I would have to agree with Natalie, that I would be extremely angry if I could not get my voice heard just because I was a women. Especially, when this "New Left" was formed, which "dedicated itself to equal justice for all." However, multiple times DuBois points out that few men would stick up for the women members, the women "were seriously reprimanded by their abolitionist brothers." The most appalling part about DuBois's article is when Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Caady Stanton were sent along with other male abolitionists to Britain to attend the World Anti-Slavery Convention. However, upon arrival the British were offended, thus Mott and Stanton were not allowed to attend. To make matters worse, well at least in my eyes, was the fact that the majority of the male abolitionists would not stand up for the women, despite advocating the same purpose. Another quote from DuBois that caught my attention is "they (the women) had been literally abandoned by the most radical political movement of the day." If a movement can forget about members who helped just as much as any other member, just because they are women, then I agree with the women that it was time for them to separate and begin fighting by themselves.
The Declaration of Sentiments from the Seneca Falls Convention states "the history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman." This line is basically what DuBois was describing in her article. Time and time again men would use women to help their cause, but when it came time to to help women they were no where to be found. Another line I thought was interesting was "in the covenant of marriage, she is compelled to promise obedience to her husband." I may be wrong, but for some reason I believe this aspect still holds true in legal matters today. Sometimes when a women is trying to accuse her husband of some injustice, she is not allowed to use information he told her in a private discussion. Reading the above line in the Sentiments caused me to instantly think about today's world and private conversations between a married couple.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
The Fight For Political Equality
Throughout history women have been struggling to obtain equal political rights with men. In her article, Ellen DuBois explains that both the first and second wave of feminism were brought about when, " a feminist upsurge was initiated by women who had attempted to function politically in the major reform movements of their days, and had found that because they were women, they would be unable to do very much at all." How frustrating would it be if you were a woman seeking to obtain better rights for all women when at the same time you could not even get your voice heard for the simple fact that you were a woman. Even when women were granted positions in the political field, they were given jobs that had nothing to do with decision making, jobs described as "shit work". Women were forced to do all the dirty work behind the scenes while men were making the decisions and taking all the credit for it.
Women also found themselves jumping on board with various movements that they hoped would help them gain political equality with men, but in nearly every case, they put in all the effort and got no reward. For example, women who were working for equal rights during the civil rights and peace movements banned together and joined a group called the New Left. This group claimed that they would be putting every aspect of the American society under intense scrutiny and would be dedicated to achieving equal rights for all people. Women were hoping that by joining this movement they could put an end to the sex-role stereotypes that were affecting their lives during this time, but in the end the stereotypes became worse and women were still struggling to be seen as equals.
The first wave of feminism also saw a lot of women joining in on abolitionsism. While they had a lot of important things to say, they were once again silenced by the male population. Women were expected to conduct themselves in "proper feminine behavior", and therefor leave the "real work" to the men. Women were contantly promised that they would get equal rights but the promises always fell through. When the 14th ammendment rolled around women noticed how much trouble they were in because they were now being discriminated against on a national level. Women then realized that if they ever wanted reform it would have to be done by the work of a woman, and not a man.
The work that took place at the Seneca Falls Conference in 1848 directly ties into DuBois article because the conference was founded by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott, two of the most powerful women abolitionists that were silenced during the First wave of feminism. These women worked together and set up a the first ever conference for women to talk about their issues and rights that they would wish to obtain. From this conference came The Declaration of Sentiments which was signed by sixty-eight women and thirty-two men, stating the ways in which women had been discriminated against in their time.
Finally, the piece Ain't i A Woman, by Sojourner Truth spoke the most to me. Men believed that women were these dainty objects that needed to be taken care of and that could do nothing on their own. Just because a woman is strong does not make her less of a woman. Just because a woman is as smart as a man does not make her less of a woman. In my opinion, the most powerful part of her speach was when she said, "If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down all alone, these women together ought to be able to turn it back, and get it right side up again! And now they is asking to do it, the men better let them."
Women also found themselves jumping on board with various movements that they hoped would help them gain political equality with men, but in nearly every case, they put in all the effort and got no reward. For example, women who were working for equal rights during the civil rights and peace movements banned together and joined a group called the New Left. This group claimed that they would be putting every aspect of the American society under intense scrutiny and would be dedicated to achieving equal rights for all people. Women were hoping that by joining this movement they could put an end to the sex-role stereotypes that were affecting their lives during this time, but in the end the stereotypes became worse and women were still struggling to be seen as equals.
