Short Post 4/27/11

These two chapters by Enloe really helped me to understand my own definition of feminism. At the beginning of the semester we were asked if we thought that we could be considered feminist. Even though I knew that by the definition of feminism I probably was one, the connotations that go along with it made me hesitant to claim my feminism. Throughout the course of the year we discussed how there is a debate whether the word feminism should change in order to leave behind its long history and establish something new. At the time I believed that it should be changed so that more people are willing to embrace the actual ideas without being intimidated by the implications. After spending the semester in this class I have switched to the opposing side of this argument. If the feminist movement is willing to give into pressure to change something as simple as its name because of outside pressure then aren’t we yet again giving into the cycle of oppression? My journey through grappling with this and changing sides of the argument reflects my general relationship with Women’s studies and feminism.
There are times when I get fed up and think we are arguing in circle over pointless things and there is no resolution (aka Enlightened Feminism by Douglas) then next thing I know I am learning about abortion rights and female genital mutilation. These topics are perhaps the social issues that have the most impact on my conscious and I want to devote my time to preventing them. In times of frustration I feel like we are wasting our time critiquing the media and designer vaginas, but then I begin to think that perhaps even the small battles matter. Sexism and oppression affect us all differently based on aspects like identity politics. Even if my struggles with oppression pale in comparison to those of others, if I stop fighting what would happen to them. Without daily questioning and challenging patriarchy it would not be impossible for our world to regress and lose all the hard work of women before us. Enloe inspired me in this thought process because I felt as though her chapters were about defining feminism for herself. She discusses the need for curiosity and questioning patriarchy rather than settling for the fact that it is normal. It is so easy to say well it is not affecting me that much because I am generally happy with my life. To take a step back and see how accepting this lot in life may affect others by perpetuating the cycle is eye opening. My favorite point that Enloe makes is how when a student brings up an analysis that dispute her thought that it is tempting to manipulate to in the end support her point. She says rather twist it around it is important to use that analysis to further question and shape the original idea. This shows the idea that feminism and its issue are perhaps so frustrating to be because there is usually not one right answer. It is a problem with such a long history and so ingrained in our society that it affects so many aspects. Rather than get frustrated and give up it is important to take the time to understand how every action has so many potential reactions. In order to stop the cycle the beginning stage to define feminism as what it means to you and then stand up for that belief.

Short Post 4/28

Enloe’s introduction talks about the importance of being curious and understanding what, how and why certain groups are oppressed.  I felt that her introduction correlated strongly to the goals of this women’s studies course.  Before taking women’s studies, I had thought I was completely equal to men and society knew it.  But after taking the course, my curiosity has grown and I am able to see how I play into the patriarchal system we live in.  It was interesting to connect this introduction to Johnson’s essay on patriarchy.  Johnson and Enloe both point out that both women and men play a role in maintaining the patriarchal system we live in.  This class and Enloe’s reading has made me curios of my role in the system.  I can now see how I contribute to the system and how hard it will be to change it because for centuries we have allowed it.  Enloe discusses tradition and how we typically considering tradition as something permanent and therefore are not curious about it.  It is crazy to think that we still have the patriarchal tradition of marriage implemented in our society.  Johnson uses the example of Monopoly.  Nobody questions the rules because that is just the way the game is played.  Many people do not question the written and unwritten rules that make up or patriarchal society.  This course and all the readings we have read have stimulated me to respond to my role within this system.  In order to change the system, we must first acknowledge the system in place and understand how it is oppressive.  Like I said above, before taking this course I did not feel the least bit that I was oppressed by society.  Now, I can see everything through a different lens and understand who is oppressing, why and how.  It is important to answer these three questions to understand how we can stop and fix these issues.  Enloe discusses the issues of globalization and women being subjected to sweatshops working in horrible conditions.  She brings up the questions of who is oppressing these women, why and how.  Enloe makes a strong point when changing the term “cheap labor” to “labor made cheap”.  She realizes how lazy she had been which sparks her discover that, “the moment one becomes newly curious about something is also a good time to think about what created one’s previous lack of curiosity” (3).  I thought about the topic of sexual assault and why I had never really been too curious about the issue.  I realized it was due to the fact that I always felt safe growing up and could not grasp the fact that something like that could happen to me.  However, I have been enlightened to understand more issues that do pertain to me as a women.  I have become curious in finding ways to change our patriarchal society.  It is really difficult imaging a new “set of rules”, but after seeing all the issues women face mostly caused by the system, change needs to occur.

