• Due: Learning Analysis & Portfolio; YOU MUST COME TO CLASS AND PRESENT your LA to receive your credits for this assignment
What was the argument of the course?
Where did you fit into it?
What books connected you to it?
What happens now?
Friday, November 23, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Feminist Reconceptualizations: WMST 300 Portfolio
Christine Cunniff
Due Wednesday November 28, 2007
Introductions
christine c said...
My name is Christine and I am a junior WMST major. I would like to add a second major, but I'm not sure in what. I've been involved in feminism for a relatively short time (approx. three years), though I have been aware of and angered by oppressive social structures and institutions including racism, homophobia, sexism, et cetera for my entire life. I agree more with third wave, or more radical feminism, though I think some of the concepts are a little idealistic. I play in a couple of punk bands in the area, and I work at a collective. I've recently been thinking about interning at HIPS (Helping Individual Prostitutes Survive) in the spring.
September 4, 2007 11:28 AM
Chauncey: Why Marriage?
christine c said…
George Chauncey’s “Why Marriage?” briefly outlines the history of institutionalized and legalized discrimination of LGBTQ people and LGBTQ couples in order to assert that the legalization of gay marriage is a necessary step in the direction of equality. While the book does contain criticisms of marriage, especially from the feminist perspective, it is clear that Chauncey is in favor of legalizing gay marriage in order to promote social, political, economic, and personal freedom of LGBTQ people.
Chauncey uses his background as a historian to demonstrate to the reader the numerous struggles of the gay social community. In nineteenth and twentieth century America, LGBT people were not only considered social outcasts, but faced discrimination within or expelled from “straight” social establishments such as clubs and bars. Mostly gay bars or clubs, or “straight” establishments that allowed the presence of an LGBT person or people, were harassed and often shut down by police. Legally, gays were stripped of personal rights, and anti-sodomy laws were specifically aimed towards LGBTQ people. Towards the end of the book, Chauncey goes on to contrast and compare the LGBTQ struggle for equality with the Civil Rights movement, pointing out similarities while noting that it would be unfair to both cause to say that one was equal to the other as far as struggle or triumph. Interestingly, the author links the more recent Marriage Defense Act, which outlines that the government only recognizes a marriage if it is solely between a man and a woman, to earlier social standards and political acts that worked against interracial marriage.
The clarification of marriage as an important gay rights issue was demonstrated through the author’s explanation of the roles that the prevalence of AIDS and the growing number of gay parents. Each of these topics played important parts in the increasing amount of tolerance and acceptance of gays in society and of the idea of gay marriage as a possibility. On completely different levels, they helped to humanize the image of the LGBTQ person to the average American. It is clear that the political legalization of gay marriage would increase the amount of social equality over time, as a legal marriage, equivalent to that of any available to a straight couple, would reflect tolerance and acceptance in society, and increasing equality. If LGBTQ people began to be treated as “normal”, as “citizens”, as being relatable, they become less of the “other” or “alien”, social equality would significantly increase. Chauncey approaches the topic of marriage as an issue of social equivalence, and effectively argues his points while taking in other perspectives within the LGBTQ community.
Insights Gained From the “How to Read” Handout
1. Analyzing the “form” of the text
- George Chauncey is trained academically
- Historical background of events (discriminatory social, political, or economic
policies) is given
- Divisions and subdivisions between topics are made and organized to convey
specific opinions and points
- The context of the writing is very academic and serious; strong assertions are
made through a clear argument that effectively addresses the opposing opinions
as well as dissent within the affected communities
2. Who is speaking, and who is not?
- Scholarly author
- Writer is directly involved in the LGBTQ community and so has a better
understanding of issues surrounding gay marriage than the average person
- LGBTQ voice is speaking
- Creates a safe space for the reader of the text
- Race and class are often not referenced
Additional Topics for Discussion
1. Gay rights in contrast with Civil Rights- what is the perspective of those involved in earlier Civil Rights movements in regards to gay marriage? Do they consider gay rights a civil rights issue? Is it widely recognized?
2. From where was the myth of queer people being child molesters derived? Are lesbians and transgender people as discriminated against on this basis as gay men are?
3. Did anti-sodomy laws apply to all unmarried couples? How could the authorities prove any related crime?
4. It is interesting that the image of the threat of a child molester was recycled from Roma people and other groups that have been discriminated against. The recycling of stereotypes and terminology seems to be a trend in American history when officials are trying to “other” a group.
5. What other types of AIDS discrimination was there?
6. Has the depictions of gay couples within the media helped or hurt the push for the legalization and/or social acceptance of gay marriage?
7. I would like to discuss the idea of marriage as a patriarchal structure from a feminist perspective, looking at the pros and cons of each side and see how the historical framework of marriage has transitioned over time as well as what it is like now.
VIOLATED ASSUMPTIONS:
1) All gay couples would be in favor if gay marriage legalization even if they had disagreements with the concept of marriage.
2) I did not expect the AIDS epidemic to have the affect that it did as far as the change in public opinion.
September 18, 2007 9:38 PM
Introduction to This Bridge We Call Home
christine c said...
The Chapters from “This Bridge We Call Home” served as a thorough, organized, and well-thought out introduction to the book as a whole. Obviously, the Introduction, Preface, and Forward, written by the main contributors to this follow up on “This Bridge Called My Back”, state the intentions, hopes, and ideology behind their choices as far as format, content, contributors, et cetera. This anthology as a whole works to display lines drawn in feminism that may not be visible to the average person, and celebrates differences while stressing the idea that difference is important and necessary to the global community of women and feminists.
The reader is able to connect to the authors and hear their concerns and experience through all of the readings that had been assigned. This idea of a shared experience and understanding the experience of others is essential to the topics and formatting of the anthology, and serve to promote global ideas in a radical way. In each section of our readings this was addressed by Keating and Anzaldua. In passages 77 and 80, our introduction to the writers continues, as each of their perspectives are deconstructed and addressed. The idea of a spiritual and global network, or bridges, of experience and communication is echoed throughout each author/editor’s passages. Descriptions, explanations, and examples all assist the reader in understanding the basis of the project and its intentions.
“How to Read” Handout
1. Voice: The voices in the passages that we have read are specifically from the editors of the anthology who are also authors of #77 and #80. These voices are especially important to understand the context and meaning of the anthology, as well as to introduce the reader to the authors. Also, each of these women are women of color with established positions within the academic, Women’s Studies related world. This also helps to set up context and intention, as “This Bridge Called My Back” was specifically by and for women of color, though this anthology has opened up the floor.
2. Form: The passages are written as anecdotes based on personal and observed experience, meaning that the reader is relating on a personal level to the writer. It creates a sort of safe space for the reader and writer alike, as the intimacy offered by this form allows for an openness that would not be as present in any given textbook or academic collection.
Topics of Interest
1. The idea of “radical” feminism and how it is practiced
2. How the ignoring of race has marginalized and fractured feminists
3. The use of spirituality and what types of things activism allows
Violated Assumptions
I would assume that this anthology would be in the form of the first edition, meaning women of color only.
I was surprised that male feminist writers were accepted.
September 26, 2007 1:10 AM
Weston: Gender In Real Time
christine c said...
In “Gender in Real Time”, Weston parallels history and discovery within mathematics and space-time theory to gender and queer-theory. This parallel allows the reader to see how temporal human bodies, sexualities, and genders are in the grand scheme of things, and how becoming “un-gendered”, or “zeroing” ones gender might allow us to transcend the roles and labels of what will be considered the past. This book itself severs as a time machine that travels through the present state of gender as it is dictated by the past. By using this “time machine”, one is led to understand that in the context of time and space, there has not been very much progress in the feminist view of class, gender, race, et cetera. While this is easily said in the theories of intersectionality, Weston complicates the issue by bringing it into a space-time context. This background forces the reader to search the past and the present, and to try to look at the future. This style of writing acts as a social critique of activists, who have allowed context to slip away.
As a student, I found this concept difficult to deconstruct, especially trudging through Weston’s academic language. Her background of social science and economy is very apparent, and it is clear that she is a skilled researcher. I was not very familiar with this background and style within my experience in Gender Studies, and so had a bit of trouble understanding the key concepts the first few times I read through them. My experience has been more relatable and tangible, rather than theoretical. However, the idea of “a zero concept of gender” really struck me. The “zero”, while it represents nothingness, also represents an endless possibility of things. If one chooses to zero their gender, they are not just androgynous, or “nothing”, they are without a gender at all. Any indication of gender could be utilized by this person, without meaning. For example, wearing make-up, walking a certain way, hairstyle- all of these things can be de-gendered by zeroing that concept of “male” versus “female”. To process this unfamiliar idea, I tried to shed my preconceptions and opinions, and read into what Weston was writing, to try to find a way to relate and feel comfortable and curious.
