Response to 11/23 Readings

I was watching some ridiculous show the other day that showed the top ten worst mass murders.  And now, thinking back, almost every single one of the murderors was a white, pretty priviliged man.  One of the murders, known as the texas tower sniper, was done by Charles Whitman (picture below).

Charles Whitman was a student at University of Texas and a former Marine.  Looking at his picture, he is a white male in his 20s.  He killed 16 people, shooting from the tower at the University with a sniper.  This reinforces Steinem's article.  The typical "hate crime" is caused by heterosexual white men who kill for no "economic or rational gain."  Similarly, Whitman was grew up in an upper middle class family.  He was a superior student and had lots of friends.  He seemingly had a decent life.

It's scary to realize that no one is really publicizing the fact that these men are committing "supremacy crimes" because of their "impossible expectation of dominance to which they've become addicted."  This needs to change.  If we focused on this fact, perhaps things could get better and some of these crimes could be prevented.  As Steinem says, sons need to be raised like daughters!

Short Response to 11/23 Readings

After reading Steinem's article, "Supremacy Crimes", I really started thinking about how I feel so safe in my every day life and yet the most common serial killers (or killings with no real motivation) are white non-poor men. I know I do not really have any enemies in my life since I am not a drug dealer nor do I owe anyone large sums of money; therefore my murder would hypothetically be considered a "senseless" killing. The weird psychological motivations that Steinem describes including seeing their behavior as "an appropriate--even 'manly'--response to the frustrations and disappointments that are a normal part of life" (1). As Johnson describes in the article we read at the beginning of the semester, our entire system of patriarchy helps contribute to these middle/upper class white men's expectations of dominance to "which they've become addicted" (1). At the end of her article, Steinem describes how the gender of these men are not focused on as it should be. If it were women who were most likely to be serial killers, then the media would most likely focus almost primarily on their female gender. If it were men of color, then their race would be focused on. Since white middle/upper class men are the "norm", the only aspect that is focused on of these male killers is their youth. I agree with her final words saying "just as we as society have begun to raise our daughters more like son--morel like whole people--we must begin to raise our sons more like our daughters--that is, to value empathy as well as hierarchy; to measure success by other people's welfare as well as their own" (3).

Summary Post 11/18

In her excerpt "Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape", Susan Brownmiller begins by describing how the typical American rapist is simply an aggressive, hostile youth who chooses to commit violence acts upon women. There have been very few article on rape in psychology journals and even Freud barely mentioned the topic, in part due to the typical Freudians' unwillingness to make a moral judgment. Instead, Freudians seek to "understand" what they called "deviant sexual behavior" but never condemn an individual's actions. Freudian criminologists "defined the rapist as a victim of an uncontrollabel urge that wasinfantile in nature, the result of a thwarted natural impulse to have intercourse with his mother" (275). The rapist was viewed simply as an individual they could treat who was simply a sexually well-adjusted youth whose act of rape is simply just another act of plunder like robbing a store. Then in 1971, an Israeli sociologist named Amir published a study of rape in Philadelphia. The report was the first pragmatic, in-depth statistical study of the nature of rape and rapist. Amir was a student of Wolfgang, who was one of the first to admit that social injustice is one of the primary causes of the subculture of violence behind rape. Wolfgang focused on two primary variables: social class and violent crime. He ultimately came to the conclusion that those individuals who are in the lower class are much more likely to encounter sexual violence. Amir's Philadelphia study found that the average rapist "had no separate identifiable pathology aside from the individual quirks and personality disturbances that might characterize any single offender who commits any sort of crime" (279). The report showed that most of the rapists were lower class, 71% of the rapes were pre-meditated and 43% of the rapes were classified as group rape. Brownmiller ends her article with describing how a world without rape would be one in which women could live without fearing men but instead men who commit rape have changed the world forever.

