What is Normal??

Our images of normal are constantly fluctuating. Normalcy has changed again and again, and will continue to change. This week’s readings all discuss these changes and similarities while also pushing body image forward into the modern feminist struggle. Amy Adams suggests that “Body image, in fact, may be the pivotal third wave issue—the common struggle that mobilizes the current feminist generation” (196). I couldn’t agree more. Adams piece, as well as the others, highlights the fact that all of these body image issues boil down to one problem—being whiter. Even the white women are trying to get lighter in order to match these unattainable goals. These standards show a great need for intersectionality in the study of body issues. We need to take all figures and bodies into account, all standards and stereotypes.
Looking to the past, we can see that these standards of beauty have vastly changed over the years. They changed based on whatever the times fads are, as explained by Collins and Lutz in “Excerpts From Reading National Geographic”. They assert that “To the extent that people accepted and participated in the products of mass culture, they were duped and misled, encouraged to develop a false understanding of their situation in a capitalist society” (318). These citizens, by participating in the pop-culture of the time, are reinforcing these stereotypes onto themselves without even realizing it. We will never be able to change these negative portrayals of women’s bodies until we are able to change the media system. Girls are fed into these stereotypes by advertisements, cartoons, and other media often before they are even able to talk or walk. As they grow older, the advertisements and shows become more and more sexualized, pushing them into an image of beauty that is truly unattainable. As shown in Lebesco’s piece, these stereotypes are even stronger for obese girls. Boys are even affected by these media giants. Where is it that they learn to objectify us? Where do they see the quiet wife sitting alone while her husband rides the range alone; smoking and drinking to his heart’s content?
The media’s portrayal of bodies in society is a major issue which has not been resolved. People all over the world, men and women alike, are striving to reach an imperfectable goal; and destroying their lives in the process. Some blame the obese for strain on a failing healthcare system, but who is laying the blame on the media conglomerates that pushed them to these struggles? Body image issues affect all people from all backgrounds, and must be made a front runner in the fight to change our society for the better.

Are We Free?

In the readings for this week I noticed, finally, a painfully obvious need for intersectionality. Reproductive rights are an issue that women and men from every class, race, background, and country can benefit from. We must, as the human race, strive to create a safe place for all people to independently determine their own reproductive freedoms. In Susan Davis’s article she tracks the history of people’s push for reproductive control over their own bodies. She chronicles this history, noting that “As far back as 1850 BCE, Egyptian women used vaginal pessaries… as did Indian, African, and Middle-Eastern women” (Davis 99). It is interesting to see that these fertility control methods were in place even before the onset of modern Christianity- which now is one of the biggest groups against it. Davis also notes, on page 99, that “The Old Testament refers to vaginal sponges” (99). So what happened? Why is it that in this day of modern medicine women in many places still do not have reproductive rights? YOU, yes, YOU, do not even have reproductive rights. We think that we do, but, in many cases, we do not. In Angela Davis’ “Reproductive Rights”, these issues are explored. Davis’ article explores how race plays an important factor in reproductive rights in the United States. When thinking of reproductive freedoms, one usually connects to the right to have an abortion or receive birth control. But what about the opposite? What about the right to reproduce naturally? These rights have been forcefully stolen from many women of color in America, especially Blacks and Latinos. Here are some statistics from Davis-
“by 1976 some 24 percent of all Indian women of childbearing age had been sterilized”
“According to a national Fertility Study conducted in 1970…20 percent of all married Black women have been permanently sterilized”
“By the 1970’s, over 35 percent of all Puerto Rican women of childbearing age had been surgically sterilized” (Davis 105). These figures are horrifying. To think that these women had their ability to reproduce and have families ripped away by our own government is sickening. This issue, in itself, is the biggest call for intersectionality in gender studies that I have ever seen. These statistics are much like that of the Malwian’s, which is a little scary. When reading that novel I never considered that things could be as bad here. But after these readings and a long night of my own research, I know that they can be.
In the Unites States, women have many more reproductive freedoms than that of an African woman. That is, upper class women. Angela Davis has proven that we discriminate when sterilizing, but what about discrimination regarding birth control? In the state of Ohio a woman receiving state funded medical insurance (Medicaid) has little to no control over her birth control rights. I have found that while Medicaid will pay for a woman to have an IUD (a form of birth control) inserted, they will NOT pay to have it removed. This procedure can cost up to 300 dollars, which is often too much for those on welfare to pay. If left in the body longer than the recommended time these devices have been known to cause cervical and ovarian cancers, sterilization, and even death. So how free are we? Scores of women have had these IUD’s inserted by their doctors after having a child, myself included, to find out later that they cannot have them removed. I, personally, have suffered cysts, pain, and other serious problems associated with the overdue removal of an IUD and cannot get it taken out. Even if a woman complains about side effects related to the IUD it is still almost impossible to get them to pay for removal. In some cases, women have been irreversibly damaged when trying to pull or cut them out themselves. I am quite over the limit for posting, so my rant will now end. But I urge you to please, for the sake of yourself, write your state rep, congress, and Governor to demand for the end of these travesties.

