April's Newsflash#2

 Rape as Political Oppression

           In March, Libyan rebels mirrored the activities of many countries in that region and rebelled against their suppressive government.  This government, controlled by Colonol Mummar el-Quaddafi for 42 years, retaliated swiftly and harshly.  American and European forces have since joined in to aide the rebels as the country continues to exist in turmoil and violence (“Libya-Protests and Revolts”).  Splashed across this backdrop is the story of one Libyan woman.  Eman al Obaidi captured the interest of American journalists by forcing her way into the hotel where they were staying screaming that she had been raped by Quaddafi’s men (“Mother of Libyan Woman”). This event elicited a surprising amount of support from her countrymen (Sayah).  Echoing the arguments made by Susan Browmiller in Against Our Wills, her rape has become more than the violation of one woman by a group of males.  It is one of the many rapes that contribute to rape as a culture (Freedman).  This culture of sexual violation walks hand in hand with a culture of political violation – this is why Obaidi’s actions have become a rallying point for her fellow political rebels; we must examine the way culture normalizes both political and sexual oppression in order to move towards overcoming them both.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/28/libya.beaten.woman/index.html

            Brownmiller argues that individual cases of rape such as this one affect not only the specific victims and specific attackers; rape translates into a wider system of terrorization that affects all women.  This is what she means by her famous quote that rape is “A conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear” (Freedman, 312).  Though I disagree with Brownmiller on one point, I do not think that rapists consciously collectivize, I do think that this way of viewing rape is useful.  Its prevalence demands us to examine it as a system not a culmination of individual instances. Brownmiller explains that historically, societies respond to rape victims by silencing them.  The second wave feminist movement began to fight back for all women by breaking this silence.

            Initially government officials scrambled to impose this same silence onto Obaidi.  She entered the hotel seemingly with the intent of gaining aide from the foreign reporters by shouting in English that she had been held for days and repeatedly beaten and raped by 15 men – members of Quaddafi’s regime.  Government officials, security and hotel staff fought to subdue her, forced her into an unmarked vehicle and removed her from the hotel.  CNN cameras containing footage were deliberately smashed.  Officials later reportedly contacted Obaidi’s mother and said that they would release Obaidi if she changed her story (“Mother of Libyan Woman”).  This attempt to silence Obaidi further stabilizes the practice, which feminists battled to unhinge.  Silencing becomes a reality for all women – victims of either the actuality or the fear of rape.   Obaidi took steps to undermine this pressure to be silent by contacting the media.  As her story spreads, she defies her attackers. 

Another common theme of many rape crimes shifts the identity of the victim from accuser to accused (Freedman).  In Obaidi’s case, the four men identified as her alleged attackers have filed a suit against her for slander.  They argue that Obaidi denied them proper rights by going first to the publicity of reporters rather than the police with her allegations.  This is complicated by Islamic law, which prizes and protects the good name of an individual and the family they associate with.  Obaidi’s actions negatively affect not only her attackers but also their families (Feller).  Though this may be the case, these alleged attackers’ actions represent common themes in rape cases where female victims are vilified and seen to be “asking for” or in some way guilty for their own assault (Freedman).  The woman is painted as a malicious individual who either lies about her attack, deserves it, or secretly wants it.

These same characteristics of Obaidai’s and many victims’ rapes echo in the political realm.  For her, political and sexual exploitation intermix.  She describes her attackers not simply as men but as Quaddafi’s men.  This positions her both as a woman and a rebel attacked by men and by Quaddafi respectively.  When officials subdued her in the hotel, one of the hotel staff reportedly yelled “Traitor!” (“Mother of Libyan Woman”).  This language connects Obaidi’s action to the political movement and implies that her actions threaten her country.  She spoke her truth, and since this staff perceived her truth as a threat to Quaddafi’s state, this individual condemned her for it.  Her use of vocal agency had far-reaching political impacts.  It spoke for all women but also for all rebels.

            This can be seen in her countryman’s response.  Following this incident, hundreds of fellow rebels banned together and marched on the city’s courthouse to express their protest of her treatment and to extend support to Obaidi (Sayah).  Though this demonstrates great solidarity for her; it is more than that.  Protesters expressed that this incident shows what they have experienced under Quaddafi’s rule for decades.  This way of interpreting the event positions her experience as an example of exploitation that applies to politics as well.  This connects to an overall theme of feminism throughout the waves.  Often coming out of civil rights movements, one example of freedom inspires women to fight for another.  Feminism seeks freedom from oppression for all – genders, classes, races, sexual orientations, etc.  In this way, rape – a violation of freedom – connects metaphorically with the rape of a country.  Obaidi’s story resonates with the rebels because her experience of oppression mirrors their own.