The first wave of feminism also saw a lot of women joining in on abolitionsism. While they had a lot of important things to say, they were once again silenced by the male population. Women were expected to conduct themselves in "proper feminine behavior", and therefor leave the "real work" to the men. Women were contantly promised that they would get equal rights but the promises always fell through. When the 14th ammendment rolled around women noticed how much trouble they were in because they were now being discriminated against on a national level. Women then realized that if they ever wanted reform it would have to be done by the work of a woman, and not a man.
The work that took place at the Seneca Falls Conference in 1848 directly ties into DuBois article because the conference was founded by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott, two of the most powerful women abolitionists that were silenced during the First wave of feminism. These women worked together and set up a the first ever conference for women to talk about their issues and rights that they would wish to obtain. From this conference came The Declaration of Sentiments which was signed by sixty-eight women and thirty-two men, stating the ways in which women had been discriminated against in their time.
Finally, the piece Ain't i A Woman, by Sojourner Truth spoke the most to me. Men believed that women were these dainty objects that needed to be taken care of and that could do nothing on their own. Just because a woman is strong does not make her less of a woman. Just because a woman is as smart as a man does not make her less of a woman. In my opinion, the most powerful part of her speach was when she said, "If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down all alone, these women together ought to be able to turn it back, and get it right side up again! And now they is asking to do it, the men better let them."
Monday, January 25, 2010
Second Wave Feminisim: From Housewife to Education, to Sexual Liberation
During the 1950s and 60s, women were expected to find a man, get married, have childen, and become a housewife. It was unthought of for a woman to go to college and recieve a higher education. Women finally had equal rights as men, such as the right to vote, and had come a long way since the beginning of the century. They could focus on domestic work now right? I thought about the popular television show I Love Lucy. If you watched the show, you will note that Lucy aspired to be in show business, and tried on countless occassions to enter into the business, but her husband Ricky would have no such thing. Instead he wanted Lucy to be a housewife and Lucy would always conform to his demands. Yet, in real life, Lucy or Lucille Ball was one of the most powerful women in Hollywood. If you watch the show you can't help but laugh. However it does bring into prospective a lot about what Schneir discusses. Why is it that Lucy, one of the most powerful women of Hollywood, was resorted to playing a housewife of whom was demanded to please her husband? Why is it that her power in show business is never brought to light but remained hidden behind the role of the housewife?Shneir brings up many of the qualms that women had with their housewife role, thus challenging its fulfillment of the women's lives. It was clear that while women had come a long way since the beginning of the century, they were still greatly opressed by men and constructed gender roles.
Adrienne Rich takes on a different angle of women empowerment. In her essay she challenges women to strive for an education. She challenges the housewife to do more than just get married and take care of the children. She argues that women have a right to claim education. They are rightful owners to it. Here we second wave feminism taking a new route: education. Educaiton would help give women the edge up they needed in the world. They could finally look further than just being a housewife; they could have a future. It wouldn't be (and still isn't) easy though. Sexism was (and is) still in strong force and the idea of women recieving higher edcuation was still a daring notion at the time. However, we find women of Rich's era being more outspoken about than the women of Schneir's era. Women were finally beginning to challenge the gender roles established in the 1950s and 60s.
Finally, we come to Levy. She mainly discusses sexual liberation for women. As throughout much of her book thus far, Levy has pointed out countless of evidence that point out the sexual explotation that women are subject to today. She mentioned Playboyand Hugh Heffner. While Hugh considers himself a feminist because he supports abortion and the sexual freedom of women, he, at the same time exploits them and contradicts himself. I belief that second wave feminism is now turning to the fight for true sexual equality today. All around us we see the sexual explotation of women in the media, publications, and day to day interactions. Here at Colgate, on any given Friday or Saturday night, you will see girls dressed in dressed that are way above their knees and heels that give make them 2 feet taller going to the Jug in 5 degree weather. You will see men the jug feeling and groping on these women who often do the best that they can to get attention from the men. While many may argue that women have gained sexual liberation, it is clear to see that they haven't and viewed as sexual beings for men.
Adrienne Rich takes on a different angle of women empowerment. In her essay she challenges women to strive for an education. She challenges the housewife to do more than just get married and take care of the children. She argues that women have a right to claim education. They are rightful owners to it. Here we second wave feminism taking a new route: education. Educaiton would help give women the edge up they needed in the world. They could finally look further than just being a housewife; they could have a future. It wouldn't be (and still isn't) easy though. Sexism was (and is) still in strong force and the idea of women recieving higher edcuation was still a daring notion at the time. However, we find women of Rich's era being more outspoken about than the women of Schneir's era. Women were finally beginning to challenge the gender roles established in the 1950s and 60s.