“How to Read”:
Background- Weston has written multiple books on gender theory and sexuality, and uses her background in social science theory, politics, and economics, in order to reinforce her gender theory concepts.
Diction- Kath Weston uses highly academic language. The structure of the writing makes it a dense read that is at first pretty hard to follow. This is largely in part due to her background as a student, researcher, and writer.
Violated Assumptions:
The main science that gender relates to is biology.
All activism needs to be direct and social only.
I would never be interested in or need math and science.
Topics to Discuss in Class:
-the importance of studying theory
-how to apply complex theory
-the concept of “zero”
-historical perspective on gender (Egyptian, Greek, Roman, et cetera)
October 2, 2007 2:34 PM
This Bridge presentations
i.v. “a place at the table”…surviving our battles, shaping the world
What does the art at the beginning of the section represent? To what or whom does the title refer? Who is at the "table" and who is missing? How can personal experience promote activism?
This section of chapters focuses on how weaving together stories and experiences of struggle and triumph act as a binding force for feminists throughout the world. Women of many different cultures, classes, races, abilities, et cetera share their experiences of oppression and the challenges that they have faced in order to deal with the situation and overcome their struggles. The title regards the past, present, and future of women's struggles nationally and internationally, and strives to be inclusive to reader, writer, and contributor alike. The art, "Puente del Fuego" that introduces this section represents the diversity of these struggles, and how learning and growing from these experiences unites women and feminists. This sections serves as a call for empowerment through shared experience, and for activism as far as making safe space for each other and for ourselves (i.e., 'shaping our worlds'). Within this idea is a discussion of intersectionality, demonstrated in the stories or personal experience as well as in the structure of the section by itself and in the context of the book as a whole. Recognizing this gives the reader an appreciation for the individual representation as well as the lessons and strategies learned by reading and simultaneously interacting with the authors. This "connection" includes the reader on a more broad scale, and therefore works along the guidelines of the section as is is constructed and intended.
Posted by christine c at 2:27 AM 1 comments Links to this post
Haraway: How Like a Leaf
christine c said...
From looking Harraway up on the web, I have learned a lot about her academic and literary background. She has degrees from Colorado College, Yale, and Johns Hopkins amongst other universities; during these years studying philosophy, zoology, biology, literature, et cetera. She is currently a professor in the History of Consciousness Department at the University of California, Santa Cruz. During her childhood, she was heavily influenced by Catholicism and by the reaction to Communism by Americans (i.e., McCarthyism), which is relevant in her use of metaphorical language.
Her interdisciplinary studies set the framework for most of her theories, which are deeply based in biological, technological, and social practice and fact. This interconnectedness of studies allows her to argue for heightened consciousness, as one cannot understand the true impact of a practice or object based on dividing up its facets to find a core problem. The web of factors that create a certain thing are all related and co-dependant, an argument that is often seen for examples as biological problems are related to political problems which are related to social problems, et cetera. Harraway would argue that to combat issues one must be well versed in, or at least conscious of, a myriad of topics to truly understand the situation. Harraway would also that change is based on the creation and founding of theory, rather than the criticism and negating of existing theory. In relation to what we have read in this class, I find this book to be most similar to “Gender in Real Time” by categorization of its content, style, and intent. It is also relevant to Chauncey’s “Why Marriage?”, because of its attention to the relevance and visibility of relationships within the context of time (past, present, future).
The format of this text as an interview seems to be relevant because Harraway’s knowledge of these topics and the way that she speaks deliberately about them translates more easily to the reader. It is not simply dense theory, however a more in depth view of how her theories work together in a non-threatening, more accessible way. Her language choices are clear, and her personality shines through, as the irony and humor for which she is recognized is obvious. This text is extremely relevant for its multidimensional nature, as it is so reflective of a number of aspects of the past, present and future. It pieces together her works and theories so that the reader is able to see what each represents as a separate, as a whole, and as a system of relationships. As a feminist work, it offers a glimpse of a possible future of greater consciousness, in which affinity is more important that identity, and that more of an emphasis is placed on relationships between humans and non-humans alike.
Discussion Questions:
1. What would a utopian relationship look like? How do we go about creating them? Would emotions get in the way, or can we de-socialize ourselves of jealousy, envy, lust?
2. What does a cyborg look like? How far are we from integrating cyborgs and cyborg politics into society?
3. How is Harraway in conversations with Weston?
October 30, 2007 8:31 PM
Duggan: The Twilight of Equality?
christine c said...
Duggan prefaces her argument within the book by stating: “The Twilight of Equality? Is written as an analysis of the politics of the 1990’s, and as a polemic for the twenty-first century, to argue that as long as the progressive-left represents and reproduces itself as divided into economic vs. cultural, universal vs. identity-based, distribution vs. recognition-oriented, local or national vs. global branches, it will defeat itself” (Intro XX). Throughout the book, Duggan uses historical background to support her assertion that neoliberal politics separates the private from the public, a practice which is in place to uphold capitalistic, imperialistic, and oppressive policy and ideology. One of the main tactics is to promote “multiculturalism”, which is generally put in place to label or confine a person or group to keep them submissive and inferior, as exemplified by the presidencies of both Clinton and Bush, the actions of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), and the destructive writings of Sullivan, a gay neoliberal.
Duggan is concerned with the progression and ultimate goal of equality. She supports downward distribution, the right-to-privacy-in-public, interconnectedness through diversity and cross-fertilization, and overcoming oppressive values and policies through politics, rather than reproducing them. She views the progressive-left as a failing entity, one constructed to oppose conservative ideology and strategy that has come to reproduce it. In her point of view, the progressive-left is divisive, narrow or limited, and wholly unequal, as well as an institution that promotes inequalities in general. Like conservatives, progressive-liberals used the façade of multiculturalism in order to promote the idea of equality and progress, though only on superficial terms that allow them to benefit on economic and political levels. This false social change is more divisive and negative than it is progressive or positive. Duggan cites the SUNY incident and the WTO/IMF anti-globalization protests as positive examples of direct social contact and change, though is critical of the (lack of) aftereffects. The author suggests that political parties should not separate the public from the private in ways that promote social, political, and economic upward distribution. To do this, the progressive-left, as well as society, needs to radicalize their politics by having more broad goals and activisms that are inclusive, critical, interconnected, and radical.
Discussion Questions:
What affect did Fallwell’s blame on 9/11 have on society?
How would one go about making the right to privacy public? Is this not as progressive as Duggan asserts? How does this work for and against personal safety?
Are the issues in this book too much too soon? How do we end bigotry? Is this necessary before political shift?
November 7, 2007 12:48 PM
WMST 300 LEARNING ANALYSIS
1. The Argument of Feminist Reconceptualization
The argument of the course seems to be that Women’s Studies is deeply analytical in a myriad of ways, making it an extremely diverse, fluid, multi-faceted discipline. The works chosen for assignments act as windows into different studies and disciplines within the context of women and gender studies, allowing us to examine parts of women’s studies through emotional, experience-based, biological, political, and intellectual lenses throughout the curriculum. More specifically the works by Bechdel, Chauncey, and Duggan used more politicized language and ideas. The readings within “This Bridge We Call Home” focused more on experience and emotion. Weston and Haraway use intellect based on the sciences to make their arguments about life and relationships.
Viewed as a series of chapters within a book, the direction of the course is laid out for the student. The article “How to Read” refreshes the idea of analytical, contextual thinking. Bechdel works as an introduction to a fun, political look into queer, more specifically lesbian, issues within modern times, whereas Chauncey takes a more historical approach looking at gay rights within the United States. The introduction of “This Bridge” also takes a more historical approach within the context of the progress of one book, while also building a pat for the future. Weston analyzes the framework and idea of time, especially within the perspective of gender. The continuation of “This Bridge” delves into personal story as well as action for change, while “How Like a Leaf” broadens the perspective again, giving perspective into the dynamics of relationships in contexts. Duggan’s book ends the semester analyzing the idea of progress using examples of current issues in politics and society. This blend of interconnected work shows the importance of the role of Women’s Studies within institutional as well as personal education, as the desire and need for multi-faceted equality is felt on a broader basis.
