'll gain a greater understanding of the culture, and empower these women to work to implement their OWN changes based on what they think they need. Such solutions are based on a modern development discourse -- changing society in such a way that will help not only women, but the entire country.

When I heard my classmate's presentation the other day, I thought it was pretty radical subject matter. Interestingly, after reading the Mohanti, Bunch and Abu-Lughod articles, I realized how this is a pretty hot topic that many feminist scholars have written about. It made me think of an issue we touched on earlier in the semester: we must acknowledge/appreciate our similarities with people, but also, as Abu-Lughod illustrates, recognize that Western scholars don't know it all and ultimately, understand that there are differences among women in the world. Doing so is the first step in achieving progress in the realm of justice in and out of the Western world.

News Flash: "Growth"

Recently Mo’Niques (actress/comedian in the highly touted film Precious) unshaven legs made a surprising cameo appearance at this years Golden Globes, sparking an enormous uproar in the celebrity media community. Newspapers, blogs and radio talk shows bashed Mo’nique, calling her unshaven legs Disgusting and unnecessary, assuming they were an error made on her part. Mo’nique later made it clear that she in fact never shaves her legs, and is proud of it, much to the horror of many people. As soon as this was revealed, many supported her, but unfortunately more criticism came her way. With so much attention over something so insignificant as a few hairs, one has to wonder if this specific social construction, among others, is contributing to the divide of equality. Also once again we have to question our society’s quest in making the natural frighteningly unnatural. Truth be told though, this news flash is not entirely just about one kind of "growth", it is about doing what you want, what you believe, what you are liberated by, without having to explain yourself.

For Years the Path of least resistance has been choosing to shave in western civilization. This habit stemmed from higher hemlines of dresses, as well as more revealing bathing suit styles. After feminists adopted the stereotype of non-shavers, almost every altercation between celebrities body hair and the media has become a question of whether they are making a radical statement, or simply accidentally neglecting to shave. However Mo’nique claimed her reasons of refraining from shaving were “ A black woman’s thing” rather than an issue with shaving itself. Reading this quote, it is clear that Mo’nique unknowingly stumbled upon a major theme in the history of feminism. We have discussed in class countless times how during the second wave of feminism (when hem lines and bathing suits styles changed) the voice of the black woman was often not heard in the movement. Mo’nique defining her legs as a “Black woman’s thing” in 2010 is a direct example of how different things were for different races in the history of feminism. Some could argue that this is a cultural difference, and has nothing to do with feminism but based on what we have learned in class we can make the assumption that the idea of shaving our legs stemmed from a white, middle/upper class group of women. These women had the money to buy the new styles of clothing and also had the time to shave, whereas many black women who were in the struggle to support their families could not. When reading this article I immediately thought of Sojourner Truth, the woman who was a voice for black women and showed us that the second wave feminist movement was different for black women.

Also quoted in the article is Amanda Palmer, a singer who also attended the awards show showing off her refusal to conform to shaving. Palmer stated something so simple and direct “You know what’s really cool? Wake up every morning, decides what you feel like doing, and do it.” Instantly when reading this, the article in LU titled “one bad hair day to many”, where the author simply decides to conform to the primping and preening came to mind. The author, tired of wasting time and money doing something for someone else, decided to shave her head, and lived her life the way she wanted.

To me, the real issue with this article is not about whether to shave or not to shave, it is about whether to judge or not to judge. As a girl growing up in a very traditional and old fashioned community, far away from city lights, I have to admit I bought completely into every social construction, not questioning or wondering if I should think things should be any different. I never had a health Ed class, and only knew exactly what a hermaphadite was because livestock sometimes are born that way. Where I am from, the mother tries to stay home with her children as much as possible, and is criticized for not taking full advantage of her maternity leave. I took this class because my teammates were in it and I needed a fourth class, and was embarrassed to tell my friends at home I was enrolled in it.

This class has taught me that there is no two separate boxes labeled male/female, there is a matrix of feminism that is so complex and intricate, that female chauvinist pigs are evident in everyday life, and much more. It has showed me that feminism is nothing to shy away from or be ashamed about, and not every woman’s dream is to eventually settle down, taper off from working, and raise kids. If Mo’nique wants to strut down the red carpet unshaven, she shouldn’t be criticized for doing so. Feminism is different for everyone but a common theme is that a woman shouldn’t be oppressed, whether it is by unequal pay, sexual gratification, or from letting her natural body hair grow naturally.