Every great historical state of oppression – including Quaddafi’s – is characterized by censorship, elimination of critics, distortion of facts through propaganda and scaring citizens into silent submission.  This sounds a lot like the tactics rape culture uses to ensure rapists protection and domination.  Even including propaganda, the array of juicy paperback literature targeted towards women details instances of female rape where the woman secretly wants to be coerced into sexual intercourse.  This creates a world where rape becomes fantasy and rapists fulfill this fantasy rather then violate female autonomy. These are marketed as arousing literature for women.  Similarly, high-end fashion companies depict and glamorize rape scenes under the guise of pushing boundaries.  These boundaries are pushed but not in a way that reveals the true nature of rape.  Instead, similar to political propaganda, these ads and literature distort an issue and create a culture of oppression

An older man pins a woman to the ground while a group of younger men look on.
(http://www.adrants.com/images/dg_girl_down.jpg)

Here a man lies exposed with eyes closed while other clothed men look on.  (http://blog.lib.umn.edu/raim0007/gwss1001/D%26Gadman.jpg)

Rape’s highly symbolic overtones create a way of thinking where oppression – even political oppression – is a crime.  In many ways, this is encouraging.  The Libyan people’s response to Obaidi’s rape shows how people identify with her in the fight against oppression, both sexual and political.  The way this case was handled, however, is discouraging.  The reoccurrence of many classical responses to rape shows how far we still have to go to reach the goal of fighting back (Brownmiller).  Part of the way we can fight back is to end oppression for all.  On a practical level, this means exposing and refusing to accept propaganda that supports any kind of oppression whether it be sexual, political, or otherwise. 

Works Cited

Feller, Ben. "'Gang-raped' Libyan Woman Charged | Herald Sun." Herald Sun | Latest Melbourne & Victoria News | HeraldSun. Herald Sun, 30 Mar. 2011. Web. 31Mar. 2011. <http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/gaddafi-hometown-hit-by-air-raids-as-libya-crisis-continues/story-e6frf7lf-1226030423548>.

Freedoman, Estelle B. The Essential Feminist Reader. The Modern Library: New York.

2007.

"Libya - Protests and Revolts (2011)." World. The New York Times. Web. 28 Mar. 2011.

<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/libya/index.html>.

"Mother of Libyan Woman Who Alleged Rape Says Daughter Still in Custody –

CNN.com." CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. CNN, 28 Mar. 2011. Web. 31 Mar. 2011. <http://www.cnn.com/ 2011/ WORLD/africa/03/28/libya.beaten.woman/index.html>.

Sayah, Reza. "Rally to Support Raped Libyan Women - World News - IBNLive." CNN-

IBN, Live India News, Breaking News, World, Business, Tech, Sports & Entertainment News. CNN, 28 Mar. 2011. Web. 31 Mar. 2011. <http://ibnlive.in.com/news/rally-to-support-raped-libyan-women/147316-2.html>.

Follow up post for 3/31

Eang's discussion of her upbringing shocked me in many ways.  For one thing, her discussion of poverty and harsh immigrant labor centered around Pennsylvania and New Jersey.  I've spent a lot of time in both those states; this made these labor issues even more realistic for me.  She discussed working as a child in blueberry fields.  Though this was not sanctioned by the employer - her parents snuck her and her siblings in - this brought the issue of child labor into a stark reality for me.  I too grew up picking blueberries.  But for me this represents cherished family time and fun excursions not labor.

Mink's article helped me to further understand the tension between classes within feminism - something I still have trouble understanding why it exists.  Mink outlined very clearly that for upper class women working is often the desired privilege while for lower class women not-working, mothering, is the privilege.  This creates a lack of solidarity within the community as welfare issues are not supported the elite women.  Mink argues that mothering should be accommodated for legally and financially.  Though I agree on many levels I do not like Mink's prioritization of women as caregivers.  Though I understand that this often is the case, men can - and I believe should - participate equally in this role.  Mink allows for this by noting that "Men can mother, too" (p. 63).  At first I thought, or father.  But then I realized that mothering and fathering has different implications about roles and level of involvement beyond simply the gender of the actor.  I can understand why Mink would not use father in this instance because it has different implications.  However, I think this is one of the problems, that the work that men and women do in the home is seen as vastly different.  For this reason, I think we should focus analysis on care-giving, not on mothering, and thereby more broadly extend this label to both/all genders and encourage males to participate.

Lead post for 3/27

“Stories from the Sidelines: Career Versus Family” by  Megan Pinand

Pinand discusses her experience as a professional woman who also wanted to maintain a family.  At one point, one of her bosses – a single father – cautioned her that she would not be able to do both.  Pinand pulled against this advice, being frustrated by the fact that men are never asked to choose and working class women are expected to handle both.  This connects to the ways feminism means different things to different classes.  The Betty Friedans were coming more from Pinand’s perspective.  Pinand’s insight here helped me to make sense of the conflict between the classes in second wave feminism.  The middle-to-upper class educated female is under a distinct and different set of pressures when it comes to the family/career choice when compared to her working class counterparts.

