I thought that the three readings that were assigned for this class complemented each other very well. Throughout my reading of the patriarchy article I found myself constantly thinking of counter arguments. Many of these counter arguments were address by the Frye and Gokova articles, which resulted in a more positive reaction to all of the articles. My issues with the patriarchy articles were that I felt as though at times the argument was a little over dramatic. I do consider myself a feminist and I have very strong opinions about reproductive and health rights of women, but at times I find myself becoming defensive and disagreeing with the arguments. Like all of the discussion over representations in the media, which came up again in the Johnson article, can trigger a negative reaction for me. I feel like often people blame oppression on media when maybe media is just a reflection of society. It is hard to see if the real world is reflecting the media or the other way around. This causes me to get frustrated with wasting time over analyzing and searching for faults in the shows that we depend on for entertainment. I do not watch TV in order to see a utopian society depicted in which there are no longer any issues. In fact the TV depicts a patriarchal society because that is what we live in and it therefore make the shows more relatable.
As I became more critical of the article it also occurred to me that men are also depicted on TV in certain ways and are restrained by certain expectations. This is where the article by Frye helped to expand my understanding. Frye addresses what oppression really means and that it is possible that men can be unhappy or dissatisfied with the status quo without being considered oppressed. I thought she was very accurate in her analysis that women can be trapped in a place where it is considered wrong to participate in sexual activity and it is also wrong to not participate. This is a feeling that I have heard expressed before on the Colgate campus. Women are quickly assigned to being sluts or prudes and there is not much room for a woman to be comfortable with her sexual experiences. Gokova opened my eyes to understanding feminist rhetoric in a different way. He offered an interesting perspective because he comes from a drastically different culture than I do. Sometimes it can be difficult to see the consequences that can come from a patriarchal society when looking at the issues from an affluent American perspective. After reading Gokova, Johnson article seemed much less dramatic and more like a legitimate and concerning perspective. For me an argument really comes alive when discussing consequences of potential rape rather than holding open doors.
Monday, February 7, 2011
Short Post 2/7
2/7/11
Oppression
I was following Frye’s argument fine through most of this piece until I got to the third page where she starts talking about how men hold doors open for women as a symbol of oppression. She says “[m]en will impose themselves awkwardly and jostle everyone in order to get to the door first.” I don’t think I’ve ever seen that happen. And if so, that is definitely a rare occurrence, not the norm. Of all the men I know, young and old, I don’t think many of them would make such an awkward situation just to open the door first. Usually, men open the door for women in a very nice way because it is considered polite. I understand that she is saying men do this because it used to be understood that women were incapable of doing things for themselves, but now I think this tradition is out of respect for women. I think of it more as men taking care of women because they can, not because women need the men to take care of them.
Next she complains that men help with trivial things like holding doors open, but they don’t help with “typing a report at 4:00a.m.” Why would a woman need a man’s help doing her own work? That doesn’t make sense. Then she says, “there is nothing but advice that women should stay indoors after dark, be chaperoned by a man, or when it comes down to it, ‘lie back and enjoy it.’” I know this was written in 1983, but I’ve never heard of women being told to do these things in the last 60 or 70 years (that’s just my approximation). Frye is over-analyzing this whole issue. She is taking something small and making it into a huge implication of male oppression of women as if they are servants or insignificant beings.
Gokova’s short writing was very inspiring, especially because it was written by a man. I agree with all of his ideals and I think his organization sounds really successful. I’m actually surprised that I never heard of anything like this before. Perhaps if there was more awareness in the United States that groups like this exist, men here would we more observant of gender issues just by knowing that they exist and people are working to change them.
Oppression
I was following Frye’s argument fine through most of this piece until I got to the third page where she starts talking about how men hold doors open for women as a symbol of oppression. She says “[m]en will impose themselves awkwardly and jostle everyone in order to get to the door first.” I don’t think I’ve ever seen that happen. And if so, that is definitely a rare occurrence, not the norm. Of all the men I know, young and old, I don’t think many of them would make such an awkward situation just to open the door first. Usually, men open the door for women in a very nice way because it is considered polite. I understand that she is saying men do this because it used to be understood that women were incapable of doing things for themselves, but now I think this tradition is out of respect for women. I think of it more as men taking care of women because they can, not because women need the men to take care of them.