In her article "Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color", Crenshaw specifically looks at how both race and gender play very important roles in studying violence against women. She presents the problem that comes with identity politics in which it "fails to transcend difference, but rather the opposite- that it frequently conflates or ignores intra group differences". Her objective of the article is to explore both the role of race and gender in violence against women of color specifically and show that many of the experiences that black women have do not fith within the traditional boundaries of race of gender discrimination that is primarily focused on in political movements. She describes how intersectionality, or the interaction between racism and patriarchy, leads to the limits and struggles that women of color face. The economic issues including access to employment, housing and wealth confirms that class structures play a very essential role in defining and understanding the sexual violence experiences of women of color. She describes how "strategies based solely on the epxeriences of women who do not share the same class or race backgrounds will be of limited utility for those whose lives are shaped by a different set of obstacle". She also explains how counselors have a hard time helping women of color because it is so difficult to find not only contacts but also resources to help them get back on their feet. She also goes into detail about one woman who did not speak english well enough to be let into any of the shelters she tried to seek refuge in due to their strict standards about language requirements. She also discusses how the black community often tends to suppress issues of domestic violence in wanting to uphold their reputation in the community. Even many women of color agree with the very anti-feminist ideas regarding the necessity of a woman's allegiance and subservience to a man to the extent that they believe the woman should be physically punished if she disobeys her husband.

In "Don't Call Me Survivor", Emilie Morgan describes how she was first raped at the age of 13. This rape, however, lead to a downward spiral into numerous more rapes throughout her young adult life until she finally found people she could connect with and talk about her experiences. She ends the story by asking people to not yet call her a "survivor" because she still does not feel like one yet. The emotional and psychological consequences of rape live on much longer than one could even imagine. After her first experience being raped at the age of 13, she describes how she had no one there to support her through the difficult time. She was scolded by her parents and ostrasized by her friends and peers. She describes the next rape as even more traumatic since she was older and had a fuller understanding of the true consequences. Not only did she harbor the feelings of the rape being in part her fault, she also was once again treated like a cheap slut by anyone who knew. What I found most depressing and sad about Morgan's story is that she had no one to turn to. Why does our culture still not really blame men for the rape crimes they commit but instead blame the victim? Our patriarchal society has a long way to go before it can actually call men and women considered equal.

Response to 11/18 readings

The chapter from Susan Brownmiller’s book was somewhat, well more like REALLY, frightening.  It is true that the media publicizes rapists to be psychopaths.  But that is so far from the truth.  In thinking back to the Colgate climate survey, a huge percentage of girls (I forget the actual percent) have been sexually assaulted.  That’s on Colgate’s campus where the average male is smart, wealthy, and unmarried.  If these guys are capable of sexual assault, then who isn’t?  That honestly is an extremely scary realization. 

Rape also works to keep women from being free, powerful, and from feeling safe.  It’s another bar in the ‘birdcage,’ keeping in double binds and in fear.  It is great that women have been uniting to speak out against rape.  However, as Crenshaw notes, identity politics can ignore issues of color or class.  Furthermore, (a fact that really scared me) is that immigrant women can remain vulnerable to sexual assault because they do not have access to waivers.  This issue among many others that Crenshaw addresses have to also be brought to light.  Rape has to be spoken about AS WELL AS these issues.

Rape is about power more than it is about sex.  As Brownmiller notes, most rapes also had some form of sexual humiliation.  Thus, the act becomes a way to show male domination over women.  As Emilie Morgan remarks in “Don’t Call Me a Survivor’, “I am not sure which was harder: being gang-raped, or having the sudden realization that this is what it means to be a woman” (Morgan 36).  Sexual objectification and violence harness women’s sexuality and ultimately keep women from being threats to male dominance and sexuality.  Rape (it is scary to say) becomes a way of uniting women because all women are influenced and affected by it whether or not they have been victims.  We all know there is always that chance BECAUSE we are women.  Men do not live in the same fear.  Fear of rape does not exist for them unless maybe they are in prison.  I remember in 9^th grade, in health class, I asked my health teacher if women were capable of raping men.  She just started laughing, thinking I was trying to be funny.  I was naïve and honestly wasn’t sure.  Turns out, it is a huge joke in society.  Men being raped by women is something that does not happen (maybe cannot happen? Who knows).  But women being raped by men is a huge problem.  Thus, rape becomes a female problem.  However, on the flip side, men raping other men is not advertised or discussed unless when prison is concerned.  I wonder if that is a major problem that is just ignored because society tends to overlook homosexual issues or problems.  I obviously know that male-female rape is a huge issue but is male-male? 