Final Long Post 2/28

Enloe

Introduction: Being Curious about our Lack of Feminist Curiosity

Enloe’s introduction talks about the concept of being curious about things and taking the opportunity to investigate them. She says that it is easy to be complacent because being curious require energy. Other terms like “tradtition,” “natural,” “always,” and “oldest” are words we use to justify our complacency. We don’t challenge the ideas that fit into those categories because it takes too much effort and its uncomfortable to challenge the ideas we grew up with. Enloe says, “uncuriousity is dangerously comfortable if it can be dressed up with the sophisticated attire of reasonableness and intellectual efficiency” (3). I liked when she brings up the questions of “where women are and where men are, about who put women there and men here, about who benefits from women being there and not someplace else…” (4). I always wonder how institutions like patriarchy came to be. How did ideologies form? How quickly? How long will they last? She says that patriarchial systems “make many women overlook their own marginal positions and feel instead secure, protected, valued” (6). I see what she is saying but I still don’t know how we fell into that system. Why do women need men in order to feel safe? Why do young women feel more valuable when they have a boyfriend? She also brings up the point that patriarchy is constantly being modernized. It’s a necessary process in order for patriarchy to survive. But will other societal systems out-evolve patriarchy and lead to its demise?

The Surprised Feminist

She starts this chapter by explaining how we are all “socialized to deny surprise.” We are, but why? Is it because we look foolish when something surprises us because it means we didn’t realize or know something beforehand? Isn’t surprise a good thing sometimes because it means you learn something new and you are forced to see something in a different way than what you expected? Enloe is starting her book by urging people to be open to the idea of being surprised by things. Its unavoidable, so why not embrace the things that surprise you? We all need to admit that sometimes we are wrong in our preconceived notions and assumptions. I think she wants her readers to have an open mind while reading this book because otherwise certain issues will just pass right over them. I really liked these chapters and I wish we had read them at the beginning of the semester instead of at the end. There are definitely some issues we talked about in class that I had to open my mind to in order to fully understand. For example, I learned a lot about abortion and abortion providers from class and the brown bag that I attended. And I was surprised by many of the things that I learned.

I meant to post this when we read Enloe's "Militia men and women", but completely forgot. This video shows a Libyan woman at a restaurant where American journalists are eating speaking out about the rape the experienced by Gadhafi's regime. This video is so frightening because they do not let her speak and just take her away and put a bag over head...so terrifying.

Long Post 4/26

Allison Attenello’s “Navigating Identity Politics in Activism” defines leadership and what the best role is to play when dealing with activism that is not necessarily your identity’s activism.  Attenello starts off her passage by informing the reader about the serial rapes occurring in the New Brunswick area.  Right away she made the distinction between the two very different communities occupying New Brunswick.  There were Rutgers students and then lots of Mexican immigrants.  Attenello discusses how the Rutgers students received more media coverage for these rapes then Mexican women.  In July 2003, Mexican women march to City Hall in demand of adequate protection and rights.  While attending, Attenello was introduced to Lupe who was the leader of these Mexican woman.  Lupe invited her to attend their meetings to offer her skills of activism.  Attenello came to the first meeting making many assumptions, including this was an organized group, the members identified as feminists and activists, and trying to combat rape.  She soon found that she was dealing with many more Mexican immigrant issues that she had no knowledge about and could not identify with.  Her experience with Unidad de New Brunswick made her ask the question: “if activists do not belong to a particular community, should they play a leadership role in an organization that represents that population?” (102).  Attenello decided it would be inappropriate for her to take on a leadership role in Unidad de New Brunswick.  She felt as if she was enabling these members as oppose to her goal of empowering them.  However, Lupe disagreed that her leaving the group would be beneficial to the members striving for their goals.  Attenello struggled with the concept of leadership in a group that she did not identify with.  She came to the conclusion that she was actually benefiting the group by having time, resources and language skills that could move Unidad de New Brunswick forward.  Although, she says, “I could contribute to the body’s mission by sharing organizing and leadership skills” (105).