Mo’nique might have unknowingly dropped a second wave “F” bomb, but because of Women’s Studies, I now know that social constructions run deep in time. Maybe the media today cannot understand why Mo’nique would ever want to refuse to shave her legs, but because of Women’s Studies, I now do.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/fashion/15skin.html

News Flash: Bill to increase sex-crime penalties

The article I found in the San Francisco Chronicle titled “Bill would increase sex-crime penalties” explains how California legislators are looking to change the way rapists, and other sex offenders are tried in courts and penalized for sex-related crimes. After teenager Chelsea King was raped and murdered in San Diego, these legislators introduced “Chelsea’s Law” in an attempt to stop treating all sex offenders the same, increase parole and jail time for sex offenders and prohibit sex offenders from visiting parks where there are a lot of children. Before “Chelsea’s Law” California had a “one-strike” law for some sexual crimes which put rapists and child molesters behind bars for 25 years to life depending on prior convictions and if the offender seriously injured the victim. However, the article explains that if “Chelsea’s Law” had been implemented before Chelsea’s rapist and murderer was convicted, he would probably be sentenced to a life in prison, and if he were to be released would face a lifetime of parole with GPS monitoring, yet “Chelsea’s Law” is pushing for a life sentence without parole. As the legislators explained, this is the big step in a long fight against sex-related crimes, and while I think making legal steps to further protect children and other victims will help reduce future crimes, I think we also need to look at why so many sex offenders, which are usually men, feel compelled to commit theses sex-related acts of violence.

After doing a little more research on sex-crimes in California, I discovered that before “Chelsea’s Law” there was also “Megan’s Law” and then “Jessica’s Law” which, as the article explains, prohibited sex offenders “from living within 2,000 feet of parks and schools, prompting more than 2,300 sex offenders to register as being homeless.” “Megan’s Law” was the original law that made information regarding registered sex offenders available to the public. Thus from “Megan’s Law” to “Chelsea’s Law” there has been a much-needed progress made in terms of prosecuting sex offenders; however, the problem is that many women, men and children are still being attacked and molested by these registered and non-registered offenders, thus how many more young girls will it take to be raped and murdered before the number of sex-crimes is dramatically reduced? Since “Megan’s Law” was passed in 1994, the number of forcible rapes per year has decreased, with relative fluctuations, yet as of 2008, the number of forcible rapes was 89,000 (U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation). Thus even though rape rates are decreasing, the number of rates per year in the U.S. is still dangerously high. It only takes one rape for a young girl’s life to be changed forever, along with the pain felt by the young girl’s family. As Chelsea’s parents explained in the article, “We were never activists or advocates before, we had never done an interview. We wish we never had. But this is what we’re going to do now.” Thus the dramatic steps to increase jail time to sex offenders to up to a life sentence without parole, may help drive this rape rate down even further and prevent sex offenders from committing even more crimes.

While I think increasing the penalties for sex-crimes is a practical and beneficial step in protecting rape and sex-crime victims, not only is there still a high number of rapes per year, but there are also so many more rapes that go unreported for a variety of reasons. As a result, I do not think we can rely solely on the legal system to deal with sex-related violence, because in reality regardless of the laws and their enforcement, sex-related crimes are still going to happen. Thus in order to protect future victims and ourselves and our families, we need to realize that rape is an act of power and begin to understand why and where this compulsion comes from. As Brownmiller explains in her book Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape, “the typical American perpetrator of forcible rape is little more than an aggressive, hostile youth who chooses to do violence to women” (274). The typical sex offender is not a crazy psychopath who just wants to have sex, but in most cases is a regular guy looking to exert his domination and power over a woman by force. Thus where did this compulsion to flaunt one’s power, specifically male power over females come from? Brownmiller and Whitney Walker explain that this need to use power against women is a direct result of the patriarchal and competitive society that we live in today. As Walker explains, men do not walk down the street afraid that a woman might attack them yet if a woman walks down the street late at night and a man approaches behind her, she will inevitably feel that sense of fear for her own safety. Brownmiller explains that this fear will constantly exist in the minds of women because the fact “that some men rape provides a sufficient threat to keep all women in a constant state of intimidation” (282). But why do men feel compelled to exert their domination over women even in a patriarchal society? Is this competition for power inherent to the system or can we somehow do away with it?

