Sunday, September 23, 2007

Activity #5 - Gender aptitude test

Kate Bornstein is a transsexual who wishes to dissolve the notion that there are only two genders and to push that the terms “gender” and “sex” should not be interchanged. Bornstein proves that she completely backs this idea, because she was born a man and has now changed to become a woman. She wrote the book My Gender Workbook in which s/he questions why we must set certain gender roles for males and females and the problems that occur because of the male/female dichotomy we have created. Instead of abiding by the rules of a certain gender, Bornstein has determined to remain genderless. S/he asks her readers to engage in activities that unveil gender roles that we all create, mindlessly or not. Then s/he asks us to question why we do this and why we abide by these rules. S/he describes that “…we rarely achieve personal fulfillment by mindlessly wandering through life, taking the path of least resistance and little or no responsibility for our actions. We need to question our assumptions and that includes our assumptions about sex and gender, if we’re going to understand those aspects of ourselves and others” (My Gender Workbook excerpt 1, pg 4/5). Many people may think Bornstein is just trying to break the rules or draw attention, but s/he is truly asking people to step back and reflect on society’s standards. Bornstein is trying to open our minds to different ideals.

After taking her gender aptitude test, I found that I was a gender novice. Basically, I am just beginning my exploration of breaking down the gender walls. I am not surprised at all with these results. I’m actually quite pleased. When I began the readings, I was completely confused. I’m still somewhat confused about why we cannot interchange sex and gender, but I am beginning to understand that they should not appear dependent upon each other. I was in the mindset that when people switched their genders it was because they wanted to feel like they truly belonged. Now I understand that the point is not to simply belong to one gender; it is to be able to find where one’s role is within the genders. Before beginning this class or even completing Bornstein’s readings, I probably would not have even understood why there should be more than two genders. Now, I’m beginning to question these ideals and I think this is what the results of my aptitude test prove.

By testing the product, we can find out how we feel about many of the gender aspects Bornstein discusses such as “assignment”, “role”, “identity”, and “attribution”. In the readings s/he describes how we can think of gender as a pyramid. “The higher up we go on the pyramid, the fewer people there are belonging to that preferred gender. The higher up we go, these fewer people have more and more power” (My Gender Workbook excerpt 2, pg 3/19). I also enjoy how Bornstein sometimes puts a “silly” spin on the answers in her test. It seems s/he is trying to make the topic more comfortable and easier to understand; therefore, we are more willing to be open-minded. One can learn his or her relationship to gender more than most people even want to think about. The test does have some limiting responses available so it may cause this relationship to be seen in a cloudy manner. It also does not tell you how you can work to improve your aptitude; however, it at least makes us aware of where we stand. I think this is what I’m learning most in this course. You must first put down your walls to become aware of your feelings, and then you can move forward to change them.

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

CRJ #4 - The Struggle of the Female Gender

Throughout my life, I have described myself as a tomboy in a proud manner. I explain how “I played many sports when I was younger and I so glad that I am not a prissy girl who takes an hour to get ready for dinner.” I never thought how demoralizing I was being to the female sex until completing this reading. In reality, my girl friends who I grew up playing co-ed softball and soccer with actually outplayed the boys many times. I remember the parents actually commenting how “cute” that was; they sometimes would joke with their sons but would never praise the females. I believe my experience is very representative of how Shaw and Lee describe that “the notions of femininity and masculinity…are socially constructed” (pg 124). I was even participating in this behavior without even realizing it. It reminds me of reading the results of my weight IAT test; I had a bias that I was unaware I was showing. As Judith Lorber would say, “everyone ‘does gender’ without thinking about it” (pg 141).

I also agree with Judith’s idea that children are molded to fit into this construction because of actions they see from their parents. I always wanted to be daddy’s little girl, and I got the most praise from my father when I was competing in sports. In a way, I had already learned that acting more like a boy would make my father proud. This is because “in a gender-stratified society, what men do are usually valued more highly that what women do because men do it” (pg 142). It’s strange because men count on women for so much: cooking, cleaning, taking care of children, and entertaining. It seems men should be kissing our feet and wanting to be skilled like us women. The exact opposite is seen though, as many of today’s idols are burly football players and rap stars. With the hopes of Hillary Clinton as President and Oprah as a role model, little girls ideas will at least begin to change.