2. How I Fit Into This Story
Personally, I wanted a little more out of the discussion structure of the class. While in most of my upper-level classes open and fluid discussion is encouraged, I found the stack structure with a student-teacher hierarchy to be traditional and sometimes frustrating, as our discussions were fairly controlled and sometimes cut-off. On a couple of occasions I felt myself wanting to chime in about a certain topic but then the discussion was rerouted. While some structure is good, I felt it was sometimes detrimental. Another part of the discussion that I wish the entire class had made more prominent is the integration of more personal experience and the use of more real-world examples. Not only would we come away grasping the basic concepts, but could apply those concepts to our learning. One method that might had aided this would be to establish our classroom as a place that is one that is intended for learning and discussion with respect and privacy, or to establish it as a safe space for everyone. For what I can tell, no one seemed particularly marginalized, but I think that creating that space in an institutional learning facility is a creative, reassuring, and helpful tactic.
Through blogging and note taking, I learned to summarize and deconstruct the concepts of the works we discussed and the topics that we analyzed. The free writing that we did worked well as an icebreaker and was a good way to indicate where everyone stood on a particular topic in class. I did feel as though I articulated myself in a way that I intended fairly consistently, and this participation did make me appreciate the interactions in class, as I heard new perspectives and gave my own as well. Not only did these practices allow me to organize papers and assignments, they also helped me articulate the discussions, questions, and responses that I wanted to make within our group. I felt that I came into this class with preconceived notions of feminism and feminist actions, which admittedly is close-minded. My role is this class and our discussions was mostly based on my experience with activism and theory with gender studies, and I tried to implement that into the pieces that our now in my portfolio. Based on my experiences within what is considered an alternative subculture (i.e., playing in punk bands), I felt that I had a fairly different perspective to offer. I originally was worried that I would feel out-casted, or ostracized for my style or my politics, though I do not think that was a problem during this semester. I felt as though my presence was not overwhelming, and I feel as though I kept an open-mind to the experiences, thoughts, and questions of others. Overall, all of the people in our group seemed accepting and respectful of each other’s ideas, suggestions, and experiences.
3. The Class in the Context of A WMST Curriculum
This course works well as a “portal” course, as it intertwines a variety of interdisciplinary topics within the realm of women’s studies, demonstrating how gender and the idea of gender are relevant in many different subjects or disciplines. This in turn allows one to see how the study of gender or women’s studies is undeniably important to the existing world, as well as the world that one might hope to someday create. On one hand, this course was not so specifically focused on topics of past WMST courses offered before one takes the 300 level course, while on the other hand, this course opens up a number of more specific and non-specific options through which to further a student’s future studies. While this course is very broad in its concepts, it offers direction in the possibilities of interdisciplinary study or thought. Haraway serves as a great example of this, using biology and technology to theorize about gender and sexuality within modern and future times.
In retrospect, this class allows me to see the ways in which the construction of a women’s studies major can sometimes confine the learning experience of a student to one set of ideas of how to view women’s studies or how to work actively with women’s studies. By drawing these lines, we work to confine ourselves and others to thinking that we definitely understand something. Women’s studies is not a discipline that can be mastered or completely understood in all of its complexities, perspectives, changes, et cetera. To be close-minded in this field, or these fields, is to deny the reality of someone else’s oppression and to limit one’s own learning.
For my own education, I think I would like to choose a double major for my undergraduate studies, to learn more extensively about History and Women’s Studies. I would like to explore the broader context of social and political history in order to better understand how each of the disciplines that I am interested in worked to construct, manipulate, and deconstruct each other. This class has helped me to better argue my political ideologies involving gender and sexualities on a political basis. These interests and ideas were helped sparked specifically by the style that Chauncey uses in his arguments, and reading Why Marriage? has been influential in my desires for future courses and discussions.
4. Readings and Websites
Reading #1: I liked Bechdel’s “Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For” because of its format. The way that it was laid out was accessible, quick, and direct. The tile itself is very forward, grabbing the reader’s eye. Because it uses as word that is viewed as abrasive and uncultured, the title asserts itself to a variety of audiences and gives insight into the frank and witty nature of the story line. The format of a comic strip allows anyone to access the stories within the book and the ideas that are intertwined with the plot, the humor, and the politics. While there were many jabs at the current political system within the US, there were also a number of suggestions for change within politics and society. Viewing the clips of Bechdel accepting awards for her comics also gave me insight into the kind of intentions she had in writing the strips, as well as her personality as an author and a member of the queer community.
Reading #2: Chauncey argued academically in Why Marriage?, giving solid evidence and credence to the arguments for the right to marriage as a tool for broader gay civil rights. By citing specific state and national laws within United States policy, Chauncey demonstrates a handful of the different ways that the government has worked to oppress LGBTQ communities in the past and present. While personal narratives and sharing experience are necessary to the feminist and gay liberation movements, solid evidence of oppression in law is also an important factor in arguing for change in politics and in society. Before reading this book, I had mixed feelings on the idea of marriage. I understand the role of marriage as a gendered institution that keeps women subservient to men, and definitely do agree that this can be the case. However, I also acknowledge the changing role of marriage as a pact of equality and sharing, and so can see the positives in marriage as well. Within my social context, marriage is something that is generally scoffed at and written off. I feel now, especially after reading this book, that the gender of the couple getting married should not matter, that it should be a right available to all who would like to partake in it. Chauncey makes a solid argument that the sooner that gay marriage becomes a civil right, the sooner queerness will be more accepted and embraced by society as a whole, because of visibility as an equal.
Reading #3: This Bridge offered a format with which I was more familiar with from other women’s studies courses and from my own personal reading. The naming and expression of different oppressions is very important to addressing issues, validating another human being, and working for change. The range of authors within the anthology worked to uphold the standards set by the first edition of This Bridge Called My Back, meaning that the works would be inclusive of those who are often marginalized by society and by large feminist movements, with an emphasis on activism as an empowering tool on a personal and broad scale.
Reading #4: I liked How Like a Leaf because it seemed to be the exact opposite of a book like This Bridge. It gave a completely different and unorthodox perspective into the study of gender and sexualities in a more abstract way, that still had the intentions of a feminist work. While the examples that Haraway used were concrete and well-formed, they were also available for interpretation and imagination. This work is not as angry or focused in the same way as other feminist works from this class and other women’s studies courses, which is interesting and refreshing. The perspective is so prone to interpretation, fluid, and imaginative that it is a bit overwhelming, though this is a positive thing that can be worked with on a number of levels.
Website: I appreciate the day that we looked at different videos on YouTube to see how feminist music artists use humor to promote certain messages and images because it was fun and relaxing, while relatable and provided a lot of discussion. My favorite was the Le Tigre video because I am a big fan of Bikini Kill and Le Tigre, and because the imagery in the video was very funny and light-hearted though it provoked thought and questions.
Hana Kim
Portfolio
Intro: Hi my name is Hana Kim and I am a senior women studies major. I am pretty new to this major due to the fact that I changed into this major the beginning of my junior year. As I continue to take more challenging women studies classes, my interest in the way that feminist theorists is exponentially growing. By taking this class I hope to broaden my knowledge feminist reconceptualization.
Summary Paper 1:
In this book, George Chauncey guides us through the criticisms of marriage from a feminist standpoint and the struggle that LGBT went through and still go through throughout the course of history. Many things and attitudes have changed towards same sex marriage, but at the same time it is still a struggle. Gay marriage is continually criticized and looked down upon, especially by religion because they argue that gay marriage is a violation of the institution of marriage.
In the beginning of the book Chauncey talks about the history of how the US has treated and perceived the LGBT community. The Lawrence decision that occurred in the spring of 2004 to extend privacy rights to homosexuals produced an outrageous outcry by congressmen and religious leaders. They were upset and worried about what was going to happen next, such as same-sex marriage. Chauncey claims that no historical study can resolve the debate over marriage, but the AIDS epidemic amongst the gay community and the boom in gay parenting is important to see why we are at this point today.
Marriage has changed a lot since the beginning, and the changes are making marriage more appealing and urgent for gay people. People who are against gay marriage are the people that can’t except the changes that are occurring in the institution of marriage. The freedom to choose one’s marital partner became a fundamental civil right. Chauncey expresses his belief for gay people to have the right to marry each other and have the same rights as heterosexual married couples.
Chauncey also relates the struggle of gay marriage to feminist problems and the civil rights movement. There is a history of the struggle of the gay community, just as there is a history of feminists and the struggles that minorities went through to be seen as equal human beings. Times have changed a lot. Chauncey emphasizes the importance of why gay marriage should be.