The Importance of Cultural Relativism

Horace Miner’s “Body Ritual Among the Nacirema” excellently demonstrates the past anthropological approaches to viewing past cultures ethnocentrically, through clever word play and misinterpretation. For many years anthropologists studied unknown societies based on their own knowledge of culture, or enculturation, which proved to be a mistake. Today we know that we must view societies outside of our own through a culturally relative lens; that is, we must acknowledge that to know another culture requires a full understanding of that cultures beliefs and motivations.
Miner’s ethnocentric article views American culture through the eyes of a society not familiar with our customs and purposes. He cleverly inverts English language words, and misinterprets all aspects of American life. One of my favorite examples is the “holy-mouth-men”, or dentists. Interpreted from an outside societies view, dentistry is seen as a masochistic ritual in which patients undergo horrifically painful procedures over and over again to appease the Nacirema’s obsession with the imperfection of the body. It is crucial to note that Miner suggests, on page 3, that “The extremely sacred and traditional character of the rite is evident in the fact that the natives return to the holy-mouth-man year after year, despite the fact that their teeth continue to decay” (3). This passage alone shows us how ethnocentrism allows anthropologists to misinterpret the actions and customs of unknown cultures.
These misinterpretations can be easily compared to that of the present day’s construction of race in society. In “The Social Construction of Race”, Haney-Lopez argues that race is a concept not used by most scientists. He suggested that “The rejection of race in science is now almost complete” (52). This lack of race suggests that modern scientists are, mostly, using a completely culturally relative method to study subjects. Anthropologists also strive to employ these culturally relative methods to their research, and have made great strides in our understanding of foreign cultures and societies.
We must also, however, notice that these ethnocentric interpretations are sometimes more accurate than we imagine. For example, Miner’s interpretation of American healthcare was unusually true. He uses differing terms to express the ins and outs of a hospital visit, but they are very similar nonetheless. On page 3 he notices that “No matter how ill the supplicant or how grave the emergency, the guardians of many temples will not admit a client if he cannot give a rich gift to the custodian. Even after one has gained and survived ceremonies, the guardians will not permit the neophyte to leave until he makes still another gift” (3). This is eerily reminiscent to the shoddy healthcare afforded by the poor in our society. As one of the most developed countries on earth, you would think that we could take care of our own people. But, as Miner suggests, we are denied treatment unless we give a large monetary gift to the practitioners.
Cultural relativism is crucial to our understanding of unknown people and cultures. Without it, we are subject to misinterpretation and incorrect assumptions, which is exactly what Miner was trying to tell us.

Liberate All People, NOW!

Transliberation is, certainly, a matter of life and death. Over the world, every minute of every day, countless people are being victimized because they blur the prescribed lines of gender. Not just the mainstream man/woman lines, but combinations of all flavors in-between. He likes to wear women's clothes. She has a short haircut. She isn't wearing makeup. He would rather sew than play football. She wants to play Baseball instead of softball. These are all normative scenarios that place us in a strictly regimented, socially constructed gender class. Transliberation affects every one of these people, including you and me.
Sure, transliberation would immensely help more externally obvious gender differences, but I think that it will also have staggering positive results for the community as a whole. It could not only liberate transgendered people, but also push forward the goals of women's rights, ethnic equality, and social equality for all people. These concepts have far to go in reaching their goals, and any positive result for one movement must positively effect the other. As Feinberg says in “We Are All Works of Progress”, “Bigotry exacts its toll in flesh and blood. And left unchecked and unchallenged, prejudices create a poisonous climate for us all. Each of us has a stake in the demand that every human being has a right to a job, to shelter, to health care, to dignity, to respect” (Feinberg 3). It is our responsibility, as progressive thinkers, to never stop fighting until every person of every type and orientation in every society throughout the world is spoken for and has a voice in the world community.
Genetic research hoping to biologically prove a person's specific gender is a dangerous thing. Even if they are able to pinpoint certain genetic codes, what is the point? There will still be plenty of individuals who do not fall into their categorical placements. Furthermore, these kinds of research have been proven to have damaging effects on the LBGT community. As stated in “The Ethics of Genetic Research on Sexual Orientation”, “History indicates that current genetic research is likely to have negative effects on lesbians and gay men, particularly those living in homophobic societies” (Schuklenk et. Al 50). This research is promoting the hate. Even those who are hoping to help are, ultimately, hurting.
The most horrifying part of Feinberg's essay, to me, was her treatment by the emergency room doctor. This man was supposed to be a caregiver. When becoming a doctor, one takes an oath promising to heal and protect all those who need their care. In that oath, I'm sure it doesn't specify that one can refuse care due to sexual orientation, gender, or race. That people in America are daily facing these types of injustices is simply unacceptable. We must, as a nation, rally around all of our brothers and sisters regardless of their sexual orientation, gender, or anything in between.