I think that this trend is somewhat starting to turn around though. When I was in high school, boys were finally “allowed” to be on the cheerleading squad and to have their own volleyball team. Also, one girl I was good friends with petitioned hard to be on the men’s wrestling team and she succeeded. I remember not understanding why she was choosing this path and thinking she must be crazy; however, now I see she was truly courageous before her time. Hopefully, this proves that the foundation of this “social construction” may be breaking down with the new generations. The problem is that only young adults, without children, are beginning to learn the problems with how we treat our children. The generation before us thought that it was normal; however, we now know that society should be different. I think as the years continue, these young people have children, and more people are educated about the negative effects of creating stigmas such as a tomboy or a sissy, females will be able to compete with the male gender.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

CRJ #3 - Gender and Science

There are some people that believe that ideas about gender and sexual behavior are natural and occur because of one’s predetermined genetic, biological and physiological make-up. Carol Vance argues that this idea must not be accepted and that we need to understand that ideas about gender and sexuality are “social constructions”. This means that there are external influences from society which shape how one perceives gender and sexuality. Cultural context changes throughout history and through cultural classes so one needs to understand that these different aspects will have an affect on how people react to gender and sexuality. In contrast to Vance’s beliefs, essentialists believe that one’s behavior is completely independent of time and space. They believe that if a person is to be homosexual this is because he or she was born that way. This is based on the theory of biological determination defined as the belief that biology determines fundamentally all behavior and actions (pg 32). A large framework for essentialists’ beliefs is based upon the natural, unchanging influence of one’s genes. Essentialists believe that genes are in a way in control of a person, and this seems logical since there is so much science backing the notion. We are basically slaves to the preferences and sexual desires that are concreted into our genes. They also believe the fact that any sexual behavior we exhibit must be based upon “an expression of an underlying human drive or tendency. Behaviors that share an outward similarity can be assumed to share an underlying essence and meaning” (pg 29). This is to say that our behaviors are not readily shaped through cultural interaction, but they are actually a part of our foundation and who we were born as. As opposed to the essentialist view, the social constructionist view is that identical behaviors may have different meanings depending on the type of culture it is taking place in and the historical time. People do not behave in a fixed manner to different sexual acts; a person can also change the way he or she perceives things over time. This is important because “cultures provide widely different categories, schemata, and labels for framing sexual affective experiences…” (30-31”). To say that sex/gender is socially constructed means that there is not a “natural”, hard-wired vision that people have of sex or gender. Cultures throughout the world are so different, that it seems that sex and gender must be interpreted in different manners in different regions. Vance states that “…social construction theory strives for uncertainty through questioning assumptions rather than seeking closure…” (pg 31). This means that the meanings of sex and gender are always being examined because the meanings do change over time and in different regions.

After reading Martin’s article, I was surprised at how blatantly the roles of the egg and sperm have been depicted in society, yet I have failed to realize this. In school I remember learning that the egg was the dormant partner waiting for the diligent sperm to find its way. It seems so odd that this was taught to me in middle school. This is where many children’s beliefs are shaped and they are clearly being introduced to the fact that males are dominant over women. Martin described the negative view of female reproduction and how the eggs “merely sit on the shelf, slowly degenerating and aging like overstocked inventory” (pg 10). It seems almost as if people believe that the woman’s eggs are useless until one day a sperm might decide that the egg is worth the trouble. At some points I did laugh when reading what seemed to be the tales of the sperm and egg; however, it is sad how accurately they depict real life. I was extremely pleased at the positive spin that Martin put on the egg being more efficient than the sperm. It is not the quantity of what one can produce but the quality. She describes how a woman wastes only about 200 eggs for every baby she produces while a man wastes more than one trillion sperm. Men may think this makes them seem macho, but women can just laugh knowing that our system is much better.