Pinand goes on to explain her experience at a new company that was decidedly not female friendly.  There, mothers experienced implicit pressure to not take full advantage of maternity leaves in order to maintain positions and gain promotions.  Though not yet a mother, Pinand plans to be.  She challenges us that larger social change needs to occur.  A necessary shift I see is one that does not simply focus on women as having to make this choice.  If a marriage is a partnership, and the couple has decided earning finances should be as well (ie they both work full-time), raising children should also be a partnership.  Unfortunately, women are still expected to pull much more of the weight when it comes to child-rearing regardless of the extent of their work commitments.

“A General Strike” by Marirosa Dalla Costa

Using strong Marxian rhetoric, Costa argues that the unifying feature of all women is that they do housework.  She argues that this universal quality itself allows housework to be discredited.  She then urges women to strike and demand wages for their work.  I appreciate what she is doing.  I think equally satisfying solutions would be either for husbands to equally share housework or for housework to be completed by whichever member was unemployed as long as the general hour commitments of each partner remained roughly equal.

“The Mommy Tax” by Ann Critenden

Critenden explains that the Mommy Tax is whatever money the mother sacrifices, particularly in terms of wages, with the decision to have a child. She provides a look at the way the French treat mothers; all receive government money and healthcare.  Critenden goes on to compare what women make in comparison to men.  She explains the normal way this statistic is calculated – it considers full-time workers only – and argues that since women overwhelmingly work more part-time positions then men part-time work should be included.  When this is considered, women make 60 cents to the man’s dollar.  This article argues that it is not discrimination in the work place that accounts for this but cultural pressures on women to parent.  Therefore, it is not a women’s issue so much as a mother’s issue.

She later goes on to acknowledge that there is also a daddy tax.  However, she explains this away by saying that it indicates continued sexist discrimination not a move towards equal parenting relations.  Critenden argues that these wage gaps are not due to the time commitment of parenting as much as to unsympathetic employers.  Though assuredly it is both, based on her own calculation of her “tax,” not working was a huge factor.  Not working certainly decreases the amount you would make otherwise regardless for the reason for being unemployed.

I understand some of her argument but key points seem preposterous to me.  Though I can see her argument connecting to Costa’s she does make this explicit.  If we lived in a truly socialist society, perhaps then the government could pay for housework and mothering.  However, as it is, we live in a primarily capitalist society.  I think it unfair to harangue the companies for wanting to pay workers less when workers ask to work less or demonstrate being less committed by working less.  Perhaps push the government to acknowledge mothering as societal work – harping on the companies seems like a poor strategy.

Also, what exactly does she mean by “educated black women face an additional problem- an acute shortage of eligible black men” (page 108)?  Is she implying that black women are not having children because they cannot find eligible husbands who must also be black? Could I possibly be reading that right?  If so, that seems problematic to me – she assumes black women only choose to procreate with black men.

“Maid to Order” by Barbara Ehrenreich

Ehrenreich provides a comprehensive look at paid household work in America.  In many ways, this is exactly what the previous articles are arguing for.  Here however, it carries heavy baggage of ethnic discrimination.  After second wave femnism, many women wanted their husbands to take up some of the housework.  Subsequent malre refusal caused tensions in the marriages.  Rather then addressing this issue, society moved towards the bandaide of hiring a maid.  This creates troublesome relationships between classes and races, relationships of superior and inferior.  Some of this has been combated by the rising use of maid agencies.  This creates a relationship between the customer and the agency and helps to deal with some of these issues that arise from personal maid/mistress interactions. However, these agencies often focus on the cosmetic aspects of cleaning rather on their sterilizing benefits. 

Ehrenreich ends with the lament that this culture creates children who do not know how to clean even for themselves.  In this way, though housework is quantified, it is also made invisible to members of the upper to middle class who employ a maid.  This does little to alleviate the gender, class, and race issues surrounding housework. 

Midterm Paper

Jason Kleinman

Professor Simonson

Introduction to Women’s Studies

March 24, 2011

Perceptions Versus Reality

Sex and the City has done a tremendous injustice to its viewers by making them think that the way that the women are portrayed on the show is the way that all women act and are treated in the real world. The way the four main characters carry themselves, talk, treat men, and conduct their sexual lives is not on par with societal norms. While I’m sure that there are women who fit the exaggerated stereotypes created by Sex and the City, average women do not act and are not treated the way Carrie, Miranda, Samantha, and Charlotte are treated. Additionally, the women in Sex and the City say and do things that may shape viewers opinions about women and life in general. The dialogue in Sex and the City is so fluid and convincing, everything said on the show is taken as part of the societal norm. However, a lot of the things that these characters say are unusual to the real world and need to be looked at with a skeptical eye. Sex and the City was revolutionary for it’s time. It created a world that looked and felt like New York City but was really a fantasy world, one where women ruled supreme and societal norms were ignored.