Intersectionality of Abuse

Today’s readings were riddled with pain and suffering. These stories provided differing situations and results among themselves, but the issue was quite clear. Women today, all over the world, are still being regularly victimized by the patriarchal systems in which they live. Religion and politics have shaped the ability of men to control women by threat of sexual violence and, as is clear in the readings, this dominance will not end until there are major changes made within the social system that perpetuates it. In “War Crimes” Helen Clarkson recounts the experiences of several women raped in the Congo. Already shocking enough, this article tells of one woman’s experience that I feel demonstrates one of the major problems with today’s social relationships. This woman, raped in the fields while working, says that “Suddenly we saw a group of armed men approaching us. My husband managed to flee but two men caught me. They raped me and at the same time they hit me on the back” (613). The woman’s rape is certainly a sad story, but the most disgusting part is that her husband deserted her, leaving her to be gang-raped by dangerous men. One of the major tenets of any patriarchal society is that a husband take care of his wife. Wedding vows commonly include a statement about lifelong caring and honor, especially on the part of the wife. But who in their right mind would leave the person they love to be violated while they ran to safety?
This issue has been documented among other cultures as well. In America husbands have been deserting their wives for years, as well as their children. While this isn’t out of the question for women either, it is much more prevalent among males. Dominance is a leverage point for men who know that their wives are not strong enough to fight, physically or mentally. In “Mapping the Margins”, Kimberly Crenshaw asserts that women of color in America, particularly Latino immigrants, are skipped over by many social outreach programs because of their inability to conform to certain restrictions and bylaws. On page 202 she asserts that, “many immigrant women are wholly dependent on their husbands as their link to the world outside their homes. Immigrant women are also vulnerable to spousal abuse because so many of them depend on their spouses for information regarding their legal status”. These women are forced to believe whatever their husband may say, because they may not know English. This language barrier allows their husbands the unique ability to lie about their status, and therefore control their lives. Non-English speaking women cannot call help lines, cannot reach out to their neighbors, and cannot request the assistance of clergy without an interpreter.
While this week’s readings exhibited very differing accounts of abuse they also formed a common bond around the issue of inequality of women in any society. Like I said before, these issues will never be resolved until the patriarchal societies in which they flourish are significantly changed.

Fluid Identities

After reading these pieces I noticed identity as a very common theme. I realize that, in today’s world, using the term “identity” could be saying thousands of different things, and this is exactly what these readings did for me. They showed me, in 4 readings, more perspectives on identity crisis and struggle than I have ever heard before. They catapulted me into a tizzy, questioning myself, “Have I gawked? Do I assume gender? Who have I offended”? Hopefully, not too many.
As a (mostly) heterosexual, white woman, it is hard for me to really understand what it feels like to be labeled in such a ridiculous manner. I will bitch and moan about being seen as a hippy, or a country person, or whatever; but I have never faced discrimination anything like that of Clare, Martin, or Alsutany. I strive to put myself in their shoes, to feel their resentment, their passion, their embarrassment, their pride….. But I just can’t do it. Even though I have had my fair share of crazy times in my younger days, I have never really experienced city life on a level like these authors have.
I really enjoyed Alsutany’s outlook on being an “other”. In “Los Intersectios: Recasting Moving Spaces” she writes that, “My body becomes marked with meaning as I enter public space” (292). This is the absolute truth. Any person’s identity is differing from how others see it. In a public space you are constantly judged, categorized, and placed into brackets. Even at the grocery store people are watching how you walk, how you talk, and peeping in your cart to see what you’ve got. It happens to me all the time and, like I said before, I’m just a boring old country girl. Public spaces are exactly what they seem –Public. No covers, no umbrellas, no hats. Just you and thousands of others who are going to put you into some checkbox in their mental bank.
Speaking of public spaces, I must say that I adored Clare’s friendly “fuck you” attitude towards gawkers. On page 225 she says, “They think I’m that pane of glass”. This can be read many, many ways. First of all, I think she is saying that they seem to gaze through her, like she won’t even notice their staring or gasping. This is a good option, as bigoted people will usually think someone under them (in their mind) is not as smart or mentally competent as them. Secondly, I noticed that this quote is similar to other ones I have read regarding women’s rights. The early Western woman, particularly the Victorian woman, was commonly related metaphorically to a looking glass, or the likes. These women were seen as dainty, sheltered women who spent their days tending to their children and brushing their glorious hair in the image reflected by their vanity’s looking glass. Many other women have asserted that they would not be fitting into this looking glass. Clare, like Martin and Alsutany, will not either

Three Things About Me

1. I have a fantastic 7 year old daughter named Kaia.
2. I LOVE bacon.
3. I have three rescue dogs. Two are Pit-bulls and the other is a Toy Poodle.