While it is true that women do rape and molest men, a majority of sexual-related crimes consist of a male offender and a female victim, which I think is a reflection of the society that we live in today. All men are not sexual offenders or molesters, however I do think it’s safe to say a majority of men have been socialized to think they are stronger, smarter, and generally have more physical and social power than women. Some men may translate this domination into physical acts of force or violence, but what about the men who do not act on this domination but still know it to be true? Is this mindset acceptable as long as the man isn’t hurting anyone? Of course it is better than displaying this power through rape or molestations, but I do not think sexual-related crimes will ever be dramatically reduced until we change this idea that men are dominant over women. However, since this idea would require a complete transformation of the system we live in today, how can we prevent men from looking to act on this notion of domination? Walker would suggest that women should take the initiative and learn to defend themselves from possible attackers. However what about thirteen-year-old girls who do not stand a chance against a strong thirty-year-old man? Also, why is it the responsibility of the woman to defend herself, when it should be the responsibility of the man to not commit an act of violence? Although Walker argues that learning to defend oneself removes or at least reduces that sense of fear of possibly being raped, I think that fear will still exist as long as society tells us that men are dominant over women.

As we have discussed in class, victims of sex-crimes have much higher suicide rates and are generally much more psychologically damaged than victims of other crimes, which is why there is and should be such a focus on protecting our children from possible rapes or molestations. Although sex-crimes do seem to be highly correlated with the need for men to exert their dominance over women, it is very difficult to remove this masculine domination driving this act of violence because it is so deeply embedded in our society. As a result, looking to prevent or reduce the number of rapes through increasing legal punishments for sex offenders is a practical and necessary step in helping young girls and women, especially, feel safer knowing the law is making more efforts to protect them.

News Flash: New course fills high school gender studies gap

Modern society, particularly in North America, is a place where sexual violence and abuse, homophobia, teenage pregnancy, rape, misogyny, and an overall misperception of gender roles run rampant. Thankfully, there are activists who are willing and eager to tackle these issues. The article I chose for this Newsflash is from the Toronto Star, authored by Catherine Porter and entitled, “New course fills high school studies gender gap” (March 30, 2010). Currently in Ontario, there are a handful of high schools that offer a course called Gender Studies; this course is similar to the Women’s Studies course offered at Colgate and other universities across North America. Students explore a variety of issues including abuse, homophobia, sex and sexuality, and the history of feminism. In September 2011, Gender Studies will become incorporated into the Ontario curriculum and offered province-wide. Gender Studies, and courses like it, are essential to high school students’ – men and women alike – intellectual and emotional development because the information they learn will better equip them to effectively deal with gender issues once they move on to college or enter the work force.

The Gender Studies course will become part of the Ontario Social Sciences and Humanities curriculum in 2011. The Ontario Ministry of Education is implementing this course in response to a report produced by the Ontario’s Safe Schools Action Team, entitled “Shaping a Culture of Respect in Our Schools.” This report examined “gender-based harassment in schools” and it was found that the Ontario “school system [was] throbbing with sexual abuse and violence.” Gender Studies is the brainchild of a group of university-aged women at the University of Western Ontario; approximately five years ago, they were all taking Women’s Studies courses, and began to wonder to themselves, “Why hadn’t they learned all that in high school”?

Additionally, a teacher at L’Amoreaux Collegiate in Toronto – one of the few schools to currently offer Gender Studies – Linda Kalafatides “developed her own course…It covers child brides, anorexia, the changing face of masculinity, the history of feminism.” In this course, she and her students “explore the pink frilly world of girlhood and blue hockeydom of boys.” Kalafatides was inspired by the women at Western, and also realized the necessity to educate kids at a younger age before they get to university of the work force. She claims that she wished she had courses like Gender Studies in high school, because “It would have saved a lot of years.” Kalafatides already sees huge strides being made in Gender Studies, as there are 7 boys in her class out of 27 students. In this way, Kalafatides and the trailblazers from Western are “empowering men and women so when they go out into the world, they are just a little bit better armed for coping and being more sensitive to all people.”