Sex and the city is the epitome of enlightened sexism. Susan Douglass discusses how some women in our generation believe that feminism is finally unnecessary because women have achieved equality with men. Instead of fighting for equal rights, women can now focus on themselves. The women in Sex and the City do exactly this. They are obsessed with the way they look, their sex life, and the ultimate goal of finding a man to settle down with. Many people who watch this show are completely unaware that these ideals are exactly what some feminists had been fighting against for years. During this time of enlightened, sexism Sex and the City truly made it seem like women had completely overcome sexism and were treated equal to men in all respects. Each woman in the show represented a different way in which women were powerful and equal in society. Carrie is a very successful journalist (sex journalist no less) who has exclusive access to high end clubs and lounges, a sex life that she is mostly in control of, and is an independent woman living in New York City. Miranda is a successful lawyer who is extremely tough, driven, and completely in control of her life and her future. She represented women who are just as successful as men in the workplace. Samantha is the wild and crazy woman of the group. She single handedly made it acceptable, in the eyes of the viewer, for women to talk about sex, masturbation, and to have as many sexual partners as they wanted. Charlotte is the ‘prude’ in the group and prides herself on having monogamous relationships in her search for her one true love. Although this character is unlike the aforementioned tough, independent women, Charlotte represents the women who are empowered by being housewives. Her character compliments the other three women nicely in that she is showing viewers that you can still be equal to men and work in the home. Each of the four characters is the most extreme and generally unattainable version of the women they represent. Growing up with a very successful mother, successful older sisters, and watching Sex and the City, I, amongst millions of other viewers, believed that the four characters in Sex in the City were how all girls in society wanted to act and were treated.

As I grew older I began to realize that the way that Sex and the City characterized women was not completely accurate and was different than the way that most women acted and functioned in society. While I understood that women were completely capable of embodying the personalities and achievements of the four women in the show, I also realized that these were four extreme examples and that the fight for equality for women is nowhere near over. Miranda, for example, would most likely not be making as much money as her male colleagues unless she was an exception to the societal norm. She might be treated differently in the office because she is a woman and she might even have to go out of her way in hopes to avoid stereotypes that women face in the workplace. Carrie would most likely be ridiculed and even persecuted for her sex column instead of being celebrated for it. Men would disapprove of it because it is unladylike and graphic while some women would be offended by it because it is enlightened sexism in its purist form. In the show, none of these observations are made. Charlotte, the ultimate housewife, would definitely be seen by some as a ‘gold-digger’ or a failure. People would say she is dependent and unable to fend for herself without a man. Finally, Samantha is an extreme example of a woman who is open about her sexuality. If the show accurately represented societal norms, many men would see her as a slut. Her open discussions about masturbation and sex would be seen as inappropriate and unladylike.

Additionally, the way that these women interact and carry themselves would definitely be met with much more disapproval in the real world than it is in the fantasy city created on the show. Not to say that any of the societal incongruities are acceptable, but they certainly exist. Seeing all of the discrepancies between the way that the characters are portrayed on the show and the way that women are actually treated in the real world indicates that women really might not have come as far as the media portrays. This media portrayal creates misconceptions about sexism and feminism. Sex and the city does more than create fallacies about women and their position in society. Specific scenes and quotes embedded within the show can shape viewers into thinking that something that is inappropriate and frowned upon by modern culture is societally acceptable, when it is not.

In our society, especially for women, monogamy is considered the more socially acceptable way to engage in sexual relations. However, Samantha says things like, “I think I have monogamy. I caught it from you” or “There isn't enough wall space in New York City to hang all of my exes. Let me tell you, a lot of them were hung”. This completely goes against a societal norm and is considered acceptable in the show. It is also considered less acceptable for women to talk about masturbation. While this might be an unfair double standard, it is a fact in our society. This does not stop any of the four women from talking about masturbation and other scandalous things in public. Finally, any kind of sexual scandal within a business or an office is not typically tolerated. However, in Sex and the City, Samantha can get away with saying, “The bad news is you’re fired, the good news is now I can fuck you”, to her male intern. All of these quotes and examples are inserted into the show so nonchalantly and normally that the viewer is tricked into believing that the world created in the show represents reality.

Sex and the City revolutionized television and the way that women are viewed in society. Unfortunately, the perception created by this show is not at all accurate to how women actually act and are treated in society. Sex and the City is essentially a dream world, set in an existing city, where women are the alpha and anything they say and do is considered acceptable in society. While this is a tactic that was widely used when Sex and the City aired, called enlightened sexism, it was and is incongruent with the way that society actually works. It starts with the personalities, actions, and situations that the four main women find themselves in and is further perpetuated with the conversations that these women have so casually in every episode. While this show revolutionized television and transformed many peoples perception of the empowerment of women, it is completely misleading and inconsistent with societal norms.

