In a quick review of student posts thus far, I wanted to give prominance to the standpoints and differentiation which is occuring as students give voice to self and community identifications.A NOTE TO THE VIEWER: Students in the WST200 course come into the class with very little critical preparation of historical processes and movements of the 20th century, much less U.S. history, or the history of U.S. foreign policy. However, in this course, they are mandated to learn fundamental theories and literatures of 'gender and power', through the matrix of race, class, sexuality, labor, migration, militarism, family, religion, and empire. The students work below reveals certain standpoints which students struggle to voice and certain resistances to applying critical theories required of the course syllabus, which are general applications in the fields of Social Sciences, Gender Studies, Critical Race, etc. Note the leaning toward 'opinion' in several posts, rather than a critical weighing in directly to the theoretical positions and historical contexts of readings assigned. This is a sampling of writing from students in the complex (and exicting!) struggle to use the tools, not merely critique,avoid, disavow the ones which are in conflict/contradiction to their personal values. At this point, students will be increasingly challenged to pick up the tools provided to them, as if they were 'microscopes, petri dishes, beakers,' --the stuff of 'evidentiary scientific laws' which they do not question in the context of a 'science lab.' They will be further challenged to confront critically the personal and group resistances to the sciences, methods and theories of gender, race, sexuality, systems, and histories of oppressed communities and polities.
RACHEL JONES:
When I first looked over the Declaration of Independence this semester I noticed a few things. Men is capitalized "all men are created equal" When you scan the document all you see is "He" Words like War, Alliance, Commerance all remind me of men. Why is this? Is this because the very men that wrote this and founded our country established these ideas for me? Another question I had "Is there gender unity when they say "we" and and speak of the people of the colonies? As we discussed the reading in class more ideas formed for me. I now believe that there was no gender unity when the word "we" is discussed. We was meant for the colonies. Not involved in that we were slaves, indigenous, poor, children, women, elders, impaired and some men. Immediately I think "Great, my founding fathers did not want me to be apart of this nation."
KELLEY O'BRIEN:
It’s sickening to me that people actually have an incentive to continue inequality; that injustice pays. Maybe that’s nothing new. Again, it seems to go back to these white men in corporations and all they want is to make money without regard to whom they hurt. They spend so much money to paint their victims as the people who have something wrong with them, when the problem originates with them. But they make it so they never have to answer for it, and the political deck is stacked in their favor. Like the book says, we should be asking “what kinds of families produce CEOs and government officials who make decisions that cost the lives of hundreds, sometimes thousands of people?” And maybe I would add my own question to that: Why don’t people question what’s going on around them? The more I think about it, the more I feel like the people in the location I grew up in, mostly white, Christian and middle class, have no idea or don’t care what’s going on. They have their own idea of why things are happening; they’re convinced it’s because people are losing their moral grounding in God.
BRITTANY RICHARDSON:
According to the reading, Americas use the most water at a huge amount of 585 liters per day. Comparing this to europeans at say around 300 on average, this is a huge difference between two industrialized countries or groups of countries. So my question is, where is all this water going to? This is not even to mention some of the poorest people in the world who only use between five and thirty liters per day, and most of them have to walk miles and miles a day to get it from a watering hole, or if they are lucky, a local pump. I feel that since water is a non renewable resource and probably the most important necessity to survive that water should be payed for. But, because not everyone can pay for water and it is necessary, like I said to survive, the United Nations and World Bank should look greatly into finding the amount of water necessary in liters per person, per day for a person to live compfortably.
HILDEGARDE VELASCO:
I kind of can't help that I'm so prone to gendering. I think it's become sort of automatic for most people. It's what we've been taught and what we've grown up with. I know many have had the experience of being told that they are not acting like their gender. For me, my mom would often tell me "That's unladylike, stop it" when I was doing something she perceived as "tomboyish". In the Lorber piece, she refers to gender as a "social instution". This social institution is quite oppressive in itself. Lorber writes: "In social interaction throughout their lives, individuals learn what is expected, see what is expected, act and react in expected ways, and thus simultaneously construct and maintain the gender order." (pg. 25)
What is the keyword throughout this particular idea? Expected.