Next she complains that men help with trivial things like holding doors open, but they don’t help with “typing a report at 4:00a.m.” Why would a woman need a man’s help doing her own work? That doesn’t make sense. Then she says, “there is nothing but advice that women should stay indoors after dark, be chaperoned by a man, or when it comes down to it, ‘lie back and enjoy it.’” I know this was written in 1983, but I’ve never heard of women being told to do these things in the last 60 or 70 years (that’s just my approximation). Frye is over-analyzing this whole issue. She is taking something small and making it into a huge implication of male oppression of women as if they are servants or insignificant beings.
Gokova’s short writing was very inspiring, especially because it was written by a man. I agree with all of his ideals and I think his organization sounds really successful. I’m actually surprised that I never heard of anything like this before. Perhaps if there was more awareness in the United States that groups like this exist, men here would we more observant of gender issues just by knowing that they exist and people are working to change them.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Short Post 2/2
The New Girliness chapter in Douglas’s book Enlightened Sexism, made me truly think about why women are they way they are and why men are the way they are. I believe that men and women are inherently different. If they were not inherently different then how have we reached these stereotypes in the first place? Of course I believe a woman should be able to do everything a man should do and vice versa. However, women are not men and will never be men. Douglas talks about the growing sense in the years of boy bands that men and women have “an innate essence that is utterly distinct and unchangeable”. After this comment she says how it is the women who accommodate to the unchangeable men. I believe men are indeed different that women, but none the less just as able to change as women are. Present day, you see men who have realized women are just as capable as themselves in doing whatever it may be. The really important thing to understand here is that feminism has changed men. However, just because some men have been changed by feminism does not mean feminism is no longer needed. Although there are the traditional men, from my experience more and more married couples are acting as a team with equal divisions of power as oppose to the father ruling the mother. I believe in order for all men to act this way and want domestication and marriage the feminist movement has to continue at full strength.
I also think it is extremely interesting how Douglas portrays the importance of the femininity scale. She talks about having a certain level of femininity and also a certain level or success. She puts Janet Reno on one side of the spectrum and Cindy Crawford on the other end. This concept of finding a happy medium is interesting. The only thing telling us we would be most happy in the middle is media portraying society. I personally like to be feminine. I like to shop, I like to gossip and I enjoy watching most of the shows Douglas critiques. At the same time I am success driven, hard working and understanding of the importance and fulfillment of having a career that I love. Although I do think Douglas over analyzes every show and does not offer her own perspective of what should be done, I also think she is doing a great job at raising awareness levels. She has made me question everything. Do I really like to shop or do I only shop because society says women should enjoy doing that? She has made me analyze all the feminine stereotypes I am subjected to. However, at the same time I feel I break those stereotypes just as I support them. I play hockey and snowboard, both predominately male sports. I am an economics major and enjoy math, which statistically are predominantly male majors. I am sometimes in the gym doing the machines where I am the only girl. From my perspective, I feel I balance out success and femininity well. Of course if it came down to obtaining my dream job, which meant giving up some of my feminine characteristics the decision would be clear. I mean how could I ever give up shopping? Kidding! Of course I would pick the job.
Douglas discusses Oprah in chapter 5 and like Michelle said, it was hard to find exactly what Douglas thought of her. She refers to her usage of Black Speak to a predominately white audience. It seems to me that people who can make fun of their own group feel they have power. Stereotypes are always going to exist unless all races, classes and gender are mixed at an early age in education. But we live in America. People have the freedom to do whatever they want and to live in areas where the kids are not going to be diversified in school. This is true with man’s perception of a woman. Unless they are taught from an early age that they are equal they will not feel women are completely equal. And in my mind getting rid of entertainment shows like Ally McBeal and Legally Blonde are not going to fix the problem.