How to read handout:
Biography:
George Chauncey is a professor of history at Yale University. He is best known as the author of Gay New York. Professor Chauncey has been involved in several major court cases and public debates bearing on the rights of lesbians and gay men. He has also authored or joined amicus briefs and affidavits on the history of marriage or antigay discrimination submitted in several state court cases in which same-sex couples have sought the right to marry. He was also involved in the Lawrence v. Texas case which overturned the nations remaining sodomy laws. He was a big activist in obtaining rights for the gay community.
-By knowing about his background it has made me realize why he wrote this book.
Form of the text:
The form of the text is in a book, which is in the genre form of almost a history book. This book is not totally like a history textbook, but it contains a lot of information on the history of the struggle of gay marriage. This book is almost a timeline of what has occurred in the past and how things have changed. It is kind of hard to pin point an exact genre to put this book into.
Topics to discuss:
1) Shouldn’t the AIDS crisis have deterred gays from wanting to get married instead of attracting them?
2) What do you think is going to happen to gay marriage in the future.
3) Is the push for gay marriage going in a positive or negative direction.
Violated Assumptions list:
1) I didn’t know that the civil rights movement had such a great impact on the gay rights movement.
2) AIDs crisis attracted gays to want to get married.
3) Homosexuality was considered a mental disorder.
Summary 2:
This book is in the form of an anthology where a variety of feminist writers have come together to share their experiences and thoughts. This Bridge We Call Home offers a new vision of women-of-color consciousness for the 21st century. Identity is a big focus of this book, how people identify and how we use our identities to better ourselves. This book covers issues of many different types of differences and oppressions such as lesbianism, interracial issues, homosexism, maternity, generational issues, racism, etc. This book emphasizes the importance of both collected and collective experiences. “Risking great openness, Bridge authors expose the stereotypes, split open the labels, and challenge the false assumptions of sameness.”
History of the book:
This anthology of writings is almost an addition to a previously groundbreaking anthology This Bridge Called My Back , except this one is put together by Gloria E. Anzaldua and Analouise Keating.
Summary of the preface:
(Un)natural bridges, (Un) safe spaces
This section starts with a description of Natural Bridges and what Bridges represent. Bridges are thresholds to other realities, archetypal, primary symbols of shifting consciousness. The world Nepantla is introduced which means tierra entre medio (earth between means). “ Transformation occurs in this in-between space, an unstable, unpredictable, precarious, always-in-transition space lacking clear boundaries.” With this explanation of how the Bridge is connected with the issues around the everchanging society, the preface continues to explain the goals and purpose for the The Bridge We Call Home. This books invites people to move beyond separate and easy identifications, creating bridges that cross race and other classifications among different groups. The purpose is to point out the differences that separate us from each other so people can understand and embrace each other. It is pointed out that the editors were afraid to include white writers because it may offend the writers of color, but they wanted to include white writers within this anthology to refuse from continuing to walk the colored line. Gloria Anzuldua says that in order for positive change to occur, we must imagine a reality that differs from what already exists and to treat the wounds and mend the rifts we must sometimes reject the injunctions of culture, group, family, and ego.
Summary of intro:
Charting Pathways, Marking Thresholds…A warning, An Introduction
This section is divided into different times, starting from the Summer of 1998 to Summer 2000, describing the process of the putting together of this book. AnaLouise Keating first describes how The Bridge Called My Back has had a very important impact on her life. She was intrigued by this book when she first read it and it made her want to take action in transforming the thoughts of people. She also includes how she came about starting this project. There are many questions she asked herself. She felt like she should make another collection in collaboration with Gloria Anzuldua because so much time has passed and she wanted to re-energize the dialogue. She wanted to take action. Receiving abstracts from writers confirmed her fear that not much change has occurred in the past twenty years. She says part of the Bridge’s power stems from the authors’ ability to transform walls into bridges, into spiraling paths from self to other, from other to self, and she wants the anthology to do more than that. As the process continues her excitement and fears continue. At first it was hard to make a connection of this anthology to the original Bridge. But working with Gloria they both made interconnections of the different pieces submitted.
“ May this book be a threshold, a marker of change, a marker of change, a place of and invitation to transformation.”
Summary of the 77: Forging El Mundo Zurdo: Changing Ourselves, Changing the World
AnaLouise what she learned from reading The Bridge over ten years ago. Commonalities indicate complex points of connection that negotiate among sameness, similarity, and difference. People hide their differences beneath a façade of sameness and erect rigid boundaries between self and other. Rejection doesn’t make these differences go away, instead they grow stronger. There are so many oppressions covered but the biggest oppression is the collective fact that people do not fit, and because of this we are a threat. She refers to Gloria Anzuldua’s concept of El Mundo Zurdo, a visionary place where people from diverse backgrounds with diverse needs and concerns co-exist and work together to bring about revolutionary change. AnaLouise strives to live by Anzuldua’s two-way movement to make a difference, that by changing ourselves, we/I can change the world. She has come up with her own premises that she tries to embody throughout her life. In this essay she has shared her belief that a recognition of our radical interconnectedness offers one way to negotiate the divisions between “us” and “them,” between “self” and “other.”
How to Read:
Biographies:
Gloria Anzuldua- She was Chicana lesbian feminist writer, poet, scholar and activist. She succeeded in getting education despite experiencing many different forms of oppression. She has made big contributions to the actual definition of “feminism” and had contributed to the field of cultural theory/chicana and queer theory. She has helped make visible the literature of women of color in the USA.
AnaLouise Keating- She is a Ph.D Associate Professor, Women’s Studies. (all I could find on her)
Form of text:
The form of this text is an anthology, a collection of writings from different writers.
Things to discuss:
1) how does spirituality connect with this?
2) What do you think about the concept of El Mundo Zurdo? Do you really think that difference functions not to exclude but as a catalyst for community building and change?
Violated Assumptions:
1) I didn’t know how much work it was to put together and anthology
2) I didn’t know difference could be used to our advantage.
3) Experiences of other women have a greater impact on telling a story.
4) Gender and race remain contested issues, but sex is the most charged of all.
Summary 3:
Kath Weston argues that there is a problem with the study of gender and that it is becoming weak. The problem is that time is taking its toll. Weston introduces new ideas that will lead the field of gender studies into a new bright future. She argues that publications on gender are flourishing yet there is a certain weakening in the study of gender. “To study gender relations today is to work in the shadow of paradox.” Activism and insight in gender studies is almost becoming nonexistent and that is a very big problem. She emphasizes that time is a big issue in the study of gender. Weston introduces three paradoxes that contribute to the intellectual weakening of gender discussions. All these paradoxes intertwine with each other and are related to the problems with time. “Time travels through the study of gender.” Her main goal is help get gender moving again in to a more productive path. In the first couple of chapters she introduces the concept of unsexed and “zero gender”
Biography of Kath Weston:
She is a Director of Studies for the Committee on Degrees in Women Studies. She has been researching the surveillance practices and what it means to live poor in a rich country. She also researched political economy; “intersections” of gender with race, class, and other aspects of identity.
Mood of the book:
The mood of this book is passionate about making gender studies better.
Words and sentences:
-She makes a lot of references to other writers and their stance on the issue. (how are argument is made)
-She uses questions to get the point across.
- There are a lot of words that are in quotation marks.
Person:
She writes in the first person to get her message across (page 3)
Things to discuss in class:
-How did gender studies become what is today?
- Is the problem the reason why we aren’t getting far?
- The idea of “zero gender” (clarify)
-Gender policing.
Violated Assumptions:
- How can a person become unsexed?
- Isn’t the publication on gender a ways of activism, spreading the knowledge?
Summary 4:
This book is in the form of an interview done by Thyrza Nichols Goodeve of Donna J. Haraway. The beginning of the interview begins out with a discussion of Haraway’s personal life, her history and such. The interview is taken place at Donna Haraway’s house in Santa Cruz, California. She explains how her theories and how her logical development came about from the experiences in her life. Thryza also guides her into a conversation of how all the aspects of her life have intertwined with each other. The works that she has done that we mentioned in the interview were “A Manifesto for Cyborgs”, Primate Visions; and Simians, Cyborgs, and Women. In her essay, A Cyborg Manifesto, she uses the cyborg as a metaphor to challenge feminists to employ in politics other than naturalism and essentialisms. Thryza asks her multiple times about her writings if she could, would she change some of her writings and almost always, Haraway says no. From this interview, it is easy to learn that Haraway is very interested in all aspects of science. She thinks science as a whole is amazing. She says
“I’m fascinated by changes of scale. I think biological worlds invite thinking at, and about, different kinds of scale. At the same time, biological worlds are full of imaginations and beings developed from quite extraordinary biological architectures and mechanism. Biology is an inexhaustible source of troping. It is certainly full of metaphor, but it is more than metaphor.”