AMBER MCGUIRE:
Jews in the U.S. (1994/5755)
Personally, the concept of race to me has always been based on a scientific perspective, and because of that, I have always believed that race is due to a gene line. Therefore I do not necessarily agree that a type of religion should be considered a race. However, for this piece, I will go ahead and consider it a race while keeping my own thoughts and feelings about it. Throughout the article many of my own views were challenged, and I have to say, I disagreed with many aspects of it, and am partially disappointed with the piece in general. Besides claiming that Judaism is a race, I disagree with the claims that everyone hates Jews, that they are seen as “different,” and that they have to fear being who they are.
JESS MOORE:
Is it ‘fair’ to compare the sacrifices mothers make raising their children to the sacrifices men in the military make in times of war and peace? Why?
Is it ‘fair’ to ask our government for more support in raising our families (like the support offered by European countries)? Why?
As Crittenden states: “The Mommy Tax is obviously higher for well educated higher income individuals and lowest for poorly educated people who have less potential income to lose.” This makes me feel like Americans have a hard time looking beyone their immediate circumstances. I feel that it is pretty selfish of professional women to complain so loudly about their loss of a pension when other young mothers are struggling to be able to provide the daily necessities for their families. How does this make you feel? How do mothers in different circumstances (say the Octo-mom and Angelina Jolie) cause us to view mothers?
CAITLIN ARATA:
Sanitation Shortfall
In the book The Penguin Atlas of Women in the World, it surprised me that the absence of adequate sanitation affects girls, more so in a negative way, then men and boys. Who would have thought that collecting water is a major factor in the absence of women in school? I never before realized that water/sanitation makes women more susceptable to attacks and how it makes their household work even more arduous and complicated. Their roles are demanding and necessary in order for them and their families to survive, yet, these women are still denied the type of education that men/boys recieve. The importance of their roles are once again over looked.
MICHELE OLSON:
Tough Guise.....
This film is very interesting and brought up many points that people just do not seem to think about when we learn about violence. What I thought was interesting was the point about the media's influence on our impressions from what we read or see on television. I have been trying to find articles that specifically name the victims in the headlines and keep coming up short. I think about the boys that did all the killings and wonder about the victims part and what if they had been nicer people and not have caused so much trouble. Can we blame the schools for not recognizing bullies and noting their aggressive behavior towards the less than average individuals? Or do we blame the parents of the perpetrators for not noticing that their children had an arsenal of weapons and the minds to use it. It is a blame game that has been going on for decades and is not about to stop. I am just glad that Sociologists are looking at the outlying reasons that can be causing our kids to grow up in a not so happy world.
ASHLEY SMITH:
Patriarchal Terrorism
The phrase "patriarchal terrorism" is used by sociologist Michael P. Johnson as a way to conceputalize the violence by male figures in some families. Growing up, my best friend, lets call her Jane, was abused by her father on a daily basis. Being nine, I did not quite understand what the bruises and burn marks meant. As I got older, our famlilies (being military families) and about six months ago, I got a chilling call from my mom. My best friends mother was in the hospital from a deadly beating that she got from her husband. Even to this day, I do not understand how she stayed for those ten years in a relationship that was completely belittling and physically h-armful to both her and her children. While reading Chapter 11: Interpersonal Gender Violence, my complete relationship with Jane and the rest of her family came to mind. The patriarchal terrorism that played out in that family relied heavily on the general idea that you are not suposed to interfere with other people's households. While thinking about why Jane's mother did not leave, I read that minimally, 50% of women in an abusive household leave. The reasons why are definitely hard to pinpoint. But I think the fact that affordable housing today is so hard to find, especially for women, domestic violence (if the woman decides to leave) becomes a cause for homelessness for women, could play a part. I think that if we really wanted domestic violence, and the patriarchal terrorism to end, then we would help those women who put themselves out because they are in danger.