Short Post 2/2
The New Girliness
Clueless: I remember that this was one of my favorite movies when I was a little girl. I had a Cher Barbie doll and I loved to pretend I had a wardrobe as extensive as hers. When Douglas brings up Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, I remembered that in Clueless, Cher brings up this book at one point when she is trying to help her friend be more 'intellectual.' Even though I didn't understand everything in that movie when I was 7, i think it definitely had an impact on me. It made me realize that it was cool to have lots of nice clothes, and shoes, and purses and girls look better when they wear makeup and when you learn to drive you should drive a jeep or a convertible. Douglas's critique of movies like this or shows like 90210 make me wonder whether these ideals were created straight from these shows or were they a reflection of what teens at that time were interested in? Its kind of like a chicken and egg question. Which one came first? Either way, the show and real life desires amplified one another to make the consumerism craze huge.
Ally McBeal: feminist and antifeminist.
It seems like Douglas is complaining that Ally McBeal and Bridget Jones inner monologues were only about men and sex rather than their work and serious issues. But I think that women really do think about men and sex a lot and she has to recognize that people don’t want to watch a show about a woman who only thinks about serious issues. Thats unrealistic. Plus womens feelings towards those shallow things is what unites women, we all experience the same feelings at some point or another. But women have very diverse careers so most women don't really want to hear a woman's inner thoughts about a legal case because that is already what the tv show is about. Most women can't related to those thoughts.
You Go Girl
I think the reason why this book is starting to frustrate me so much is that Douglas repeatedly categorizes shows into enlightened sexism or embedded feminism but she doesn’t seem to like either one. So she just complains the whole time instead of telling us what she would rather see. She needs to acknowledge that shows are made to be entertaining and maybe she doesn’t need to pick apart every detail of each show to make a point.
When she talks about Oprah, I just don’t follow her argument. Its pretty unclear to me what her problem is with Oprah. Why can’t Douglas just accept the fact that Oprah is doing the best she can to make a good, informative, helpful talk show? Oprah is an amazing role model for all women and girls and I think Douglas should pay more attention to that than the fact that she is giving into consumerism by trying to sell products.
Clueless: I remember that this was one of my favorite movies when I was a little girl. I had a Cher Barbie doll and I loved to pretend I had a wardrobe as extensive as hers. When Douglas brings up Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, I remembered that in Clueless, Cher brings up this book at one point when she is trying to help her friend be more 'intellectual.' Even though I didn't understand everything in that movie when I was 7, i think it definitely had an impact on me. It made me realize that it was cool to have lots of nice clothes, and shoes, and purses and girls look better when they wear makeup and when you learn to drive you should drive a jeep or a convertible. Douglas's critique of movies like this or shows like 90210 make me wonder whether these ideals were created straight from these shows or were they a reflection of what teens at that time were interested in? Its kind of like a chicken and egg question. Which one came first? Either way, the show and real life desires amplified one another to make the consumerism craze huge.
Ally McBeal: feminist and antifeminist.
It seems like Douglas is complaining that Ally McBeal and Bridget Jones inner monologues were only about men and sex rather than their work and serious issues. But I think that women really do think about men and sex a lot and she has to recognize that people don’t want to watch a show about a woman who only thinks about serious issues. Thats unrealistic. Plus womens feelings towards those shallow things is what unites women, we all experience the same feelings at some point or another. But women have very diverse careers so most women don't really want to hear a woman's inner thoughts about a legal case because that is already what the tv show is about. Most women can't related to those thoughts.
You Go Girl
I think the reason why this book is starting to frustrate me so much is that Douglas repeatedly categorizes shows into enlightened sexism or embedded feminism but she doesn’t seem to like either one. So she just complains the whole time instead of telling us what she would rather see. She needs to acknowledge that shows are made to be entertaining and maybe she doesn’t need to pick apart every detail of each show to make a point.