Midterm media project

Taylor Swift, Fearless? 

In her book Enlightened Sexism, Susan Douglas explores the way sexism manifests in today’s culture.  She identifies the new archetype of the “sexpert.”  Epitomized by the “Cosmogirl” this woman knows about sex, likes it and publically displays both these qualities.  However, our culture – afraid of a truly liberated woman – only allows this behavior if the sexuality is for male enjoyment (Douglas 157).  Media objects such as Katy Perry and Brittany Spears tend to follow along these lines.  Sexually explicit, they direct that energy to pleasing men.  In this way, these women participate in the system that is patriarchy (Johnson 28).  Possibly unknowingly, they create an image of freedom while simultaneously submitting to the handcuffs.  However, then there is the immensely famous Taylor Swift – delicate, light, and sexually reserved.  Using this platform, Swift also preaches a message of empowerment to her fans (Swift).  However, she too lives within the system.  Her album Fearless (2008) displays how the confines – established by patriarchy – within which Swift operates keep her from fully reaching her goal of empowering young female followers.  Though this manifests differently then with the “sexpert” the principle is the same: women can be free, but only to a point.

http://youthoughtso.com/wp-content/
uploads/2009/03/taylor-swift-fearless-tour.jpg
-> the url for the image.
It is the cover of Fearless

Gleaning from the album title itself, Fearless, Swift creates an image of a strong woman not cowered by being culturally submissive.  Her fans latch onto the phrase and chant it as a rallying cry. The image on the album features Swift with her hair flung back in a glorious halo – an image of abandon, freedom (Swift).  To be fearless truly does liberate.  Especially when viewed in the context of feminism, being fearless enables women to break from the box they historically have been forced into through fear. However, the very first song begins to poison that freedom.  Entitled for the album, this song chants “fearless” ten times in its course.   However, this fearlessness is not something that comes from Swift as an individual; instead, it comes from a boy.  She explains how the first time she experiences fearlessness it came from a male love interest by singing, “You take my hand and drag me headfirst, fearless” (Swift).  Certainly, growing through experiences with others matures us; however, through the song, Swift never gains ownership of this newfound fearlessness.  It hinges on this male’s presence and even his embrace.  She explains becoming “a little more brave” in his arms.  In this way, Swift encourages her fans to be fearless, but her only example of doing so is through a boy.  This promotes dependency not freedom.

The very next song on the album, entitled “Fifteen” carries on these intended, though unachieved, themes of empowerment.  This song counsels young girls entering high school to experiment cautiously.  Swift acknowledges the frailty of many girls self-image at that age and their subsequent dependence on male attention.  She encourages girls to develop their self-identity and gain strength through themselves rather than boys.  This becomes clear in the third verse where she sings, “Back then I swore I was gonna marry him someday/ But I realized some bigger dreams of mine” (Swift).  I argue that these bigger dreams include her singing career.  She places her identity and life’s passion over a male-dependent marriage.  I applaud.  However, though this song’s message about femininity is positive it suffers from implicit cultural baggage.

[<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb-K2tXWK4w>, video for "Fifteen" actual videos    
messed up formatting and obstructed text, links provided]
Through “Fifteen” and its music video Swift reaffirms the narrow cultural image of what a woman should be.  Douglas explains this image to be physically the Victoria’s Secret model body type (Douglas 216).  Except by being comparatively flat-chested, Swift complies to the rest of this script by being extremely thin, white, blond, heterosexual and seemingly of the upper to middle class.  Though I cannot fault Swift for her biology or life’s position, she makes no attempt to broaden this definition of beauty or “normal” identity.  In all of the videos attached to this album, there is only one individual of color (“Love Story”, “Taylor Swift – Change”, “Taylor Swift – White Horse”, “Taylor Swift – Fifteen”, “Taylor Swift – You Belong With Me”).  The video for “Fifteen” shows a private school – a staple of the elite.  All of the women, including the young freshman girls, wear heavy makeup (“Taylor Swift – Fifteen”).  As a white, upper to middle class, conservative girl Swift writes a diary through song (NXTM).  Her fans respond because they can relate.  Whether or not the fans themselves mirror this image, they at least acknowledge it as representative of the American girl and, I fear, aspire to portray it.  Therefore, though “Fifteen” encourages girls to discover their own self-identity, it sends a visual message that narrows what that identity should look like and be.