Shira Lynn Pruce’s “Blurring the Lines That Divide” was really inspirational to me.  She starts off by talking about living in Jerusalem in 2000 and having a front row seat to the violence and suicide bombers between Israel and Palestine.  She brought her experience back to Douglass College where there was a lot of anti-Semitism towards Jews in the aftermath of 9/11, blaming the bombings on Israel’s existence.  Pruce started to take action by founding an unaffiliated Jewish Zionist group on campus to give Zionism and Judaism a local presence.  Pruce took her first women’s and gender studies course where she was enlightened on life through a gendered lens.  She discusses how she recognized the system that has been so oppressive to women: “patriarchy, a system of male normativity and control that systemically oppresses women” (187).  Like Pruce, I did not realize the patriarchal system we live in until taking this course and reading essays such as Johnson’s.  Pruce started to realize that she felt excluded and marginalized by the patriarchal system reining in on our world.  She says, “I started seeing the glass ceiling and walls everywhere; I felt I had the power to produce real social change” (187).  This statement made me think of Frye’s birdcage where it seems as if women are not constraint by society, yet there are so many factors that make them this “other” than the “norm” and are trapped in the cage.  Pruce explains how attending IWL has transformed her into a stronger, more focused, more confident and more articulate woman and leader.  Pruce found herself torn between grassroots activism and formal political participation, which she originally thought were two distinct spheres.  However, she came to the conclusion that these two lines of work were very much connected to one another.  I like really like when she says, “Society portrays one group as professionals in suits, as the others as troublemakers in jeans and sometimes handcuffs” (188).  While at Rutgers, an international anti-Zionist organization planned on hosting its annual conference at Rutgers.  To combat this organization, Pruce and friends organized events under Israel Inspires to “support the transformation and education of Rutgers University’s Jewish campus life” (189).  7,000 people, including New Jersey senators and governor attended their rally to promote positive change for the Jewish community at Rutgers.  She continues her activism by organizing campus events that attracted NOW and shed light on women’s issues for Rutgers students to be educated on.  The most interesting part of her essay is when she worked with Palestinian women who she had once worked against.  Her work with these Palestinian women has taught her how important it is to “not necessarily to overcome difference but rather to blur the differences in the face of a common cause” (190).  While interning in Israel, Pruce discovers that grassroots activism and formal political participation intersect much more than she could have imagined.  Pruce has found a balance between her fights for Jewish and Women’s right and as been able to blur the lines between these causes for the bigger cause.

Short Post 4/26

“Learning the Meaning of One”: This article by Greenstone was effective because it draws attention to the difficulties of activism amongst minorities. For some reason it seems that so often minority groups turn against each other. This drains a movement of power that could be greatly amplified if only different identity groups would come together and support each other. When Greenstone looks back at her interaction with the girl in sixth grade I think it is important that she wishes she had acted in a more mature fashion. Every degrading comment that someone makes can be an opportunity to spread education and tolerance. If one is willing to lower themselves to the level of the person who first made the comment then there will never be a chance for progress. The ability to maintain composure and also speak one’s mind can be difficult as well as intimidating, but it is essential. The worst that can happen is that the message does not get through and the person still believes they are right in their prejudice. This risk is clearly worth it if one can inspire even a small amount of questioning of prejudice.

“Navigating Identity Politics”: Attenello clearly points out that it is important to see the ways in which one can be both a perpetrator and a victim of identity politics. Often people seem to see this as black and white, where there are people in power and those who are oppressed. In reality we all often belong to so many different groups each of us is both a mixture of power and oppression. When she starts to discuss the Rutgers rapist it really reminded me of how many groups make up each of our identities. I feel like often when considering ones identity people are likely to list their gender, religion, ethnicity and socio-economic status. I would be much less likely to immediately consider my status as a college student. In my world most people I interact with have a college education and therefore it does not help to greatly further my identity. One only needs to take a step back and observe the town of Hamilton to understand how being a Colgate student shapes my everyday interactions.

Short Post 4/26

Antenello's essay brought up the conflict she experienced of not identifying with the group she was supporting. This led her to feel like an enabler rather than contributing to a solution. The only experience I can think of that I have to identify with this was when I went on three mission trips to Appalachia to help fix up houses for poor families. I always felt the strong disconnect between myself and the people I was helping, especially in terms of our education and overall life experiences. I was there to help them, but there was always a question of whether fixing up their house will help them improve other areas of their life, like finding a job, or if they will just accept the help and continue the same as always. Did they feel embarrassed that teenagers were more capable than they were? I never came to a solid conclusion of how our work affected people in the long run.

Greenstone's essay highlighted the fact that discrimination starts very early. Children learn to discriminate against other people implicitly from their parents, peers, and the media. The fact that a sixth grade girl had such strong feelings towards jews shows that she learned that from someone else, she likely did not have any life experience that caused her to feel that way. The rest of Greenstone's essay just discussed her activist activities, which I thought was wonderful but I didn't personally get a lot out of reading about it. I think that her own experience is unique but by seeing an example of someone who is all about activism, it shows the type of path one can take to pursue those activities.

Pruce's essay was a great example of someone who was passionately devoted to a cause on a college campus and actually had an impact. I was shocked to read about the discrimination against Jews that was present at Rutgers. Its hard to image what it would be like to be a Jewish student at Rutgers during that time. I can't imagine that taking place at Colgate. Pruce showed that she could use her experience from one activist project and apply it to another and stay committed to a cause in order to see the results she wanted. If she hadn't done that, there is no way she would have ended up living in Israel.