When she talks about Oprah, I just don’t follow her argument. Its pretty unclear to me what her problem is with Oprah. Why can’t Douglas just accept the fact that Oprah is doing the best she can to make a good, informative, helpful talk show? Oprah is an amazing role model for all women and girls and I think Douglas should pay more attention to that than the fact that she is giving into consumerism by trying to sell products.
Short Post 2/3/2011
Main Post Douglas Chapter 4 & 5
Chapter 4 in Douglas is titled “The New Girliness” which works well to sum up the main point of the chapter. She explores the emergence of a new sort of feminine model in which women are powerful; while at the same time conform to typical standards of beauty. The supporting evidence starts with the 1995 movie Clueless, which features Cher a Mini skirt wearing, shopping loving, blonde girl who also saves the day with her intelligence. This movie spawns many other movies and TV shows where we hear the inner monologue of female characters. Douglas claims these inner monologues generally show the supposedly shallow thoughts held by women. This “new girliness” seems to continue the legacy started by warrior women where media exemplifies both progression and regression for the feminist cause. Douglas sums it up by stating, “it offered the fleeting fantasy that girls could have it both ways: they could be sex objects in their fuck-me pumps and micro minis while simultaneously critiquing patriarchal ways of looking at and thinking about young women.” Then Douglas takes a look at the exceedingly popular show Ally Mcbeal and the role it took in advancing women’s image while tearing it down at the same time. Ally in many ways was a model of a woman who was both attractive and intelligent. She was a powerful attorney who could take down any man that was in her way. The show was an inspiration in the ways that it tackled cases about sex discrimination, yet in the next minute the women would be using their sex appeal to seduce a man and Ally would be whining about her inability to find love.
Douglas goes on to point out the similar features in popular entertainment at the time. Bridget Jones makes women appear to think only of men and makes feminists look like unattractive, out of touch women. What Women Want like Mcbeal shows the inner monologue of women thinking of shopping and babies. Then there is the grouping of Miss Congeniality and Legally Blonde, two movies which showed women trying to find a balance between feminism and hypergirliness. While the message may seem like a positive one both movies put strong feminism in an unattractive and unappealing light. Down with Love sends the message that during the second wave of the feminist movement men saw the error of their ways, another reason feminism is now unnecessary. All in all in order to be happy, women had to find to perfect balance between ultra girly and the overbearing feminist. This chapter raised some valid points and I cannot help but agree with Douglas that Bridget Jones’ wining is enough to make almost any women cringe. At the same time it did raise some questions for me. For one is if this is all true then, what is it that made these films so popular? Perhaps it is because in each of these women we see bits of ourselves and our struggle to find balance reflected. Douglas states that it is a loss for women that we see in the media women attempting to achieve attractiveness and girliness. At the same time there is something to be said about people simply wanting to see attractive people on TV. As much as we demand this of women I think that there is also a lot of pressure on men to have the perfect face body etc. Do shallow movies meant to entertain us really convince anyone that all that is floating around in women’s head is shoes, men and babies? I do not watch TV to see an accurate reflection of myself, but sometimes as an escape from my thoughts and a chance to just be entertained.
Chapter 5
I found chapter 5 from Douglas raised less mixed emotions in me as I agreed with more of her analysis. Recently the figure of the sassy black women has risen to a high level of popularity. This is because she tells it like it is and seems unrestrained by the expectations many upper and middle class white women feel govern their behavior. Yet again this character evokes an unrealistic image that feminism is unnecessary. Despite media black women telling it like it is, in reality black women are still trapped in a disadvantaged position. Black women recently became more and more prevalent in entertainment, but Douglas points out that it is often as the butt shaking back up dancer to degrading songs. Then with the rise of black TV shows came embedded feminism for black women. The show Living Single featured black women who managed to have it all. They could be sassy, free speaking bold black women, while remaining attractive, powerful and have boyfriends. Black women began to become a caricature: they were loud, bossy, and generally emasculating. As the Film Waiting to Exhale shows these women rarely had good luck with men, perhaps it was because they did not fit into the typical feminine role. To counter this came Soul Food which showed that true happiness only came to black women who conformed and put there men first. The emergence of Operah was a cultural phenomenon that was the sassy black women who was also relatable to white women. Operah used “code switching” which had been seen throughout the majority of black people in media where she would easily alternate “black speak” with proper English. This draws in a huge audience and once again makes women feel as though the fight for feminism is over; with blunt speaking black women as the example we have clearly reached equality. In order to understand the myth of this created character one only has to look at the real statistics that black women face.