Deviating from the “sexpert” of modern sexism (Douglas 2010), Swift embodies chastity.  Overwhelmingly, Swift appears in a white dress (NXTM).  This clearly creates a virginal, pure, bride-like image.  In the music videos from this album she kisses only one of her many lovers and even then briefly, and in a reserved no-tongue-visible way.  This combats the “sexpert” who must cater to men to gain the right to be publically sexy.  Our culture, afraid of a truly liberated and empowered woman requires Swift to sacrifice something for her right to be publically reserved.  Douglas explores how sexuality is contingent on male desire (157); Swift does something very similar by apologizing for her freedoms through submission.  She reverts back to the dangerous coupling of abstinence with self-worth and villainizes those that deviate. 

[<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuNIsY6JdUw >, video for "You Belong With Me"]
In the video for another of Fearless’ songs, “You Belong With Me” Swift presents a girl in white in opposition to a girl in red.  She equates being chaste with being nerdy, unpopular and wholesome and being sexy with being popular, unfaithful and cruel.  In the end, purity wins and gets the guy (“Taylor Swift – You Belong With Me”).  This communicates that purity is best and associated with being a “good” person.  In the previously discussed song “Fifteen,” Swift appears in a white dress (shocker) and her best friend, “Abigail,” in darker colors.  The most emotional part of the song centers on this friends’ deflowering when she “gave everything she had to a boy/ Who changed his mind.”  I acknowledge that a boy manipulating a girl to get sex is problematic; however, Swift’s language is as well.  She uses “everything” as a euphemism for vaginal penetration.  Though it may make for better song writing, it clouds the issue and attributes “everything” about a woman to her virginity.  This implies that “Abigail” has nothing now.  I love that Swift encourages girls to be critical of ways that they may be manipulated; unfortunately, she subverts that message by nudging girls back into old models of sexual suppression that equate virginity with self-worth.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vls5WXTusfU>, video for "Love Story"]
Swift uses ancient imagery of love as metaphors through out much of her work.  Most famously, the song Love Story centers on the motif of Romeo and Juliet.  The video shows Swift and her love interest in a modern college setting with a flashback/dream-like insert of them in a romanticized Renaissance world (“Love Story”).  This appeals to young girls and encourages them to look for a prince, someone who will treat them well.  But it also carries baggage.  Here, the princess is stripped of her agency and reduced to “waiting” and in need of “sav[ing].”   At the very end this “Romeo” says to Swift, “I talked to your dad, go pick out a white dress.”  Here, marriage is presented not as the promise of commitment but rather a patriarchal transfer from father to husband and a fashion opportunity.  The same pattern emerges that Douglas points out where women are depicted as wanting men, marriage, shopping and little else.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNbefiTiGB4>, video for "White Horse"]
The song White Horse disguises itself as a challenge to these ideas.  In the video, Swift’s lover betrays her by being involved with another woman (“Taylor Swift – White Horse”).  Here at least, we see some agency; Swift does not give him another chance at the end of the video.  She challenges some of the images upheld in Love Story by stating that “This ain’t a fairytale” and questioning if such idealized relationships can exist in real life.  However, folded into the final chorus it becomes clear, she concludes that the fairytale is possible.  Throughout the song the chorus sings, “Im not a princess.”  It seems as though she’s awakened to reality, but the last chorus declares “I’m not YOUR princess” (emphasis added).  When taken in consideration with the subsequent line “I’m gonna find someone someday who might actually treat me well” it is clear that Swift’s ideal of a prince is still alive and well.  This song still fully supports a white horse simply not when ridden by her current lover who has proven himself to be unworthy of owning her.  And an ownership it would be as the possessive “your” implies.  Her Renaissance view of love is still mired in oppressive systems glossed over with a fairytale sheen.

Taylor Swift represents a unique entity by erring on the side of chaste delicacy rather then in-your-face sexuality.  She strives to bring a message of empowerment to her many adoring, young, female fans.  However, Swift operates within a system (Johnson 28).  Adding a conservative, country veneer to patriarchy, this system encourages certain behaviors and images Swift may not even be consciously aware she is supporting.  Regardless, these images of male-dependent liberation, a narrow concept of beauty, an overemphasis on virginity, and male-centered romance contradict her message of empowerment.  I am not implying that delicate femininity and patriarchal submission are necessarily a package deal; however, they often are, and Swift makes little effort to disentangle the two.  To her credit, she does end Fearless with a non-romantic song with spiritual overtones.  However, when this constitutes one of three songs on the 13-song album not directly about a boy, it does little to dissipate the impression that heterosexual love consumes the majority of time, energy and life.  These songs give women little agency and little freedom.  This displays that culture suppresses a liberated women. Douglas explains how the sexually explicit woman is still confined; and this examination of Swift shows how the sexually conservative woman can also still be confined.

 References

Douglas, Susan. (2010). Enlightened Sexism: the Seductive Message that Feminism’s 

             Work is Done. New York, NY: Times Books Henry Holt and Company.