In order to learn a little bit more, I did some searches online and came up with some pretty interesting stats.  Most people believe that men who rape other men are always gay.  In fact, most of these men are heterosexual.  Women can rape men although out of all rapes, a female raping a man is only 2%.  Something that I found REALLY interesting was that more male rapes occur every day in prison alone than there are rapes of all females in the USA.  This should get more publicity!

Summary for 11/11 readings

Atul Gawande’s article has an interesting form.  The article begins with the introduction of Elizabeth Rourke, a pregnant woman almost at her due date.  Gawande will skip around, discussing Rourke as she gets closer to delivering as well as discussing current issues involving child birth.

Rourke is an intern at a hospital and thus knows the pregnancy process fairly well.  She is aware that she has to wait until her contractions are five minutes apart to call the doctor and go to the hospital.  She also had decided on giving a natural birth, sans epidural and C-section. 

Gawande then talks about the medical process of child birth, down to the gory details.  In the first trimester, female hormones cause the joints of the pelvis to elongate and loosen.  When its delivery time, the uterus starts to form a funnel shape, which the baby is ultimately pushed through via contractions.  The cervix will slowly soften and relax as the baby’s head pushes against it.  This is called ‘effacement.’  Finally, an opening will appear and slowly widen.  Eventually the amniotic sac will burst and this pressure will increase the opening even more.  When the opening is between 7 to 10 centimeters, the baby’s head will enter the vagina and ultimately be pushed out.  This process is extremely dangerous.  At any point, there could be mistakes or problems that could lead to harm to either the child or mother.  In order to avoid such harm, midwives and doctors have been racking their brains for years.  The first instrument invented was the crochet which had hooks to crush the fetus’ skull in order to pull out the fetus and save the mother’s life.  Other devices were later invented that were specific to the position the baby was in.  The forceps was the most successful tool invented although it was kept as a family secret by the Chamberlen’s for years.  However, even with all these measures, in 1933, there was 2,041 maternal deaths in childbirth and of those, 2/3 could have been prevented.  Presently, there has been a huge rise in Cesarean sections with about 1/3 of American women using this method for childbirth.  Gawande later discusses the merits and problems of this

Returning to Rouke, she was having a lot of problems.  Her cervix was not dilating fast and Rourke had already been in extreme pain for many hours.  Finally, she opted out of her original plan and took epidurals.  It also turned out that her baby ended up getting stuck.  With these progressions, Rourke had already been in labor for 30 hours and the baby still had not been delivered. 

Virginia Apgar made a huge contribution to the childbirth.  She created the Apgar score which rated the condition of babies.  This created competition by surgeons to have higher scores.  Thus, more attention was paid to the babies after birth and if the babies looked unhealthy, they were not given up on as they had been previously.  Thus, more babies were saved from what could have otherwise been death.  However, the field of obstetrics seems to not have a huge attraction for medical students or professionals.  Interestingly, it saves the most lives out of any other medical profession.  Another intresting thing to note is the lack of forceps use in childbirth.  Since it is an extremely difficult skill to teach, C-sections are instead turned to in such instances. 

Back to Rourke: Rourke ended up having to have a C-section as she had been in painful labor for an excruciating amount of time.  Her baby was successfully delivered with an Apgar score of 9 after five minutes.  Gawande at this point goes into heavy detail of a C-section, commenting on the amount of risk attached to such a surgery.  It is not as simple as women seem to think these days.  There is still huge risk attached.  Yet even with these risks, most surgeons are turning to C-sections.  Is this because it fits better into their schedules and makes them more money?  Natural births are no longer as heavily considered.  C-sections are immediately offered.  This shift to ready surgery is somewhat frightening. 