She obviously values biology and believes that it is a source of many good things. The interview continues on with describing and explaining the different menageries she uses.
What I learned from web research about Donna J. Haraway:
-She is a postmodern feminist and argues against essentialism.
- According to Haraway's Manifesto, "There is nothing about being female that naturally binds women together into a unified category. There is not even such a state as 'being' female, itself a highly complex category constructed in contested sexual scientific discourses and other social practices" (155).
- Haraway has also lectured in feminist theory and techno-science.
- Haraway is a leading thinker about people's love and hate relationship with machines.
Form of interview: This interview is in a non formal, free flowing form. They talk and if something comes up they elaborate on it. I think it is in a form of an interview because of its informality, she is better able to express her ideas more thoroughly. Because there are questions out there about her works, she addresses them in question answer form. A conversation with another person is easier to have than a conversation with yourself.
Discussion topics:
-Do you think you could ever have a relationship like Donna’s and Jaye’s?
- She never taught her theories in her class and says she uses teaching as a way to stay current, I don’t really understand.
Summary 5:
Lisa Duggan expresses her view on the conflict between free market economics as exemplified by neoliberalism and the promotion of social policies. She explores the connections between cultural and economic politics in U.S history. The book starts out with an introduction of neoliberalism and how it dismantled the New Deal, and how equality throughout the years seemed to be more attainable. Duggan believes that Neo-liberalism has had an negative effect on equality, “Neoliberalism developed over many decades as a mode of polemic aimed at dismantling the limited U.S. welfare state, in order to enhance corporate profit rates. The raising of profit rates required that money be diverted from other social uses, thus increasing overall economic inequality” (XII). She uses history to restructure the origin of economic, social, political, and cultural inequalities in America. Duggan believes that inequality is growing in the U.S. Neo-liberalism is an incarnation of liberalism; it organizes material and political life in terms of race, gender, sexuality, class, ethnicity, and religion. To understand this better, Duggan provides the reader with a little history. The neo-liberal revolution has advanced. Neoliberal politicians and corporate employers and media in the US had already moved significantly in the direction of “diversity, and towards “equality”. She emphasizes how political conservatives, the “neo-liberals” are gaining economic success while the progressive lefts are growing weaker and encourages progressives to challenge the neo-liberals.
Discussion:
•Same sex couples were excluded from relief funds associated with September 11, 2001 attacks.
Biography:
•Director of the American Studies Program and Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis at New York University
•Director of the American Studies ProgramUniversity of Pennsylvania, Ph.D. 1992
•Sarah Lawrence College, M.A. 1979
•University of Virginia, BA 1976
Violate Assumptions:
1. I didn’t know that same-sex couples didn’t originally get equal relief from the Sept. 11 attacks.
Group Project:
"This Bridge we Call Home Section 3 "locking arms in the master's house"...omissions, revisions, new issues "
Liliana Wilson Grez is a profound artist who was born in Valparaiso, Chile. She earned a law degree in Chile, and studied art at Southwest Texas State University. Her many works depict a symbolic meaning in which they convey a message of many political, and societal issues. Her images concentrate on the struggles for integrity and the ideas of her images come from her dreams and the subconscious.
"As a Latin American woman who lived through a dictatorship in Chile, I use art to give meaning to a life history that is at once hard to confront and important to remember."
On Page 131, a picture drawn by Liliana Wilson Grez is titled "Burning House."
From the image, what are your first impressions?
What is Grez trying to convey through her image?
As you look closely, the burning house is floating on water, what does this symbolize?
Titles of Section 3: "locking arms in the amster's house"...omissions, revisions, new issues"
26. Burning House
27. "What's Wrong with a Little fantasy?" Storytelling from the (Still) Ivory Tower
28. Footnoting Heresy: E-mail Dialogues
29. Memory and the New-Born: The Maternal Imigination in Diaspora
30. The "White" Sheep of the Family: But Bleaching is like Starvation
31. Lesbianism, 2000
32. "Now That You're a White Man": Changing Sex in a Postmodern World-Being, Becoming, and Borders
33. Poets, Lovers, and the Master's Tools: A Conversation with Audre Lorde
34. "All I Can Cook Is Crack on a Spoon": A Sign for a New Generation of Feminist
35. DON'T TOUCH: RECUERDOS (SELF DESTRUCTION)
36. Premature
37. The Reckoning
From the image, what are your first impressions?
What is Grez trying to convey through her image?
As you look closely, the burning house is floating on water, what does this symbolize?
My first impression of the image is sort of negative because a house is burning down. The house is literally engulfed in flames. I think Grez is trying to convey the message of breaking something down. Breaking down a structure or something. A house is built with the help of many people. This house looks like a representation of the works and theories about colored women. This section in the book deals with reconstructing feminist thought about colored women. Some women are excluded from the writings which in itself is oppressing them even more. It is a criticism of previous works by feminist. This house represents the break down of that structure so a new one can be built. You can also see this in the title. All women, no matter the color of their skin, should come together and lock arms in the master's house. I think master's house represents the structure of white feminist thought. If colored women come together and lock arms, join together, they can change things in feminist theories. Whether they are ommiting things, revising things, or bringing about new issues.
Hana Kim
Learning Analysis
Hana Kim WMST300 Prof: Katie King Learning Analysis
1) My description of the argument or story of the course.
If we look at this course as a book I would title this book “Understanding the Different Dimensions of Feminism.”
- What is the argument of the course?
To me, the argument of the course is to emphasize that feminism is not one dimensional; there are many different dimensions that interconnect feminism and Women’s Studies to the outside world. We can see how feminisms can connect to out everyday lives. Feminism is able to connect to different people and our everyday lives because there are so many different types, hence the different dimensions. Feminism is also a catalyst to understanding and a way for us to dive into different issues and social movements. Through out this course we read a lot of works done by very diverse people. By reading different views, ideas, and theories; we learned how Women’s Studies bonds feminists and to other social justice movements. By this, as a class we are able to reconceptualize feminism.
To me, the ideas of these authors are very different to what I am used to encountering. There are many different ways to get your point or story across as we can clearly see in this course. For example, ideas can be presented in the form of interviews or comic books. These ways of presenting ideas are effective in keeping the reader interested and truly seeing the feminist’s personality, which makes everything much more personal. Feminism is not just for women who are trying to achieve equality for them selves it is about everybody, no matter your color, race, gender, ethnicity, age, sexuality, etc. This leads us into another argument of this course, which has to do with identity politics. Feminists around the world all consist of different identities. Some are different ethnicities, sexualities, and even gender. In accordance to their identity, they all strive for different goals and arguments. Identifying identities was a big part of this course. Especially when we were trying to understand where these feminists were coming from, we were trained to do background research rather then just reading works and interpreting them as is. Knowing about the author’s identities helps us understand the work better. All these different works striving for different goals is what makes up feminism. It is not only about women trying to liberate women it is much larger than that.
- What are the parts of this argument, and how do they connect to each other?
The parts of this argument are the different types of feminisms presented in this class and identity politics. These two parts are connected to each other because they have a cause and effect relationship. The cause of different feminisms is from the effect that there are many different people out there with different identities. You fight for what you identify with.
- How I think the course was constructed.
This course was constructed to showcase all the different issues of feminism. Not only did it show the liberation of women, but also the liberation of all the different oppressed groups of people. The course started out with the comic book, “Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For” by Alison Bechdel, which I believe was an introduction to what we would encounter through out the course. It contained all the different elements and dimensions of feminisms. Alison Bechdel did a great job including characters of all different sorts. They included people dealing with homosexuality, same-sex marriage, patriotic dissent, breast cancer, and with transgender issues. After the introduction, we were exposed to the subject of gay marriage, which we may think is not a feminist issue. This helped us to realize that feminism isn’t all about women, and not all feminists believe in the same thing. We also learned that some feminists don’t agree with gay marriage, surprisingly. This was a violated assumption to some of us in the class. I believe that violated assumptions lead to feminist reconceptualization. Then we were exposed to activism and feminism by women of color and histories of U.S feminism from the book “This Bridge We Call Home” edited by Gloria E. Anzaldua and Analouise Keating. This which leads in to identification of identity and realizing what we believe in. Overall, I believe that this course was constructed in a way so that we learn new ideas by getting our assumptions violated while a learning how to assess our own views and politics in correlation to what we have learned.