Johnson, Allan G.. “Patriarchy, the System: An It, Not a He, a Them, or an Us”.

“Love Story- Taylor Swift with sub [HD].” Youtube, 6 March 2010. Web. 19 March

2011. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vls5WXTusfU>

NXTM, LLC. Taylor Swift. Taylor Nation LLC. Web. 19 March 2011.

<http://www.taylorswift.com/>

Swift, Taylor. Fearless. Big Machine Record, 2008. CD

“Taylor Swift – Change.” Youtube, 16 June 2009. Web. 19 March 2011.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1jYllE0T-k>

 “Taylor Swift – Fifteen.” Youtube, 23 Nov. 2009. Web. 19 March 2011.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb-K2tXWK4w>

“Taylor Swift – White Horse (OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO).” Youtube, 8 Jan. 2010. Web.

19 March 2011. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNbefiTiGB4>

 “Taylor Swift – You Belong With Me.” Youtube, 16 June 2009. Web. 19 March 2011.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuNIsY6JdUw >

            

follow up post for 3/22

Cynthia Enloe's "The Globetrotting Sneaker" exposed how female workers in specific Asian countries are exploited by American companies.  As the economy continues to globalize it seems imperative that human rights protections for industrial work also globalize.  Unfortunately, we do not see this happening.  During the early stages of the Industrial Revolution workers, often women and children, were exploited.  We see the same thing happening today only in different markets because current laws protect the American worker.  It is interesting to see how companies have monopolized on gender inequalities to exploit.  Enloe explains that "Troops sexually assaulted women workers, stripping , fondling, and raping them 'as a control mechanism for suppressing women's engagement in the labor movement."  In some ways, these same fights have already been battled in the 19th century.  I understand that they are now being fought on a different front, but since the companies are American, it is an unnecessary repetition made necessary by the pursuit of wealth trumping the preservation of human rights.
I enjoyed the way Enloe made the reader consider Nike's campaign to reach women buyers in juxtaposition with Nike's exploitation of the female worker.  It further encourages me to be critical of advertising remembering that they want to make money, that is their sole objective, regardless of the  image they present.  I particularly enjoy the image below that tries to empower women by dealing with a controversial issue such as body image.  However, it still over sexualizes women and contradicts with attitudes towards women in the factories.  Here, women are encouraged to be strong because that strength makes money for the company while in the factories women are encouraged to be submissive and weak because that makes money for the company.

[sometimes my images do not show up so i've included the link as well] http://www.nike.com/nikewomen/us/v2/media/swf/wkcampaign/butt_1024x768.jpg









"Safe Keepers and Wage Earners" explained how Asian immigrants to America often have to juggle two identities.  For women, this means that their communities expect them to make money in an American way while continuing to care for the family in an Asian (or conservative American) way.  This pressure to do both creates a barrier for advancement in the workplace.  Women do not want to sacrifice family by taking on time-intensive promotions.  Shyam explains how coming out of law school women are half of the graduates seeking employment.  However, by the time each generation of women reaches upper level positions and partnership in law firms they are only 10, 15, or 20 percent of the partners.  Women have the capacity and the education to succeed but are kept from doing so by the pressure to maintain a family. 

Follow Up Post For 3/8

All three texts expose marriage to be an invisible system of power and privilege.

Same Sex Marriage FAQS

I found myself outraged when reading Same Sex Marriage FAQS. I didn’t realize that couples that are joined in a civil union are restricted from the same government benefits that married couples receive. This article exposes this inequality. It seems as if the American system is working against homosexuality; attempting to show those who deviate against the norms of society that it is easier or, better yet, it is beneficial to be a heterosexual.

Andrea Vaccaro, “Soldier in a Long White Dress”

It was heart breaking to hear Vaccaro’s recount of her wedding day. She describes it as “bittersweet” because, even though she was getting married to the woman she loved, she knew that her wedding would be seen as a “second-class union.” Until now, I didn’t realize that this was an unearned privilege of mine. As a heterosexual female, I have the privilege of not feeling like my marriage is a second-class union.

Paula Ettelbrick, “Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?”

In this article, Ettlebrick claims that lesbians and gay men look to marriage for self-affirmation. Her statement in fact devalues their marriage as an attempt to fit into society. To me, this sounds like Ettelbrick is saying that the motive for marriage in the LGBTQ community is in order to appear straight. If I understand this correctly, then, I think that it is unfair to condemn marriage to the point where those who want to openly display their love are seen as detrimental to achieving equality. Moreover, she is adamantly against the notion of marriage for homosexuals because she feels that it “fails to incorporate a broader understanding of the underlying inequities that operate to deny justice to a fuller range of people and groups”(306). She is saying that regardless of marital status all gays and lesbians should receive equality to heterosexuals. However, I feel like change doesn’t occur over night, but in increments. And if we have to start somewhere, why not start with marriage for homosexuals.