The second article, “How Childbirth Went Industrial: A Deconstruction,” talks about and criticizes Gawande’s article.  Goer begins by indicating a parallel between Rourke and Princess Charlotte’s childbirthing experiences.  Goer points out that Gawande does not make a case that the current tools in obstetrics (such as Pitocin) have made a positive difference.  Gawande also appears to have no argument to C-sections as he points out numerous positives associated with it.  Gawande also praises doctors for doing whatever interests them regardless of research trials.  Furthermore, there has never been a point where obstetric interventions have enhanced newborn results.  Goer points to numerous studies to support this fact.  Enhancement in chidlbirthing process came when doctors didn’t ‘meddle’ as much.  Gawande also states that C-sections will save lives in difficult situations.  However, the facts do not support this statement.  Women are more likely to die in C-sections or have complications than during natural births.  Goer also goes on to state a multitude of risks for the mother that Gawande ignored attached to C-sections which include hysterectomy and pulmonary embolisms.  Newborn risks include respiratory complications and sensitivity to allergens.  There are many more risks with having a C-section to a natural birth as Goer points out.  Furtehrmore, the more C-sections a woman has, the higher risk she is at each time.  Goer also looks at the standardization of care in obstetricians.  This has done nothing to regulate the use of medical intervention.  A careless attitude has been adopted and women who might not necessarily need C-sections are receiving them nevertheless.  This attitude is also seen in many other surgical cases.  Goer also comments on the Rourke story.  Rourke’s story cannot be seen as typical.  It is an irregularity.  In 2005, a study done showed that only 2% of women received all the ‘care practices’ that Rourke received.  Most women can have birth much more ‘naturally.’  Also Rourke did not receive a doula and she had idealistic hopes that were not realistic.  Goer essentially criticizes and disagrees with almost every aspect in Gawande’s article.

Short Response to 11/9 Readings

As Maria mentioned, these readings also made me think about my own stance on abortion. Personally I am also pro-choice; however I believe it is a hard decision to make before actually being put in the position of being pregnant with an un-wanted child. All of the readings, however, emphasized at least to some extent how much it is really a WOMAN'S issue and not a man's. I believe that way too much attention has been given to men's rights and beliefs on the issue and not enough has surrounded women's opinions. How can we say that we have really gained equality as women when men are still making the decisions about what we can and cannot do to our own bodies? Right before I read tomorrow's assignment, I read a very interesting article in the NYTimes that briefly discusses how the Republican party's recent takeover of power in the house will likely lead to the challenging of many current issues including the legality and access to abortion. The fact that abortion is even a partisan debate proves that women do not have enough control over it. The recent elections saw a decline in women in political positions and therefore even more men are being given the power to control our right to choose. As Arcana describes in her article titled "Abortion Is a Motherhood Issue", the decision whether or not to abort a "fetus" (or "child", depending on the context) is strictly an issue up to the mother. Although Roe v. Wade did determine a cut-off point as to how far along in the pregnancy an abortion is legal, which I agree is necessary; however a woman's right to choose in the first trimester should be up to her and her alone, not the men who have been elected into government positions of power.

Response to 11/9 Readings

After reading the articles assigned for class, I began to think about my own beliefs regarding abortion.  I have always considered myself pro-life and I still support that immensely.  However, after reading the articles, I came to realize women should not be divided between pro-choice and pro-life.  We should be pro-help.  We should help women in whatever decision they make and not judge.  It seems that one of the hardest parts of making a decision in regards to an abortion is what everyone else thinks.  And that should not be the case.  Other people's thoughts should not necessarily be taken into consideration.  The choice should be 100% your own.  Yet, our society is structured in a way that other people's opinions do become a part of our own decision.  People's judgements are intimidating and fearsome.  This should not happen.  We should accept each and every individual decision and just be supporting.

Furthermore, I was curious to see what pro-life media and advertisements looked like.  I looked at a couple websites and each one seemed to use fear tactics or intimidation techniques.  Horrifying pictures of fetuses etc. were displayed.  Some were too graphic that I don't even want to describe them.  I did find a picture that I think Allison Crews talked about:

I just hate that people would use such techniques to try and influence women.  And I'm not saying pro-choice is perfect either.  But women should have the right to do whatever they want and EVERYONE should support that.  It is no one else's battle and it should be no one else's choice.  The government should not be allowed to decide if a woman should birth a child or not.  That's insane to me. 

I also found a website that had speeches by a young girl, Claire, who looked like she was only 7 years old or so.  She talks about pro-life.  That is extremely disturbing to me.  People can be pro-life and I support that.  But young children should not be forced to have certain beliefs based on their parents beliefs.  A 7 year old girl is not going to have her own opinions yet on abortion.  By forcing opinions on her, she will have trouble forming her own beliefs and ideas.  Everyone should be able to make up their own mind.  This was similar to Allison Crews as she said she would protest for pro-life outside of abortion clinics before she was 10 years old.