It is important for high school students to have the option to take courses like Gender Studies because they will be better prepared to confront the world in which they live. In learning about subjects like the kind of raunch culture that feminist writer, Ariel Levy talks about in her book, Female Chauvinist Pigs, they will better understand the culture that exists today in mainstream society. Levy describes how women display their body via performance (i.e. pornography, magazines, commercials) in a way that objectifies them in order to give men pleasure and often times, make money. Teenagers today are so programmed to think that to these kinds of sexually explicit images and situations are normal. I will admit that prior to taking Women’s Studies, I was fairly desensitized to the raunchy images I witnessed on a daily basis, but now that I am more informed, I am able to recognize that the pornification and objectification of the female body is not empowering. The first way to resist raunch culture and its byproducts is to at least recognize that women and men throughout society perpetuate it. If students are required to take this Gender Studies course, they will be able to recognize and resist buying in to the raunch culture upon which our society is built if they so choose. The knowledge they acquire in Gender Studies is a form of power in that it will at least give them the choice to resist. By educating high school aged kids through courses like Gender Studies and bestowing useful, practical knowledge upon them, it is possible to reshape the way younger generations see women, men and sex for the better.

Moreover, when high school students graduate and enter into the brave new world full of promise and opportunity, they are guaranteed to encounter individuals who are vastly different from them and anyone they have ever met before. Two issues that would inevitably come up in a Gender Studies class are homosexuality and intersexuality or transgendered individuals. It is likely that a lot of high schoolers do not know many, if any, outwardly gay, lesbian, intersex or transgendered individuals. However, it is even more likely that once these students graduate and move beyond the confines of their hometowns and high school hallways, they will encounter people that fall into these groups. With that said, Gender Studies can provide preemptive education – it will educate students that sexuality is more than just hetero, or male and female/man and woman. For instance, feminists and women’s rights activists, Paula Ettelbrick and Nancy Naples eloquently describe the challenges of living as a gay or lesbian couple in society in their articles entitled, “Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?” and “Queer Parenting in the New Millennium”, respectively. These couples are seeking equality, but still want to maintain a unique identity distinct from heterosexual couples. In their articles, these authors describe the struggle for equality in terms of marriage and adoption rights, and how complex these issues really are – they are not black and white, but rather, involve interactions at the individual, legal and societal levels for acceptance. Additionally, feminist scholar and biologist, Anne Fausto-Sterling discusses in her book, Sexing the Body, how Western culture is obsessed with labeling people as either a man or a woman, with no room for the sexually ambiguous, because the definition of gender in today’s society is so rigid. Anyone that does not fall into these two categories is considered abnormal by our standards and must be “fixed.” In being required to take a Gender Studies course while still in high school, students can learn at an earlier age about the complexities of gender and sexuality, and understand that we live in a diverse society full of people of all sexual orientations and genetic make-ups; these students can learn the difference between gender and sexuality, and that one’s identity cannot simply be categorized by the terms, “male” and “female,” “gay” or “straight.” This information will prepare students if they happen to encounter people that are “different” from them in these ways; it will allow these students to recognize their differences, but at the same time allow for them to acknowledge their commonalities – ultimately they can realize that we’re all human beings, and strive to foster a more loving, inclusive, accepting and tolerant society.

Finally, Gender Studies is an important course for high school students because they can learn about the sexual violence, abuse and rape, which run rampant in modern society. We have seen the statistics: women are sexually attacked every few minutes or so in the US. Feminist contributors to the compilation, Listen Up, Whitney Walker (“Why I Fight Back”) and Emilie Morgan (“Don’t Call Me a Survivor”) describe in their memoirs how women often live in fear of men, like when they are walking the streets late at night, because men can use their inherent power and strength over them. Oftentimes, women are at the mercy of men – they are attacked or pressured to have sex – then are sometimes even blamed for the sexually violent acts committed against them. It is also important to recognize that men can also be victims of sexual abuse and rape – these violent acts are issues that pervade throughout society, and no one is exempt. Even women in the US armed forces are not immune to sexual violence! If high school students take Gender Studies, they can acknowledge the pervasiveness of sexual violence and can use this information to become involved at their high schools, and future college campuses and workplaces. If these younger students are aware of how frequent these violent acts occur, they will be more compelled to spread this information and educate their peers, and they will potentially have knowledge of what to do if they or one of their friends are ever in a similar situation.