Quotes and Commentary:

Leading the Way: “We are ‘civil unioned,’ a complete abstraction to the binaries ‘single’ and ‘married’ on which society is based. Civil union is not the answer; it is simply a way of reinforcing second class citizenship”(37) – Oppressors reinforce oppression by keeping the oppressed in the dark; distracting them and drawing their energies elsewhere or giving a little without expecting to give more in the future in an attempt to silence them. It’s kind of like the saying to ‘give a dog a bone.’ According to Ettlebrick, by doing so, we began to undermine the gay/lesbian movement’s purpose.

“… I entered a committed and loving relationships knowing it will be treated as a second-class union, knowing that people-even those closest to me-do not have the language to call us ‘spouses’ or ‘wives’ but rather ‘partners,’ as if we were at a square dance”(37)

Q. Why do we call the union between heterosexual couples a marriage, but the union between homosexual couples a civil union?

Lead Post 2/3

Boston women's Health Book Collective's article "Our Bodies, Ourselves" articulates the important link between women's identities and their bodies.  This selection shows how these women took their positive experiences and created a group to spread there knowledge.  This connects to some of our other readings such as Ann Fausto-Sterling's article "Hormonal Hurricanes" that laments the lack of knowledge about the female body.  "Our Bodies, Ourselves" attempted to bridge this gap by raising awareness.   This included awareness about reproductive health in such a way as to give women more choice in regards to whether or not to have children.

Gloria Steinem's "Sex, Lies, and Advertising" explains how feminist magazine MS Magazine faced unforeseen challenges due to the way sexism permeates all aspects of culture including advertising strategies and misconceptions.  MS struggled to remain profitable because they refused to write advertising editorial that many advertisers require from women's magazines before they will buy ad space.  MS magazine also sought to obtain advertisers not traditionally targeting women such as financing, business, and car companies.  Steinem argues that these companies affect women's lives as well and though not considered feminine women are still interested in the products these companies have to offer.  However, MS faced extreme difficulty in getting these companies to buy ad space.
Women's magazines face pressures and expectations from ad companies not comparable to other media forms.  This can be seen in Steinem's conversation with a potential client, Este Lauder.  The owner said that since MS did not feature enough articles about beauty products; this inhibited him from advertising his beauty product.  Steinem points out the double standard that Este Lauder advertises its shaving line in men's magazines without complimentary articles about shaving.
She concludes that advertisers have too much power over content and that this inhibits the goals of women's magazines and forces them into an consumerist focused mold. She ends by petitioning readers to change this system.

Joan Brumberg's "Body Projects" looks at the way women's relationship with their body has changed over the years.  She begins with the idea that for many people, the body is the tangible representation of the soul, or the self.  This can be damaging because then when one does not like their body, they do not like themselves.  She then looks at different historical movements that prize different body types beginning with the "Century of Svelte."  Svelte refers to being thin and small.  In the 1920s and the days of flappers, flat chested, slight, long-legged individuals were prized.  This began women's new relationship with food as evidenced by diaries that lamented college weight gain rather then celebrating the abundance of food.  Brumberg uses anecdotal evidence here via a look into a contemporary girls' diary which explained at one point she was eating only 50 calories a day (p. 103).
Brumberg then explores how in the 1920s another trend emerged where "girls understood that their bodies were in some ways a public project" (p. 107).
Following this obsession with thinness an obsession with breasts was added.  Brumberg explores the emergence of first the bra and then the training bra as tools to preserve the aesthetic and reproductive value of these features.  As the bra, and in fact all clothing, began to be made primarily in department stores more pressure was placed on women to fit into clothing.  Previously, clothing was made to fit you regardless of your shape.  This perpetuated the concept of the ideal or normal woman's shape.
Now an added dimension of the ideal women involves being muscular and fit.  This particularly involved the thighs.  Shockingly, in 1982 one girl was kicked off her marching band because at 5'4" and 124 lb. she was considered to be too fat.  This is the same high school where fans were known to chant "thunder thighs" at performers. Brumberg ends her discussion with a look at piercings.
Her overall argument is that the phenomena described confuse the private and public aspects of the body.  Since body is equated with identity, when the body undergoes public scrutiny and control so does ones identity.  This can be harmful and confusing.

This connects to "Our Bodies, Ourselves" by showing how a positive understanding of ones physical body is empowering.  This is thwarted by consumerism and advertising agenda that makes women feel the need to buy products to change their bodies.  Advertisers pitch that this will make women comfortable and confident, but it requires women to give up some of their agency and subject their bodies, and therefore identities, to the whim of the market and to others control.

This can be seen in images such as the one below where women's bodies are represented as only being attractive when they match a particular ideal.  The pressures women to match this ideal though it may not actually be part of their identity.  This places women's bodies under public scrutiny and public control.