Monday, September 10, 2007

Event #1 - Gendered Space in Central Mexico

Making women visible: Gendered space in fiesta food preparation in central Mexico
September 5, 2007
223 Engel Hall

Dr. Maria Elisa Christie presented her findings of an 11 month field study in three Mexican towns: Tetecala, Ocotepec, and Xohimilco. Her research consisted of qualitative methodology (i.e. participant observation, interviews, progressive contextualization, etc) in order to determine how men and women relate to food preparation within the society. She actually worked in the gardens with the women and helped wash dishes after fiestas. She mainly discussed Feminist Political Ecology dealing with gendered knowledge and gendered space. The results of her studies showed an extremely close relationship between women and the environment. This closeness means that changes in the environment greatly affect women’s lives. Abundant food will mean the women are happy and have easier days, while deforestation leads to long, hard days with little findings. Most of the focus was placed on women’s relationship to food preparation with minimal details on men’s relationship. The resounding outcome was that women of Mexico are becoming extremely affected by degraded environment. Looking at the landscape, a distinct difference could be seen between where men and women worked. Men worked in large fields in the front of lots, while women worked in small gardens hidden behind the house. Women also showed a greater knowledge of food preparation especially when determining food quality. As an example, Maria discussed that when purchasing hicuma the best quality hicuma is the one that is cracked and full of dirt. This means that they are actually so sweet that they are bursting with flavor. Many people, especially men, would not know this and would thing this hicuma was bad.

I found some connections between the event and our class. When discussing where the genders where located on the landscape, it is obvious that the men are out in front to be seen while the women are hidden from the public eye. The kitchen is the main sector that women are in charge of. It is believed that this is where the reproduction of culture and society occurs. Women must figure out how to feed their families here and also it is where young people learn about life, especially for girls to learn about cooking. Also, I found out that women are not allowed to ride bicycles in Mexico. They are allowed to walk beside a bike while pushing it; however, men are the only sex able to actually ride the bike. I saw this as a clear example that sexism is also prevalent in Mexican societies.

I was somewhat surprised by the event because at one point Maria scolded western feminists for critiquing how women in Mexico live. She said that these feminists urge women to get out of the kitchen and into different jobs. Maria declared, “The fact is that women spend a lot of time there and if you want to understand Mexico you must look at the kitchen.” Mexican women are proud of their kitchens and understand that their work there is extremely important to the Mexican societies. Everyone works together in the kitchen and the women are not in isolation as feminists believe. I think the event actually confused me more than taught me. It seemed the presentation was not very organized and contradicted itself in many areas. Although it was interesting to learn about the Hispanic culture, I look forward to learning more in another event.

Friday, September 7, 2007

CRJ #2 - White privilege and its effects

Most people from the American culture are extremely aware of their image and will not support any idea that may put them in a negative spotlight. I think it is easier to grant that others are disadvantaged than to admit being over privileged because it is easier to show pity for others than to admit that that one has unearned advantage. By only focusing on the disadvantaged people take scrutiny, a dangerous situation for one’s image, off of themselves and direct people’s attention to trying to help the disadvantaged. I also think that through history, the proud American has had to endure a time of struggle before working hard enough to succeed. Many people want to feel that they also have had this hard life and had to overcome many obstacles to come out on top; it seems a part of American tradition. If one were to acknowledge that he or she is over privileged than this romanticized image of a hard-working American could not be true.

I actually didn’t believe the idea of being over privileged myself until reading McIntosh’s article where she describes some of the daily effects of white privilege in her life. I agree with her that “whites are carefully taught not to recognize white privilege” (pg 91) so I think people need to be understanding of the fact that whites truly do no know, but whites need to begin to acknowledge it. McIntosh describes this white privilege as an, “invisible package” because it holds countless advantages which whites are aware of but pretend not to be. Other races can see this package and know that it is full of unearned assets and they are likely not to receive a similar box. Most times when I think of privilege I think about the privileges afforded to me as a woman over men. Things as simple as not paying a cover charge when I go out or getting extra help from the operators when I worked at a refinery. I do recognize that it is a privilege; however, I don’t think it gives women an edge over men. I think male privileges such as higher pay and quicker promotions have a much greater impact on moving them up in society.