2) Putting myself into this story… -How are you a part of the argument of the course?
I would say that I am a part of the argument of this course because I do consider myself as a feminist, and it is not only because I believe in the liberation of women as the sole goal. I believe by using feminist ideas and practices, we will be able to strive and advance in other social justice movements. Every one comes from different backgrounds, such as my self, so feminism should not be solely based on one particular group. My identity is a big part of me, and within the story of this class, I have been better able to identify with my self.
-What was happening to you at different points in this argument?
At different points in this argument my views were becoming more enhanced, changing at some points and I was learning a lot more on feminist ideas. I was being more exposed to some ideas that, honestly, kind of seemed really foreign to me. Also, my assumptions were being violated, which made me take a step back and realize that everything is not that simple and just because something is one way, it doesn’t mean it can’t be another. My mentality was almost linear, to put it forwardly. -What kind of knowledge did you make yourself in your analysis of readings, in your responses to other’s work? I made myself understand the author’s background and their other works in order to fully understand what their ideas were based on. By doing this, I have learned to understand their ideas with out judging them. It’s almost as if we tried to get to know the author in order for us to connect with them.
-Other thoughts
I liked the discussions that we had in classes to get our ideas across. I didn't really express much in class because sometimes I felt like I couldn't fully relate and I'm the type of person that just like to listen. I felt the discussions were intriguing to listen to and sometimes hard to keep up with because we jumped around a lot. Other than that I loved hearing other student's views, thoughts, and experiences. I think I brought an open mind to the class as a listener rather than a talker. I listened to what everyone had to say carefully and try to understand where they were coming from, although there were times where I did not agree to some comments. The discussions did help me understand the readings better. The blog was a good way for people the also express their thoughts even if it was on different subjects. I liked that we were given the opportunity to expand our learning experience outside of the classroom. 3) Put the class into the context of a WMST curriculum. -How does this course connect with work from other women’s studies courses?
This course connects with work from other women’s studies course because these works that we have been getting to know are theories that other feminists have expressed. Throughout my WMST career so far, I have been reading and analyzing theories done by other feminists. I think this is a big part of Women’s studies. With out theories, there wouldn’t be solutions. I see theories as a way of passive activism. Other women’s courses also deal with works done by feminists of color and bring up the issues of intersectionality as deeply touched upon in “This Bridge We Call Home.”
-Similarities and difference?
The similarities to this course and other WMST courses are they bring up the wide range of issues that feminists deal with, such as gender issues, homosexuality, etc. Not one course that I have taken in the Women’s studies curriculum yet, have they not talked about all these issues. My first Women’s studies class, I was quite surprised to find out that women’s liberation was not the sole subject and goal of feminists, although it is the main concern. I had no idea that in the course of the Women’s studies history that there were so many more deep issues underneath. Some differences though that I have seen in comparison to this course and other courses is the modernity of these feminist ideas. For example, in the Donna Haraway’s interview, “How Like a Leaf,” never have I heard feminist ideas in comparison to science. There are many new concepts brought up through out this course which I think is wonderful, but I think kind of stretched from the norm. Another difference from this course is that it helps us reassess where we stand in our own views and ideas. In other courses, there have been times where I didn’t agree to some ideas, but then that would be it. But in this class, we are able to express our ideas and discuss our differences. Not only do we discuss and analyze what we have read for the class, we put our thoughts into it and write out loud our violated assumptions, which I think helps us realize where we stand.
-How does it allow you to look back over theses kinds of courses, and what kind of sense does it help make of them? This allows me to look back over these kinds of courses and helps me understand that these courses all have purpose in enhancing and advancing our knowledge of Women’s studies. All these classes are building blocks for each other. I have also acknowledged that all these Women’s studies courses have a big deal to do with feminists of all different identities. It is not only about white middle class feminists fighting for equal rights. Feminists, women or men, are all trying to learn how to coincide in this diverse world peacefully with out anybody being shorthanded. - What place does this class hold in the construction of the WMST major? Did you get tools from this class that will help you continue your feminist education/politics/life? My thoughts.
I believe that this class in the WMST major is almost like a training course. We learn how to analyze and most importantly we learn “How to Read” these feminist works. Through out the WMST we will be continuously reading works by feminists so this course teaches us how to do that effectively. This is why this class is a portal course in the WMST curriculum.
I have learned so many tools from this class, most importantly the tool of how to read. Honestly at first when we were handed the “How to Read” sheet, I was a little confused to why we were getting it. I thought I knew how to read, but obviously I didn’t know how to do it effectively. Within learning how to read, I feel that I have acquired the tool of being more open minded, which I think is very important. Because with out an open mind, nothing will ever be achieved. Another important tool that I have token with me from this course is the tool of research. Being knowledgeable of an author’s background really helps to understand their reading better. By using these tools, I truly trust that my career in the WMST program would be more affective and enriching. The ideas for the future that this class helped me envision is that not everything is straightforward and simple. Anything can be abstract beyond belief, and if that works then it’s okay. There are a lot of issues and side notes to take into consideration.
4) Discussion of 4 readings and 1 or 2 web sites from the course connecting you to the class.
Reading 1: “Invasion of the Dykes To Watch Out For”- Alison Bechdel
I’d like to first discuss about this comic book, “Invasion of the Dykes to Watch out For” by Alison Bechdel. This is my first choice of readings in this class to discuss not only because it was the first reading but because I feel that all the issues addressed in this comic encompasses what we have been talking about in class as a whole. This comic book addresses issues of homosexuality, same-sex marriage, politics, deviations from traditional gender roles, breast cancer and transgender issues. I think this choice of reading was a great one as an introduction to this feminist reconceptualization class.
This reading connects to the class because all the characters are so different and they all have different views on life. Feminism can be seen through all of these individual characters. Each of their identities is either established or they are still trying to identify them.
I think this comic affected me greatly. It violated a lot of the assumptions that I had. For example I did not know that not all homosexual individuals agreed with same-sex marriage. I guess it was naïve for me to think that, but I never thought of it other than they all were fighting for it. From this comic I learned to look at things from many different perspectives than one. Of course, I am always going to have my own views and things that I agree to and not agree to, but it is interesting to think of the opposite perspective to. I think that helps with keeping the mind open. Just to know that not everything is lateral made me more interested in studying feminism and WMST. This course of study is so complicated, yet so intriguing.
Reading 2: “How Like a Leaf” Donna J. Haraway an interview with Thyrza Nichols Goodeve
This reading was a quite interesting one because it was in the form of an interview. (This is one of my favorite things about this class- the format of the texts are different than traditional texts read in classes).The interview helped readers to feel more personally attached to the interviewee. Their thoughts are explained more clearly than in an actual formal writing. This was also an interesting read because Donna Haraway’s experiences were directly connected to her work. Because of the connection within her life and work, this reading really portrays the purpose of the class. By just reading this interview we got to know her and where her ideas were coming from. In the class, we learn to do background research to understand a person’s work better. It was easy to actually realize where Haraway was getting all of her complicated ideas and concepts. Haraway discusses the importance of reconceptualizing the way that westernized science has conquered concepts of naturalization. Using biology as a foreground, Haraway touches on all different aspects of the society, culture, philosophy, human adaption and development. She is very unconventional when it comes to her concepts, which I thought was a little strange at first because I was not used to it. She emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary work. I think interdisciplinarity is very interesting to me because it involves attacking a topic from all different kinds of angles which in the end help develop a new method for understanding a topic. Her interdisciplinary works is very important to this class because, it shows that it is possible for feminism to be interconnected with our everyday lives. This book helped me to grasp the importance and understanding of this course because it actually demonstrated the intricacy of how feminist theories can be developed. It seems to me that Haraway has a very peaceful life even though she has gone through a marriage with a man that was attracted to the same sex and a divorce. This shows how changing the way you think and keeping an open mind can lead you to places that are quite peaceful.