Finally, we come to Levy. She mainly discusses sexual liberation for women. As throughout much of her book thus far, Levy has pointed out countless of evidence that point out the sexual explotation that women are subject to today. She mentioned Playboyand Hugh Heffner. While Hugh considers himself a feminist because he supports abortion and the sexual freedom of women, he, at the same time exploits them and contradicts himself. I belief that second wave feminism is now turning to the fight for true sexual equality today. All around us we see the sexual explotation of women in the media, publications, and day to day interactions. Here at Colgate, on any given Friday or Saturday night, you will see girls dressed in dressed that are way above their knees and heels that give make them 2 feet taller going to the Jug in 5 degree weather. You will see men the jug feeling and groping on these women who often do the best that they can to get attention from the men. While many may argue that women have gained sexual liberation, it is clear to see that they haven't and viewed as sexual beings for men.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Sex, Girls Gone Wild, and Katie Couric
I was completely fascinated and educated after reading the first two sections of Ariel Levy's book. While it is no surprise to me that sex as become a big part of today's pop culture and that women are often the victims of this sex culture, I was shocked at the fact that many people would argue that the vagrant display of nude women in today's media and publications is evidence that women have finally gained as much power as men. Levy really did job at offering compelling evidence to support her argument that we still have a long way to go in the feminist movement. I found it particularly interesting at the fact that Olympian female athletes who have gold medals pose nude in male publications and that this is viewed as women empowerment. Personally, I feel like this was done to bring out the "femininity" of the female athletes. Furthermore, I was better educated on how Girls Gone Wild exploits the sexuality and bodies of women. I mean, I have seen the infomercials before on late night television. However, I honestly never thought anything of it....I figured these girls new what they were doing and so be it. However, after reading what really goes on behind the scenes, I am compelled to move in a new direction of thinking. These girls are not making an conscious choice to show there breasts and privates on camera to millions of strangers that they will never meet...they are being coerced to do it....and for what...a hat?! Then there are the girls who merely do it out of peer pressure from men and other girls. It was all very enlightening. Levy went on to argue that even women of great power, like Katie Couric, are even seen as sexual objects. The fact that she made was made to a sexual object on the Leno show in order to prove her power, depsite the fact that she is the the highest paid and one of the most powerful news reporters in the US, causes me (and should really cause others) to question if we are really pass the w omen's rights issue. Women aren't sexual objects that should be drooled over...there human beings. And if I see a GGW camera man near my daughter, I will punch him dead in the face.
Follow up: Responding to Marissa's Post
The issue brought up in Ariel Levy's Female Chauvinist Pigs about female Olympic athletes using their bodies as sex icons is very disturbing to me. I remember when i was younger I would watch the Olympics and dream about being as talented as the women that were competing. After reading the first two sections of this book and also reading Marissa's blog post, I decided to see what I could find about this issue online. The article, which can be found at http://www.maxim.com/girls/girls-of-maxim/44041/worlds-hottest-olympians.html#6, entitled "The World's Hottest Olympians", was produced by Maxim and is directly related to what Levy was talking about in her book. The subtitle for this article stated, "These 11 women could medal in any aesthetic competition. They might even make you almost care about the Olympics." Almost care about the Olympics??? Being able to compete in the Olympics is the highest achievement that any athlete, female or male, could even hope to accomplish. Even without risque pictures, this comment does the job of completely degrading the accomplishments that these female athletes have made, and has also helped to portray the Olympics as a showcase of sexual appearance rather than a display of the amazing talent that these athletes possess. One such Olympic athlete, Amanda Beard, known for being a seven-time swimming Olympic medalist, can be found posing nude in pictures that have been plastered across the Internet, magazines, and posters.
(www.prosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/amanda20beard.jpg)
When people look at this picture they do not see an Olympic athlete. They do not see a woman who has made a living busting her ass to get where she is today. They see another pretty face. Another attractive body. Pictures like these don't only have an affect on the adult population, but also young women who could have looked up to her for her success in the pool. After seeing pictures like this, those young women, who could have had a potential career becoming successful swimmers and athletes, will now strive to have the physique and sexual appeal that their role model has. No longer will they look up to her for her talents, they look up to her because society has made it clear that her body is the icon of "sex appeal".