Chapter 4 in Douglas is titled “The New Girliness” which works well to sum up the main point of the chapter. She explores the emergence of a new sort of feminine model in which women are powerful; while at the same time conform to typical standards of beauty. The supporting evidence starts with the 1995 movie Clueless, which features Cher a Mini skirt wearing, shopping loving, blonde girl who also saves the day with her intelligence. This movie spawns many other movies and TV shows where we hear the inner monologue of female characters. Douglas claims these inner monologues generally show the supposedly shallow thoughts held by women. This “new girliness” seems to continue the legacy started by warrior women where media exemplifies both progression and regression for the feminist cause. Douglas sums it up by stating, “it offered the fleeting fantasy that girls could have it both ways: they could be sex objects in their fuck-me pumps and micro minis while simultaneously critiquing patriarchal ways of looking at and thinking about young women.” Then Douglas takes a look at the exceedingly popular show Ally Mcbeal and the role it took in advancing women’s image while tearing it down at the same time. Ally in many ways was a model of a woman who was both attractive and intelligent. She was a powerful attorney who could take down any man that was in her way. The show was an inspiration in the ways that it tackled cases about sex discrimination, yet in the next minute the women would be using their sex appeal to seduce a man and Ally would be whining about her inability to find love.
Douglas goes on to point out the similar features in popular entertainment at the time. Bridget Jones makes women appear to think only of men and makes feminists look like unattractive, out of touch women. What Women Want like Mcbeal shows the inner monologue of women thinking of shopping and babies. Then there is the grouping of Miss Congeniality and Legally Blonde, two movies which showed women trying to find a balance between feminism and hypergirliness. While the message may seem like a positive one both movies put strong feminism in an unattractive and unappealing light. Down with Love sends the message that during the second wave of the feminist movement men saw the error of their ways, another reason feminism is now unnecessary. All in all in order to be happy, women had to find to perfect balance between ultra girly and the overbearing feminist. This chapter raised some valid points and I cannot help but agree with Douglas that Bridget Jones’ wining is enough to make almost any women cringe. At the same time it did raise some questions for me. For one is if this is all true then, what is it that made these films so popular? Perhaps it is because in each of these women we see bits of ourselves and our struggle to find balance reflected. Douglas states that it is a loss for women that we see in the media women attempting to achieve attractiveness and girliness. At the same time there is something to be said about people simply wanting to see attractive people on TV. As much as we demand this of women I think that there is also a lot of pressure on men to have the perfect face body etc. Do shallow movies meant to entertain us really convince anyone that all that is floating around in women’s head is shoes, men and babies? I do not watch TV to see an accurate reflection of myself, but sometimes as an escape from my thoughts and a chance to just be entertained.