Reading 3: “This Bridge We Call Home” edited by: Gloria E. Anzuldua and Analouise Keating. This reading meant a lot to me because it deals with women of color. As a asian woman, I do see the importance of intersectionality. Feminism should be aimed towards all different types of women, not just one. This extensive reading falls into the class argument of the importance of identity. All aspects that make up our identity need to be taken into account. Experiences from different women and people need to be heard in order stop the oppression against all women. The Bridge helps with self-acceptance and teaches us that we don't have to conform, we can be who we truly are and don't have hide anything. We can embrace ourselves and build bridges with women from different backgrounds. This is very important to me because I believe in bringing all women together to help each other out. All we have is each other. Reading 4: “Gender in Real Time” by Kath Weston
Although this book was a little complicated to understand sometimes, I loved the way it provoked my mind. She uses different methods to approach gender studies. The idea of time and how it related to gender is a key part to Weston's argument. She places the evolution of gender in the context of history. She emphasizes that gender studies need to change and that it is getting "weaker". She introduces the concept of "unsexed", where and individual does not labeled a sex or gender. Her theory of the "unsexed" is related to the history of mathematics, which I see as an example of interdisciplinarity. She used mathematics to explain her theory on gender. Lastly, Weston reinforces the notion that gender is learned through repetitive behaviors that are labeled as either masculine or feminine. Gender is a performance, it is not a biological characteristic. I think this reading is important because it takes one of the most discussed issues in WMSTs and displays it in a different perspective. One of the first things we learn in introductory WMST classes are the difference between gender and sex. And gender is always correlated with gender roles, it is not a biological factor. Weston brings to light very interesting and different perspectives that pertain to gender. This helps us reconceptualize what we have thought of gender and gender studies so far.
-Website: The website/video that I want to discuss about, are the music videos shown in class. I thought the music videos were cleverly directed and thought out. They were very abstract yet still conveyed important messages. I really like how feminists used all different types of media to get their messages across. They don't just stick to one media, which may get repetitive and boring sometimes.
Molly Jang
Wmst 300
Learning Analysis
Due: November 28th, 2007
In today’s world, we live in a society in which theories, concepts, and morals are changing in every way. People’s minds are converging, renewing and adapting to the mainstream way of life. As we look into today’s society, we see a patriarchal society as the mainstream way of life. We live in a society in which men dominate and are looked as superior to woman. Learning about feminist theories, and concepts have given people another perspective in life. Feminists have emerged to take a stand and voice their opinion. Having taken many women’s studies classes have opened my eyes to new experiences and a new outlook on life. When I first encountered on the name “Feminist Reconceptualization”, all I thought about were theories, theories and theories. However having taken this class, I was able to learn some theories and actually apply them to real life situations. I broke down the word “reconceptualization”. Re, the pre-fix means to do something again, and stated by dictionary.com, to conceptualize something means “to form into a concept, make a concept of.” In this class, we were able to look at various concepts such as higher education, gay marriages, and political sarcasm and further reshape what they mean in the context and delve deeper into the meanings with class discussions.
This course enabled us to really crack open various literatures and discuss what it means to us and how it relates to our society. As we read each book, we had intense discussions about the author, topics we were still ambiguous about, and what we learned about the book. From each book we were to write a summary about the book, complete the “How-To-Read” exercise and write about our violated assumptions. The “How-To- Read” exercises were beneficial in that we were able to really read the book inside and out. I realized having background information from the author helps to understand where the author is coming from. Looking up the author’s ethnicity, educational experience, language, health, job, etc helped me to place myself in the author’s shoes and envision how the author thinks or feels. Also observing the form of the text whether it’s an interview, a biography, a novel, or a comic strip was helpful in that you understand the flow of the text. From each reading, there were a set of violated assumptions everyone had. Violated assumptions help you comprehend more about yourself and rethink your thoughts. There were many assumptions I had, and having them violated allowed me to question my thoughts and realize new things. If they weren’t violated, I would continue to be ignorant in my thinking and allow myself to think that my thoughts are correct. The argument of this course is to reevaluate the way feminism is changing and formed into new ways.
My input in the “argument” of the course was to share with my classmates my insights in each reading and have them teach me their thoughts. I believe in education whatever is spoken is taught. Having class discussions each week really helped me to understand and get to know my classmates better. I was able to really engage in class discussions and learn more about various authors and their views. My contribution to the class was for my classmates to understand my background and where my views come from. The various free writings that we did really benefited me in writing down my thoughts and experiences from the past. Looking back at one of our free writings, we were asked to write “What is theory? What is Feminist Theory?” Ironically, me being a women ’s studies major, I never really thought about what a feminist theory was. These various free writings that we wrote in class, allowed me to have my thoughts to flow out of my head onto paper. When we shared our thoughts, it was interesting to see how each person incorporated their past experiences to the present and how various events in the past have shaped them into the person who they are today.
Feminist reconceptualization summed up a lot of the women’s studies classes as a whole. There were many similarities and differences that allowed everything to be summed up into this one class. One similarity that this class had with various other women’s studies classes was having the same foundation in reshaping culture, and society. We read various books in which stand out in today’s culture such as Bechdel’s political comic strips, George Chauncey “Why marriage? The history shaping today's debate over gay equality.”, and Kate Weston’s book “Gender in Real Time”. These books were written to change culture, and change society’s views. Today, gay marriages are more common than ever before. George Chauncey said that feminist movements have helped gay marriages be brought to light. In the past it was always the traditional nuclear family, the man being the breadwinner, and woman taking care of the children and house chores. However, today society has become more diverse. This relates to a women’s studies literature class I took in which we also looked at books that changed and reformed culture. One book that we read was “Kitchen” by Banana Yoshimoto. “Kitchen” was about a love story that resulted in loneliness and despair. The author being Japanese incorporated the Japanese culture however with a twist. The main character’s lover had a transsexual as a “mother” in which is uncommon and unheard of in today’s Japanese culture. These various literatures are all written for one common purpose, to be a thorn among the bushes and make a change in today’s cultures.
There were many differences between this class and other feminist classes. This class was more of an open discussion where we were able to sit facing one another and have many open conversations about what we read and learned. Other women’s studies classes you were able to discuss things, however they were limited. This class really allowed me to open up and speak what is on my mind. I was able to really engage myself in these discussions and learn from my classmates their thoughts and what they got out of various books. Other women’s studies classes were limited in discussion which put a block towards really engaging in the material. Another difference from this class to other women’s studies classes were the “How-to Read” exercises, and violated assumptions. This was the first class in which I was able to break down the reading material sentence by sentence and understand where the author was coming from. In the past, I would just freely read the book, and summarize the book briefly. However after learning how to do the “How-to Read” exercises, there was so much so learn and I was able to delve deeper into the book. Another aspect of this class that differed from other classes was having violated assumptions. In other women’s studies classes, you just shared what was on your mind, however never had your views negated or “violated”. Having violated assumptions really allows you to re-think our thoughts and broaden your range of knowledge. After each reading, it was effective to have your assumptions violated because it helped me to widen my narrow views and accept new ones.
In this course there were many readings that have broaden my knowledge and made me into a stronger person as a women’s studies major. The first reading that has influenced me was “The bridge we call home” by Anzaldue and Keating. This book of anthologies really engaged me in placing myself in these women’s shoes and understanding their struggles of identity and oppression. This book really reaches out to women of color who have struggled with their inner being, and who they are. Being a Korean-American it was hard to juggle with two cultures and be accepted into two worlds. My parents being Korean have raised my brother and I in the Korean culture, to speak it, and to uphold the traditions, however it was hard to keep these traditions while being born and raised in America. I consider myself not just a Korean, but also an American. As a girl in my family, my parents expect me to speak Korean to them and their friends, to become a “waitress” when guests come over to our house, and to be a high achiever in my academics. Reading the various essays in this book, allowed me to empathize with these women to conform to a society where they are looked upon as outcasts. After reading this book, the title of the story became so clear. As I thought about what a bridge symbolized, I thought about a connection from one place to another. All theses essays written were a connection to one another in which these women and men were able to form a connection and reach out to one another.
Another reading that struck me was George Chauncey’s book: Why Marriage. This book was a timeline of how gay marriages were brought to light from the past to today and how the concept of marriage was and is still being reconceptualized. Chauncey breaks down the historical perspectives of LGBTQ people and how they’ve come a long way to become accepted within society. Earlier in the 1920’s and 1930’s, homosexuality was not accepted let alone the marriage of homosexuals. Many gay businesses such as bars, and business associations shut down and were closed off to the public. There were many derogatory signs such as If you are Gay, Please Stay Away, or We do not serve homosexuals that were put up in restaurants. LGBTQ people were looked as outcasts and gained no respect from society. Chauncey talks about how the feminist movements were able to pave the way towards gay marriages. He compares gay rights to civil right movements and the equality gays should have today. This reading intrigued me in the way that Chauncey was able to break down the meaning of an institutionalized marriage and how gay rights have come this far in this day in age.