I think most people pretend to be unaware of white privilege because they want themselves and others to believe that the only reason for their economic success is because they pulled themselves of by their bootstraps. This myth portrays that success is “a result of hard work and ambition and asserts that people, if properly motivated and willing to work hard, can pull themselves up by their bootstraps” (pg 70). People want others to think they worked hard to achieve success and not that it was simply handed to them on a silver platter. This myth insinuates that people that are not as successful must have some deficiency and causes people to overlook the fact that there are “societal forces that shape people’s existence and maintain classism” (pg 70). Society uses this myth to justify that since all people have the possibility to reach the same level, the only reason for not reaching that level is not trying hard enough. This prejudice is able to perpetuate because society internalizes oppression. Shaw and Lee describe, “Internalizing oppression means that we not only police ourselves but also police one another, encouraging compliance with institutions that may oppress” (pg 71). The effect of this is that it will cause many people to gang up against a certain target group and even encourage or justify hostility towards the group.

One group that experiences much aggression is the homosexuals. Society sets the norm that all people should be heterosexual; if they are not, then society has a fear and hatred for their homophobic sexual desires. Lesbians are perceived as someone who has denied sexual and economic dependence on a man. Therefore, a lesbian “is perceived as a threat to the nuclear family, to male dominance and control, to the very heart of sexism” (pg 88). This explains the close relationship seen between sexism and homosexuality. It seems to almost force people to accept and become heterosexuals; otherwise, you do not fit in with society. Being named a lesbian threatens all women mostly because of lesbian baiting. Pharr explains, “Lesbian baiting is an attempt to control women by labeling us as lesbians because our behavior is not acceptable, that is, when we are being independent…any woman who steps out of role risks being called a lesbian” (page 88). A lesbian cannot be physically identified, so women cannot deny or confirm being a lesbian from a physical inspection. This portrays why many people equate the words feminist and lesbian. Lesbians and feminists are both seen as those who deny the necessity of men and therefore are a threat to male dominance; to some people this makes them one in the same.

Wednesday, September 5, 2007

Activity #4 - "A Girl Like Me"

As I continue to progress through the beginning of this course, I realize how naïve I am to the vast amount of biases that still exist within society. It seems so many strives have been made to eliminate these stereotypes; however, they are still there disparaging people every day. It is especially shocking to see the effects that they have upon innocent children. I had never actually heard of the doll test, but after seeing the results from the new test I see that children are extremely affected by stereotypes. The video taught me that the concept of “race” appears to decrease the self-worth in children whether they are aware o f it or not. After I saw the children continuously choose the white doll as the “nicer” doll, I thought that maybe that is what they believed the white dolls looked liked themselves. I couldn’t believe when most of them actually selected the black doll, the “meaner” doll, to describe which doll looked most like them. I’m not sure if the children actually understood that they were relating themselves to the doll which they selected as the inferior doll; however, it did prove that they had learned to place the black doll below the white doll. It was extremely unsettling to see children that can’t even understand the concept of race actually identifying with the stereotypes involved with it.

What is even scarier is that people must have acted racially towards the black children or their families in order for the children to think that they should place black people below white people. They are being molded to accept that they will always be looked down upon, which is completely wrong. Skin color and hair texture should in no way determine a person’s value in the world. The different characteristics between us should be what we are proud of and what makes us shine. Children need to learn this early, so that they understand they don’t have to fit any standard in society. The only way to hinder these thoughts from coming to children is to not put them before their eyes in the first place. In order to do this, society needs to change what it sets as the “mythical norm” for people in society.

After completing the readings, I feel a very simple description of the “mythical norm” is a white male. Although this is over exaggerating the idea, I think it helps spells out just how excluding the standards of the norm are. In order to describe a female “mythical norm”, Shaw and Lee characterize her as “White, middle-class, heterosexual, abled, thin, and a young adult” (pg 60). After reading that simple statement, I thought “Are you crazy!?!?” But I quickly realized that those are many of the standards that I try to hold myself to; I am in fact trying to attain this mythical normalcy. In fact it seems so obscure to title this a “norm” when in reality there are not many people who can even come close to this. The term “mythical norm” is so ironic, one would think that them women of society would scoff at it; however, I find myself having it as my goal.