Ultimately, courses like Gender Studies are important for high school aged students because these courses provides a wealth of information that these kids can utilize in their everyday lives, and in their future, whether at college or in the workplace. The information learned in this course teaches students to recognize the deficiencies of our culture, the diversity of individuals in our world and the prevalence of violence in modern society. Requiring students to take Gender Studies at the high school level teaches teenagers that everybody – male, female, gay, straight, intersex, transgender, and the list goes on – has a stake in the system, so everybody can attempt to reform the current system. Future generations can utilize this information and knowledge to change the world in which we live – it can breed activism and positive change about real life issues through education.

News Flash: Child Brides

Article from CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/04/09/yemen.child.bride.death/index.html

News Flash

In a country like the United States, it is hard to imagine living in a world where ten year old girls are considered a proper age for marriage. It is hard to imagine a world where twelve-year-old girls are forced to marry and have sexual relationships with men nearly three times their age. Although such horrifying acts may occur within this country, they are isolated acts of violence, not results of recognized marriage. Such is the world for girls who live in Yemeni, a Southwest Asian country where girls as young as ten are forced to marry much older men. The situation in Yemeni came to the forefront last week, when a twelve-year old girl died from internal bleeding after having sexual intercourse with her much older husband. These occurrences, although unfortunate and equally as horrifying, contrast the rights and protection women have in the United States versus non-Western countries, such as Yemeni.

Barely a week ago, twelve-year old Elham Mahdi died three days after her marriage to a man nearly twice her age. Her death was a result of internal bleeding due to having sexual intercourse. UNICEF and Yemeni human rights groups are outraged at Mahdi’s death. Government officials remarked that her recent death is “a stark reminder that the practice of underage marriage must come to an end." Similarly in September, another twelve-year old bride and her child died due to complications during childbirth. Debates to fix a minimum age for marriage within this country are still ongoing, but with such dismal cases as these, this debate is completely necessary. It is hard to imagine why some parents would willingly agree to hand over their young daughters to men who are at least twice their age. However, if a family is suffering financially, having the opportunity to “pass” off their daughters seems like a promising deal. Some parents ask that grooms wait until the bride is older to consummate the marriage, but recent news coverage makes the grooms compliance with this plea hard to believe.

While these acts are no doubt horrifying, they certainly make me grateful for living in a country like the United States. Despite the ongoing battle for rights for women, such as abortion rights and the Equal Pay Act, thankfully pre-adolescent girls in this country do not have to worry about being married and having children at such a young age. Women in this country are granted certain rights that would prevent anything this sickening from legally happening in the United States.

If Elham Mahdi grew up in America, she would have been protected by a handful of laws that would have prevented her death. Firstly, Elham’s groom definitely would have been charged on account of rape. Undoubtedly, Elham’s consent to their sexual relationship was surely absent. Her husband would immediately have been charged with statutory rape, and a trial would be brought against him. While the issue of rape poses a universal threat to women and men in this country, I think our culture is more apt to have open dialogues about rape. Although it may not be an entirely comfortable topic to discuss, discussions about rape do exist. Several of our readings for class have dealt with the issue of rape. These personal essays function in many ways in our culture. They serve as a means of therapy for these women, allowing them to begin the healing process. The essays also cultivate awareness and make it easier to talk about rape. I think reading these personal essays brings the issue of rape to a different level. Instead of viewing it as a distant and isolated threat, these essays help us to see that rape doesn’t discriminate. As Emilie Morgan, in Listen Up says, “I have a lot more healing to do, and it’s going to take time. I am just a woman who has a story to tell, and I am learning how to make it heard.”

Our country’s open dialogue about rape is sharply contrasted with a country’s similar to Yemeni. Although it is probably widely known that hundreds of young girls are being subjected to repeated instances of rape, objections need to be voiced.

The article also briefly touches upon the lack of proper medical attention girls in Yemeni receive. A twelve-year old girl suffered the same fate as Elham, and died while giving birth. Who knows if her life could have been saved in the United States, but she surely would have had the option of an abortion. Not only is having a child at such a young age dangerous to both the mother and the baby, but I have yet to meet a twelve-year old who is capable of raising a child. The support system that many teenaged mothers rely on would probably be lacking in these instances, as some girls are married to men who have more than one wife. The families these girls came from are probably stressed on their own, even without the added stresses of a new baby. In Yemeni, women are only offered the opportunity to have an abortion solely in the case to protect her life. They do not permit abortions even in cases of rape, fetal defects, or socio economic factors. It is hard to believe that these restrictions control so much of a decision that should be a woman’s own personal and private decision. Despite the fact that there are varying restrictions on abortions in the United States, a woman can go into an abortion clinic with no questions asked and receive the procedure, given certain time constraints. Even though the right to an abortion still makes for heated discussion among politicians, it represents a certain power and control that women have over their own bodies, a power that I’m sure is limited in Yemeni.