Chapter 5
I found chapter 5 from Douglas raised less mixed emotions in me as I agreed with more of her analysis. Recently the figure of the sassy black women has risen to a high level of popularity. This is because she tells it like it is and seems unrestrained by the expectations many upper and middle class white women feel govern their behavior. Yet again this character evokes an unrealistic image that feminism is unnecessary. Despite media black women telling it like it is, in reality black women are still trapped in a disadvantaged position. Black women recently became more and more prevalent in entertainment, but Douglas points out that it is often as the butt shaking back up dancer to degrading songs. Then with the rise of black TV shows came embedded feminism for black women. The show Living Single featured black women who managed to have it all. They could be sassy, free speaking bold black women, while remaining attractive, powerful and have boyfriends. Black women began to become a caricature: they were loud, bossy, and generally emasculating. As the Film Waiting to Exhale shows these women rarely had good luck with men, perhaps it was because they did not fit into the typical feminine role. To counter this came Soul Food which showed that true happiness only came to black women who conformed and put there men first. The emergence of Operah was a cultural phenomenon that was the sassy black women who was also relatable to white women. Operah used “code switching” which had been seen throughout the majority of black people in media where she would easily alternate “black speak” with proper English. This draws in a huge audience and once again makes women feel as though the fight for feminism is over; with blunt speaking black women as the example we have clearly reached equality. In order to understand the myth of this created character one only has to look at the real statistics that black women face.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Short Post 1/31
I found Douglas’s writing on the Riot Grrrl movement extremely interesting. I was unaware of any of those bands before reading Enlightened Sexism. Allison Wolfe, a woman involved in the beginning of the movement, said, “how can we make this kind of stodgy…feminism have a fresh face that speaks to us, to a younger generation? And, at the same time, how can we make the punk that we’re involved in less macho, less violent?” To me the Riot Grrrl movement seems to have gone in the wrong direction. At the time in the 90s, I’m sure it was a pivotal point for women to express their desire and need of power. However, based on what Douglas has written about them it seems as if they did not adequately push forward the feminist movement. I have never heard of the Riot Grrrl bands before and I would imagine if they had significant impact on the feminist movement I would have. One critique referred to the Riot Grrrl as “strident”, “self-absorbed” and “anti-male”. I think the Riot Grrrl movement had a hard time getting huge numbers of followers because the media coverage made girls scared to behave in these ways because they were unfeminine. It seems to be that the stereotype of feminists is unfeminine qualities. Riot Grrrl was too harsh for many girls and I feel it prohibited girls from getting involved in the feminist movement. I think at the time this rebellion was a huge new idea, however now it seems feminism is reached through constant change and activism as oppose to just rebelling. Also, I have put in a youtube video of the band, Bikini Kill. Based on the pictures in the video, I feel Riot Grrrl is exactly what Douglas defines as enlightened sexism.
Rebecca Walker considers herself a Third Wave Feminist. Walker struck me as persistent and determined to get women to fight for change alongside her. Walker’s approach to feminism contrasts with the Riot Grrrl movement. Walker wants women to fight for personal and political power. In my opinion, this approach is better than the Riot Grrrl movement because she is identifying the problems women encounter and offering a solution to fix them. Riot Grrrl simply complains about female problems and feelings of weakness. Of course it is necessary for all women to have their voice heard, but Walker wants power to be given to women. Walker believes women will receive power once enough women want to use their rights politically and personally. At the end of her excerpt, she states not do certain things for men if they do not “prioritize our freedom to control our bodies and our lives”. This is exactly what is necessary for the Third Wave of feminism to be successful. The way women will get their power is if they do not take anymore jokes and do not take anymore harassment from men. Once all women are on the same page and do not settle for inferiority anymore, men will get on the bandwagon and realize we aren’t leaving.
Main Post 1/31
Essential Feminist Reader
Rebecca Walker “Becoming the Third Wave”
This short piece was inspired by Walker’s reaction to the Hill-Thomas hearing in the early 90’s. Walker says, “to me, the hearings were not about determining whether or not Clarence Thomas did in fact harass Anita Hill. They were about checking and redefining the extent of women’s credibility and power” (389). She goes on to question: “can a woman’s experience undermine a man’s career? Can a woman’s voice, a woman’s self-worth and injustice, challenge a structure predicated upon the subjugation of our gender?” She felt that Anita Hill threatened to do so. Walker wanted to expose the misconceptions about gender equality. My understanding is that the third wave was born out of the idea that women already had all of their rights so there was nothing left to fight for. There was a veil over the inequalities that still existed because they were more implicit. This piece of writing really struck me by how passionate Walker was about this issue and I could really feel it in her voice on the page. Her description of an incident on a train where she stood up to some men who were making some disparaging remarks about women in the presence of a young girl was very moving and showed how intensely she felt about the issues of gender inequality.