-Natalie
(www.prosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/amanda20beard.jpg)
When people look at this picture they do not see an Olympic athlete. They do not see a woman who has made a living busting her ass to get where she is today. They see another pretty face. Another attractive body. Pictures like these don't only have an affect on the adult population, but also young women who could have looked up to her for her success in the pool. After seeing pictures like this, those young women, who could have had a potential career becoming successful swimmers and athletes, will now strive to have the physique and sexual appeal that their role model has. No longer will they look up to her for her talents, they look up to her because society has made it clear that her body is the icon of "sex appeal".
-Natalie
The Rise of Raunch Culture
All I can say is "WOW!" after reading the first two sections in Ariel Levl's Female Chauvinist Pigs. I never considered today's mainstream portrayal of women in this way before. Well I always thought there were "those" women in our country, but I would have never considered Katie Couric's revealing dress as a way of her showing everyone that she has made it today. This along with female Olympians baring all in magazines is supporting the notion that "it is not enough to be successful, rich and accomplished" woman (pg. 33), more is needed in order to be apart of today's mainstream culture, raunch culture. "Trading up" was a reason proposed by Levy for why Olympians decided to pose nude because porn is a greater part of today's culture. But no male Olympians have done so. Why is this the case? Could it be the fact that we as a culture value male athletes more? Or are female athletes considered masculine and unwomanly? Thus by posing nude, they are displaying the female body for all it is worth.
Levy mentioned that feminsim has been achieved as shown by the emergence of raunch culture. However, this statement from her introduction seems contradictory to the purpose of the feminism movement. Instead of gaining equality to men, women have degraded themselves by displaying their bodies in such a way, so they can be viewed as sex symbols. I believe this is the opposite of what women need. We need to be seen as equals to men, not more inferior, especially since Christie Hefner, CEO of Playboy, said that male nudity is not acceptable, well males feel uncomfortable posing. "How is resurrecting every stereotype of female sexuality that feminism endeavored to banish good for women?" (pg. 4) This question posed by Levy caught my eye because I think she has a good point and foreshadows the rest of the book, which seems like it will discuss different circumstances when women showcased their sexuality. What do you think? Also do you think this culture represents what women have already achieved or what there is still to gain? But if our culture was the opposite of today's and instead of a Girls Gone Wild crew traveling around spring break destinations there was a Boys Gone Wild show, would this completely change how everything is looked at? I think so. Would men be more "comfortable" with them selves? All of this embarrassment women are subjected to if they fail to please an audience of Girls Gone Wild is crap! You may be the most confident and comfortale person in your own skin, but still refuse to participate. Maybe you just don't want to encourage this type of behavior and be stereotyped as a slut.
The last thing I found interesting was the fact that many women partcipate in encouraging other women to act in a sexual way. For example, Liest, the Girls Gone Wild tour manager responded to friends saying GGW is degarding to women, by it is ok when girls offer to act this way. This comment just encourages more of this behavior to occur. What do you think about how Leist answered her friends?
Levy mentioned that feminsim has been achieved as shown by the emergence of raunch culture. However, this statement from her introduction seems contradictory to the purpose of the feminism movement. Instead of gaining equality to men, women have degraded themselves by displaying their bodies in such a way, so they can be viewed as sex symbols. I believe this is the opposite of what women need. We need to be seen as equals to men, not more inferior, especially since Christie Hefner, CEO of Playboy, said that male nudity is not acceptable, well males feel uncomfortable posing. "How is resurrecting every stereotype of female sexuality that feminism endeavored to banish good for women?" (pg. 4) This question posed by Levy caught my eye because I think she has a good point and foreshadows the rest of the book, which seems like it will discuss different circumstances when women showcased their sexuality. What do you think? Also do you think this culture represents what women have already achieved or what there is still to gain? But if our culture was the opposite of today's and instead of a Girls Gone Wild crew traveling around spring break destinations there was a Boys Gone Wild show, would this completely change how everything is looked at? I think so. Would men be more "comfortable" with them selves? All of this embarrassment women are subjected to if they fail to please an audience of Girls Gone Wild is crap! You may be the most confident and comfortale person in your own skin, but still refuse to participate. Maybe you just don't want to encourage this type of behavior and be stereotyped as a slut.
The last thing I found interesting was the fact that many women partcipate in encouraging other women to act in a sexual way. For example, Liest, the Girls Gone Wild tour manager responded to friends saying GGW is degarding to women, by it is ok when girls offer to act this way. This comment just encourages more of this behavior to occur. What do you think about how Leist answered her friends?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)