The film seemed to illustrate that the meaning that has come to be associated with difference is ugly. One girl even claimed that, “I use to think of myself as being ugly, as being dark-skinned.” People want to fit in so much that they use bleaching creams, chemical straighteners, and many more obscure means that seem ridiculous when viewing them from the outside. Yet, I know when I’m in the same position that I go to the same extremes. And it is not only black people that deal with trying to reach society’s norm. The film portrayed white women as trying to overcome the stigma of being conceited or weak. The book describes white privilege as the “invisible package of unearned assets that White people can count on cashing in every day” (pg 62). I think the author should have titled this white male privilege. The film does focus on the fact that black people do fall far behind white people in privilege; however, I think the film also portrays the fact that white women still fall far behind white men in privilege as well. Society still has many strides to take towards equality, but I think the first step is for us all to understand that we should be embracing our differences.

Monday, September 3, 2007

Activity #3 - Tolerance.org tests

I completed three IATs to determine hidden biases that I may exhibit, and the following are the results:

  • Family – Career IAT : Little or no association between Male and Female with Career and Family
  • Fat – Thin IAT : Moderate automatic preference for thin people compared to fat people
  • Gay – Straight IAT : Little to no automatic preference between straight and gay people

I am always somewhat skeptical about taking online tests; however, I found that the results of these tests seemed quite accurate. I have very liberal views so I am extremely supportive of gay rights and women’s rights. I was proud to see that the results of my IATs showed that I had no preference between gays and straights or male and female with career and family. Although I am very supportive, I do not feel that I attempt to side with homosexuals or women over heterosexuals and men so I was glad to see that I didn’t show a strong preference for women or gay people either. I am not as proud as the results for my Fat – Thin IAT; however, I believe the results do reflect my beliefs. I have always played sports throughout my life, so I am used to being around people that are in shape. This usually means I’m around more thin people. Although I do not express an outward biased against fat people, I do believe that my past experiences may have instilled a hidden bias.

After completing the second assigned reading, I was somewhat annoyed by the extent of the –isms that were discussed, especially dealing with age and disability. I thought, “Who really would think or do those things?” After completing the IAT on weight, I realized if I had read an article discussing the biased against fat people before taking the test I probably would have been thinking the same thing. Now I know that I do reflect some of those feelings that I had been quite skeptical about. I think this was the main purpose of opening the Women’s Studies course with the IATs. Many people are apt to brush off much of the information in the readings believing it doesn’t really reflect the majority of society; however, now I know that the readings do reflect my beliefs and I can learn from this course.

After completing the IATs I think that others may learn that they have hidden biases as well. After seeing actual test results that showed I had a hidden bias, I am able to confront the issue straight on. I think this testing product will enlighten others to my same feelings. I do realize, though, that the IATs are not completely accurate so people should not be upset if they see they show an extreme preference towards a bias. The tutorial even specifies that it has not been firmly established whether laboratory studies “adequately reflect real-life situations”. So the tutorials do hide the extent to which one displays his or her bias. What people should learn is that they may in reality hide this bias to some extremity and it should be analyzed.

It is important to think about our prejudices and biases because they reflect on our beliefs whether we realize it or not. The tutorial states that “studies show a link between hidden biases and actual behavior”. I may have unknowingly put down a fat person without even realizing it, and I do not want that to reflect upon my character. Some may believe that their prejudices are acceptable; however, that decision is dependent upon the person. Even though the tutorial explains that a prejudice can be positive, I personally feel that the term carries a very negative connotation and therefore no prejudice is acceptable. A prejudice involves creating an opinion about many people, and I think that people are so different there is no way one characterization of a group describes all the people involved. I do not want to be stereotyped, therefore I do not feel it is right to stereotype others. I think I may have chosen the weight IAT because truly I did know I had a slight issue with fat people, and I wanted to see how the test categorized my belief. Now that I see that I do show a bias towards fat people, I will be able to work on changing the negative attitude I have created against them.