Baumgardner and Richards. 2000
This list of 13 point agenda for 3rd wave feminism contained a variety of goals for the 21st century in regards to womens rights. Many of them related to sexual health and reproductive rights. I was interested in point number 4 that aims to “bring down the double standard in sex and sexual health, and foster male responsibility and assertiveness in the following areas: achieving freedom from STDs; more fairly dividing the burden of family planning as well as responsibilities such as child care; and eliminating violence against women” (425). These are issues that are seen quite often in today’s society. A great example would be on MTV’s show Teen Mom where the teenage girl almost always ends up taking care of the baby alone because the boyfriend breaks up with them and leaves. It seems to me that although a child is made by a man and a woman equally, because the woman carries the child and is biologically designed to be the nurturing parent, the man has the opportunity to ignore his responsibility. Even though a woman can go through the legal proceedings to obtain child support from the man, it never seems to justify the complete lack of care that the father fails to provide if he is not around to help care for the child. A couple hundred dollars a month does not seem to justify the absence of a father’s care and love. I could go on about this and obviously every family’s situation is different. The bottom line is that men need to be just as responsible about sex as women. Here is a link to a website I found about child-support. I looked this up because I don't really know much about child support and I wanted to know some statistics on it. http://www.rbowmanlaw.com/2010/10/child-support-statistics.html
I was also interested in the goal of “valuing (monetarily) stay-at-home parents, [and] aiding employees who want to spend more time with family and continue work” (426). I don’t know how this would be implemented but it is a very interesting thought. I know that parents work just as hard at home taking care of their children as they do at work. Seeing my mom take care of my siblings and I plus our dog and take care of the house everyday has allowed me to see how much time and effort it requires. I’m really glad that I babysit for other families with young children because it gives me a glimpse of what its like to be a parent. But I only see it for a couple hours at a time.
These 13 points contained so many interesting ideas that I’m looking forward to discussing them in class in more depth.
Enlightened Sexism
1. Get the Girls.
2. This chapter explores the new television phenomenon of the early 90’s where tv shows targeted teenage girls. The combination of sex and merchandizing reiterated the cliché that “sex sells.” The main focus of this chapter was 90210, the show that kick-started the trend of television shows of its kind that followed. You can still see today that shows like Gossip Girl appeal to teenage girls in exactly the same way they did almost 20 years ago. Douglas’s complaint with this style of show (as she usually tends to find fault in just about everything I’m beginning to realize) is that it went against everything feminism had worked for. Melrose Place showed successful women but it also showed that “’success’ and ‘bitch’ just went together” (37). 90210 made teenage girls feel important but it also reduced them to sexualized objects and it glorified material objects like clothes.
3. 2. Castration anxiety.
This chapter analyzed some very publicized news stories in the early 90s where women acted ruthless in a way that hadn’t really been seen before. It also goes into great depth looking at Janet Reno and the response that the public gave to her. That made me wonder whether androgynous women like Reno will ever be fully accepted in society? I feel like feminine men, although not completely accepted, are more accepted in society than masculine women.
4. Warrior Women in Thongs
This chapter looks at 90’s television shows that had strong, ass-kicking young women as the main character. After Douglas shows how many tv shows were of this genre, it made me realize that a new phenomenon became very over-used and I think people got sick of it after a while. Maybe that’s why there aren’t many shows like that on tv today.