When news of children brides reaches the United States, the stories always stir up feelings of horror and curiosity. How does the country allow girls, who should still be in school and enveloped in airs of security, to be married at such a young age? How can the country allow girls to be subjected to countless attacks of rape and not step in to prevent it? While I am not making an argument that abuse against women never happens in the United States, women here certainly are granted legal rights that attempt to protect them against such crimes. The voices of these young girls from Yemani should not be silenced any longer. Their stories need to be heard and shared in order for any sort of social change to happen.

Welfare Mothers

In Mink's article "The Lady and the Tramp" she explains how poor single mothers are struggling to take care of their kids and provide financially for their families because the government does not recognize social labor as a source of income and thus these poor single mothers cannot receive welfare for single-handedly taking care of their kids. I think Mink made a lot of convinving arguments in the article, starting with the fact that while mothers (and fathers) do not receive income for taking care of their own children, yet they are paid to take care other peoples' children and handle other peoples' social labor -- nannies, housecleaners, chauffers, etc. While this income is paid for out of the personal pockets of other parents, I think it's very interesting that caring for other people's children is more socially productive than caring for one's own. What does this say about the system that we live in today when we put caring for someone else's children above our own? How can we give parents the opportunity to focus on their own kids while also providing financially for them, or should parents even be given this opportunity? Mink suggests the solution to this problem is providing an income for social labor to parents who stay home to take care of their kids.

I think another important point Mink makes is that throughout the feminist movement, especially during Second Wave feminism, white, middle-class women fought for equality in the workplace and independence through paid employment. The problem that Mink finds with this is that it makes the home seem like a site of oppression for women in the sense that if a woman stays at home instead of working, she is oppressed. While I think the intention of Second-wave feminists was not to belittle the housework that they do or make social labor seem any less important, but rather present themselves with the same opportunities that men have, I do think it could have given the impression that work in the home is not enough or adequate. As Mink explains this is a problem with the feminist movement in itself, but also presents problems for poor single mothers who are forced into work because they have no other source of income, as opposed to willingly enter the work force. However, even married mothers face the same problem when their husbands income is not enough to get by and they must go to work -- how are they supposed to take care of the kids if they're both working, especially if they can't even afford child care? Mink's solution is that we need to restructure welfare in a way that provides these mothers and fathers with the choice to either stay at home with their kids or work. While I think this solution may not be the easiest to attain, I do think there needs to be more appreciation and a sense of value given to care-taking in a way that allows parents who want to stay at home to be able to afford it instead of being forced to leave their homes for a job in order to make ends meet.

As we talked about in class today, these are some of the big problems facing couples today who simply do not have the money to have the families that they hoped for. A mother who always dreamt of staying at home with her kids may not be able to because her partner's income is not enough to get by. Or single parents who do not have another source of income and who do not receive welfare for staying at home and taking care of their kids have no other choice but to get a job, maybe even two jobs so their kids can have basic necessities. Thus as Mink suggests, perhaps the solution is providing welfare or a source of income for social labor so parents can take care of their kids while also providing for them financially.

new age = new mommy tax?

The readings for this blog post had vital points that one cannot disagree are instilled in today's society. However in some cases, especially the Mommy Tax article, I felt like the author writing it was so concerned with getting the point across that he/she threw the aspect of enjoying motherhood under the rug. Although it is unfortunate to have to choose between a high power (high paying) career and having children, that article made it seem like motherhood is a burden, something that a woman should do, not want to do.

While reading the Mommy tax article, I was reminded of the article I wrote my first news flash on. It basically stated, because of the downturn of the economy many stereotypically woman dominated jobs/careers (once considered unimportant) are important and thus becoming to be higher paying. It also said that women will be safer, and more important in the industry as we climb out of this recession.

I guess my thoughts is, has recent events changed the mommy tax? are women still being treated unfairly or thought of as having a "Recreational attitude" to working while raising kids? Has the "Be a man" strategy lessened, and is there room for kick butt mothers/workers in todays work world? Will driven women be able to not have to worry about the time running out because they want that dream job?