NICHOLAS KLINKE:
Tough Guise
After viewing the film, I had many mixed feelings. At it's core, it's an argument that has been made multiple times in multiple formats. The media image of men and maleness that dominates our culture is hardly realistic, but the idea behind the ideal man has been around for the ages across multiple cultures. Would Michaelangelo's David be just as compelling or well received were it not an image of a powerful, well developed male specimen? Probably not, as it's noted for being an image of ideal male form. Who's ideal is that though?
I think that the ideal exists for a reason beyond some marketing campaign or shallow constructions of a powerful minority. There is an underlying psychology behind attraction.
SIERRA SCHALLER:
With America in an Economic Crisis, will Interpersonal Violence Increase?
With the economic crisis at the foot of American society, we have found that it has taken a serious toll on the way people live and function in current society today. Reading about domestic abuse in the American society also brought to mind the movie “Tough Guise”, where Katz analyzed the world of masculinity and what makes a man masculine in American culture. When it comes to poverty in America, there is an obvious connection between living below the poverty line and having an abusive home. The question though is why? The first thought that came to my mind was the value of control in American culture. We live in a society where independence is extremely valued, which is a great gift to many, but at the same time independence can bring on a mind set of needing to be in control of one’s life, one’s own identity and place in society. When one looses that independence, especially when it comes to supporting one’s own family financially, one must depend on others to support their own independence, which means a loss of control of what their life is worth financially. How does one gain control back? As a result of having a violent culture, in terms of proving masculinity and independence, one can regain control if they control someone else’s life, whether that would be physically or mentally. Becoming dependent on others in America is something of humiliation and shame in many families, but why such a negative stigma? The American family is valued for being extremely close and being able to lean on each other in times of struggle, but as Chasin mentions in chapter 11, usually one partner does have the “control” in the household, when it becomes unhealthy.
DUSTIN HALL:
One "white" man's struggle to understand...
LisaNa M. Red Bear’s speech was interesting. It pulled in a lot of different directions. From an art perspective, I respect where she is coming as an artist and understand to some extent the messages behind the work, but I have to say I was not a fan of it aesthetically. For a graduate student, I feel like her work is not up to par to what I’ve seen out of other artists at the same stage in her career. I think her pieces could have been executed a lot better. Her video piece was cool with the face paint, but that was collaboration with another artist. Art critique aside, what she had to say brought up a lot of difficult thoughts for me.
First off, I have to say that it is really hard for me with identify to those who have a native culture. I myself have nothing in my family passed down from any of the various blood lines that have crossed to create us. The largest percentage of my blood is Swiss, but I don’t know the first thing about being Swiss. I know no Swiss history and I don’t know how, why or when my family came to this country. I don’t even have any idea what Swiss food is like except maybe the cheese or the hot chocolate. The only title I have in terms of ethnicity is "white" and there is no culture attached to that. The only culture I somewhat identify with is Gay culture, but that is an entire different sect of what culture is and it certainly isn’t native. What I’m getting at is I guess being so detached makes it hard for me to empathize with the idea of Native American loss.
KAYLEE HARDMAN:
This chapter largely dealt with the prevalence of hate crimes and racial violence throughout time. For the most part, it focused on crime committed by white individuals against black individuals. As I was reading through this chapter, I was thinking to myself, "Have we improved our situation as a collective society?"
The reason why I ask this to myself is that as I read through this, I was wondering whether our society has become less violent towards other races over time. I wonder whether or not different outlets in the media may be encouraging violence in younger and younger people; and even in women. On YouTube, there is a rise in videos of young girls fighting each other, just so they can be seen as tough and hardcore by their peers. What makes women think that they have to be seen in this way? What makes people feel that they need to resort to violence against people they are prejudice against? I think that in the 1960's most people weren't necessarily prejudiced against black people, but it was a social normality that many just blindly accepted.
Posts