Rebecca Walker “Becoming the Third Wave”
This short piece was inspired by Walker’s reaction to the Hill-Thomas hearing in the early 90’s. Walker says, “to me, the hearings were not about determining whether or not Clarence Thomas did in fact harass Anita Hill. They were about checking and redefining the extent of women’s credibility and power” (389). She goes on to question: “can a woman’s experience undermine a man’s career? Can a woman’s voice, a woman’s self-worth and injustice, challenge a structure predicated upon the subjugation of our gender?” She felt that Anita Hill threatened to do so. Walker wanted to expose the misconceptions about gender equality. My understanding is that the third wave was born out of the idea that women already had all of their rights so there was nothing left to fight for. There was a veil over the inequalities that still existed because they were more implicit. This piece of writing really struck me by how passionate Walker was about this issue and I could really feel it in her voice on the page. Her description of an incident on a train where she stood up to some men who were making some disparaging remarks about women in the presence of a young girl was very moving and showed how intensely she felt about the issues of gender inequality.
Baumgardner and Richards. 2000
This list of 13 point agenda for 3rd wave feminism contained a variety of goals for the 21st century in regards to womens rights. Many of them related to sexual health and reproductive rights. I was interested in point number 4 that aims to “bring down the double standard in sex and sexual health, and foster male responsibility and assertiveness in the following areas: achieving freedom from STDs; more fairly dividing the burden of family planning as well as responsibilities such as child care; and eliminating violence against women” (425). These are issues that are seen quite often in today’s society. A great example would be on MTV’s show Teen Mom where the teenage girl almost always ends up taking care of the baby alone because the boyfriend breaks up with them and leaves. It seems to me that although a child is made by a man and a woman equally, because the woman carries the child and is biologically designed to be the nurturing parent, the man has the opportunity to ignore his responsibility. Even though a woman can go through the legal proceedings to obtain child support from the man, it never seems to justify the complete lack of care that the father fails to provide if he is not around to help care for the child. A couple hundred dollars a month does not seem to justify the absence of a father’s care and love. I could go on about this and obviously every family’s situation is different. The bottom line is that men need to be just as responsible about sex as women. Here is a link to a website I found about child-support. I looked this up because I don't really know much about child support and I wanted to know some statistics on it. http://www.rbowmanlaw.com/2010/10/child-support-statistics.html
I was also interested in the goal of “valuing (monetarily) stay-at-home parents, [and] aiding employees who want to spend more time with family and continue work” (426). I don’t know how this would be implemented but it is a very interesting thought. I know that parents work just as hard at home taking care of their children as they do at work. Seeing my mom take care of my siblings and I plus our dog and take care of the house everyday has allowed me to see how much time and effort it requires. I’m really glad that I babysit for other families with young children because it gives me a glimpse of what its like to be a parent. But I only see it for a couple hours at a time.
These 13 points contained so many interesting ideas that I’m looking forward to discussing them in class in more depth.
Enlightened Sexism
1. Get the Girls.
2. This chapter explores the new television phenomenon of the early 90’s where tv shows targeted teenage girls. The combination of sex and merchandizing reiterated the cliché that “sex sells.” The main focus of this chapter was 90210, the show that kick-started the trend of television shows of its kind that followed. You can still see today that shows like Gossip Girl appeal to teenage girls in exactly the same way they did almost 20 years ago. Douglas’s complaint with this style of show (as she usually tends to find fault in just about everything I’m beginning to realize) is that it went against everything feminism had worked for. Melrose Place showed successful women but it also showed that “’success’ and ‘bitch’ just went together” (37). 90210 made teenage girls feel important but it also reduced them to sexualized objects and it glorified material objects like clothes.
3. 2. Castration anxiety.
This chapter analyzed some very publicized news stories in the early 90s where women acted ruthless in a way that hadn’t really been seen before. It also goes into great depth looking at Janet Reno and the response that the public gave to her. That made me wonder whether androgynous women like Reno will ever be fully accepted in society? I feel like feminine men, although not completely accepted, are more accepted in society than masculine women.
4. Warrior Women in Thongs
This chapter looks at 90’s television shows that had strong, ass-kicking young women as the main character. After Douglas shows how many tv shows were of this genre, it made me realize that a new phenomenon became very over-used and I think people got sick of it after a while. Maybe that’s why there aren’t many shows like that on tv today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)