The 2 articles in LU also had valid points, but I have to say, I didnt really connect or enjoy Hakim-Dyce's article. I thought there was going to be a scarring story about an altercation at the club, or she turned around and made lots of money and felt liberated by the process. instead, she got saved by that tutor job in the nick of time..... give us something juicy!

Same-Sex Marriage - Not So Cut and Dry

I started the readings for Tuesday by reading the Same-Sex Marriage FAQs first and foremost, just in case there were things I didn't understand or wasn't aware of when it came to marriage vs. civil union, or why same-sex couples want to get married. The answers to these questions really cleared some things up for me, and really made me understand the obvious and not-so-obvious differences between marriage and civil unions. I particularly liked this excerpt: "Comparing marriage to civil unions is a bit like comparing diamonds to rhinestones. One is, quite simply, the real deal; the other is not." I realize that granting the right to a civil union in a place like Vermont was a pretty big deal at the time; however, marriages and civil unions are so vastly different from one another that I don't see how legislators could ever think that this would appease anyone for a long period of time. It's pretty clear that civil unions are a step in the right direction, but they are not enough -- not by a long shot.

Then, I moved on to Ettelbrick's article. I liked this article because she pointed out a lot of the problematic issues within the American legal system, and didn't think legislation allowing same-sex marriage is the answer to all of the obstacles gay and lesbian individuals and couples face. Ettelbrick points out how the US legal system acknowledges sameness, not difference, and by allowing same-sex marriage, gays and lesbians can simply be accepted into mainstream society and lose their "real" identity. Ettelbrick wants to illustrate that homosexual individuals and couples are inherently different from heterosexual individuals and couples; these differences are not bad. In fact, she thinks that if same-sex marriage were permitted, people would just see homosexual couples as the "same" as everyone else, rather than acknowledging the positive "differences and diversity" they bring to society. Moreover, it's important to realize that just because gay and lesbian couples could be granted the RIGHT to marry, it's not certain that every gay and lesbian couple would exercise this right. They may be happy with their relationship as is, and do not feel as though they need to validate their love or their partnership by having the state sign a piece of paper to prove that they have indeed entered into the institution of marriage. We can acknowledge heterosexual couples that live in a "common-law" marriage, but a homosexual couple living together for a number of years would not be granted the same rights in case of emergency, death, illness, etc. I think Ettelbrick gets it right in advocating domestic partnership as a solution to this problem; however, I think same-sex marriage should be a legal option for those who want to pursue it.

I think the most important point that Ettelbrick pointed out in the conclusion of her article was that same-sex marriage need not be the pinnacle achievement for gays and lesbians. It is a big step forward for in terms of equality rights, in terms of legal rights and basic recognition of their relationships. However, Ettelbrick emphasizes that even if same-sex marriage becomes part of US law, it's not the end of the struggle for equality for the gay and lesbian community. It's a big piece of the very large puzzle.

Finally, I was blown away by some of the facts I learned about in Naples' article. I didn't know that the non-birth mother had to legally adopt a child if a lesbian couple wanted to co-mother together. They are being forced to adopt their own children! Meanwhile, there are plenty of women who have babies every day with men who have no interest in being fathers, but these men often still get their names on the birth certificate. And we're denying this inherent right to people that actually want children? Wow -- it seems really backwards to me. Things like this just further segregate society, and make gay and lesbian couples seem so alien to us. If a gay or lesbian couple wants to adopt and they are fit to be parents, then why does the legal system need to complicate things?

To conclude, these articles really emphasized to me that same-sex marriage and the variety of issues surrounding it isn't so cut and dry. It's not one or the other, black and white -- there are so many gray areas involved. Marriage or civil union or domestic partnership? Which is best for the couple? What is best for any children involved? In my humble opinion, I think that same-sex marriage should be a right afforded to every individual, just so the option is there. But like Ettelbrick, I think domestic partnership should also be extended to acknowledge same-sex couples. Whatever happens in terms of legislation in the future, the bottom line is that gay and lesbian individuals and couples should not be "otherized" by the law. We can acknowledge their differences -- differences that make the gay and lesbian community unique and diverse citizens in mainstream society -- but the same rights and freedoms afforded to everyone by law should be extended to them if we as human beings -- that is, of every sexual orientation -- want to say we live in a truly inclusive, accepting, loving and tolerant society.