The third reading that influenced me was “How like a leaf” by Donna Haraway. This was a profound interview between Donna Haraway and Thyrza Nichols Goodeve. Haraway is a professor in the History of Consciousness Department at the University of California in which she sees the world through a biological lens. She says “Biology is about endless variation, whereas in psychology there is the notion of repetition compulsion.” Her childhood has really shaped who she is today. As she was brought up in a Catholic home, she was greatly influenced by the nuns in her life wishing to become one in the future. What intrigued me about this book was her love for science and how majority of her ideologies, and thoughts all uprooted from biology, psychology, and from the unconscious.
The fourth reading that influenced me was Alison Bechdel’s comic’s from Invasion of the Dykes to watch out For. It was funny and amusing how she puts political sarcasm into these comics in which she speaks out her voice for gay rights. Many of her comic strips speak out on lesbian, and gay rights, same sex marriages, the Iraq war, etc. She portrays unique characters such as transsexuals, gays, and lesbians. The way Alison puts sarcasm in the comic strips are amusing and catchy. Her website http://www.dykestowatchoutfor.com/index.php, is also a website that I’ve visited a lot to see Alison’s updates on her comics and what she has been up too. I think we should read more of Alison Bechdel’s comic strip books. This book was the most fun to read and insightful. Her insights on the political world are one that I think President Bush needs to look at.
Overall this class has brought me new insights and has expanded my knowledge of the feminist worlds. The various books that we’ve read have re-shaped my thoughts in reconceptualizing our ways in society. Feminism has come a long way, and if we keep reconceptualizing feministic ways, we will help shape today’s culture into a more diverse, eclectic society. The various class discussions has helped me understand my classmates better and delve deeper into each book and cracking open the meaning of each book. The “How-to-Read” exercises and violated assumptions allowed me to understand myself and the readings better. This class allowed me to realize that there are always new and better ways to reconceptualize anything in a new shape and form. One prominent goal of feminism is to reshape and reform today’s culture, and this class has helped me to see that.
Molly Jang
WMST 300
PORTFOLIO
Violated Assumptions #1: Dykes to Watch out for
#1. Bechdel makes clear political statements towards lesbians rights.
#2. Stay at home dad's are more common now, then before. Back in the day, it was strictly just women.
#3. Everyone has a voice to be heard.
#4. Any artistic form of usage, singing, writing, drawing, shows your inner passions
Violated assumptions #2: Chauncey: Why Marriage
1) Through the footsteps of African America, Jews, Chicanos, Jews and Italians oppressions, gays were able to speak out.
2) Governmental Policies put a ban to all gays when serving in office. President Eisenhower particularly was against gays serving in the government.
3) Homosexuality was known as a mental disorder, however in 1973 it was removed from the list at the American Psychiatric Association
4) It was the gay community that sought out to help with AIDS in the 80’s and early 90’s.
Summary #1: Why Marriage by George Chauncy
Gay marriages have come a long way since the 1920’s. Many governmental policies, groups, and coalitions have come together to say no to homosexuals. Earlier in the 20’s and 30’s, homosexuality was not accepted let alone the marriage of homosexuals. Gay businesses such as bars, and business associations were illegal and had limited access to the public. Many issues of harassment were often occurring, and signs such as If you are Gay, Please Stay Away, or We do not serve homosexuals were put up in restaurants. Homosexuals were looked upon as minorities and gained no respect in the public. Chauncy breaks down the pivotal points in which gays have gone through in order to gain their rights in marriages.
It wasn’t until the “identity movement” in the Second World War that brought about change to the oppression of gays. The most influential movement that allowed the gays to gain some voice was the black civil rights movement. Gays came together by taking over public beaches, going to bars, throwing open gay parties, etc. In the 60’s and 70’s, the gay movement broke out in celebrations stating their homosexual difference. The gay community, and African- American community stayed hand in hand to represent cultural difference. Soon after, rioting occurred and police tried to arrest people such as gays, drag queens, and hustlers. The gay liberationist began to plan new organizations and the old traditions of gay life separated into three ways.
The first way old traditions of gay life came back was through the rebirth of feminism. By analyzing their oppression, gays and lesbians were able to look into a different light by looking into their sex roles between men and women. The influence on feminism helped broaden gay and lesbian politics and presented support of heterosexual superiority. The second way was for gays and lesbians to stick together. Lesbians had their own feminist bookstores, music festivals , magazines, in continuing feminist politics. The main goal was to have a community that sticks together. There were newly established gay caucuses in unions, church choirs, and even a gay version of the Olympics. The last way old traditions came about were for the gay community to be open to heterosexuals. The term “coming out of the closet” became known in the 1960s and was a crucial liberation.
As time pasted, and many political war fares went on, it was the 90s that sprung the gay community into action. Many states such as Hawaii, Connecticut and Massachusetts became progay. Many found it unnecessary to hide their true identity as being gay. This change had caused the notion of marriage to change. Marriage became a vital part in public and private rights that allowed same sex marriages to increase due to economic and legal consequences. Marriage soon became to be seen as a fundamental civil right. As gender to husband and wife declined, same sex marriage seemed more open. Same sex marriages were able to break through due to the termination of gender roles. The roles as to what a husband should do, or the roles as to what a wife should do were intermixed.
Today gay marriages are more common than ever before. There are those who still fight against gay marriages; however there are those who rightfully respect the decision of homosexuals. The debate of gay marriages will always be expected.
How to Read Handout: Why Marriage by George Chauncey
Biographical:
George Chauncy is a professor at the University of Chicago teaching American History. He studied twentieth century U.S. history and gay and lesbian history and received his doctorate in history at Yale in 1989. He has taught for fifteen years at the University of Chicago and other schools such as Rutgers, New York University, and the Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris. Chauncy has been involved with numerous major court cases involving gay and lesbian rights. In this book, and looking at his past education studies, it is evident that Chauncy has a passion for lesbian and gay rights.
About the book:
This book was written in 2004 by George Chauncey. The blurbs on the back were form E.J. Graff, from OUT Magazine. He states that the book was “Breathtaking…[a] brilliant, slim, and nuanced volume.” The New York Times said “A wonderfully readable account of how the issue emerged..[that] thoroughly debunks the myths of ‘traditional’ marriage.” The Baltimore Sun quotes “ Essential in the current public debate”. This book was produced here in the U.S. I think it could be published in Europe, and other nations were homosexuals are prevalent.
Form of text:
This book is historical and informational. Chauncy first talks about the history of gay marriages and then talks about how far gay marriages have progressed. Many political issues were also laid down such as laws, that were passed or rejected. The mood of this book was exhaustively data-filled. I felt like all Chauncy did was put in data after data. There wasn’t much opinion in the book, but more of historical facts. I feel as though this book was biased because it always pinpointed to gays and their rights. Chauncy did add in the perspectives of heterosexuals however in a negative light. I feel as though more diverse opinions should have been brought up, and not just the opinions of heterosexuals.
The basic context in this book was equality and marriage for homosexuals. There were other minority groups that were discussed such as the black civil movement which aided the gay movement into light.
Class Discussion:
1) Do you think this book is biased?
2) Chauncey ends with a clear note that gay marriages will always be a debate, did he really come to a conclusion to this book?
3) What were some surprising facts that you found out in this book?
4) Are you for and against gay marriages?
5) If you were to meet Chauncey, what would you ask him?
Summary #2: This bridge we call home by Anzaldue and Keating
This book “This Bridge we call home” is an anthology written by many woman who talk about their identity, sexuality, racism, and experience. IT is the second part of the book “This Bridge called my back”. Anzaldue and Keating were apprehensive as to how this book would reach the expectations of their first book, however the second book was just as successful as to reach those in need. “This Bridge called my back” talked about how feminism has changed lives in different places for men and woman. It also focused more on feminist theory and reached out to woman of color. It excluded experiences of men. However this anthology, “This Bridge we call home” brings out the character and struggles that woman in different countries and includes transgender men. From Arab-Americans, to Jewish woman, to African American woman, these women all identify with their struggles that have made them who they are today. These women and men talk about the experiences they have face within the American culture. Poetic writings are published where they talk about their bodies, parenting, social class, etc. Powerful words fill each page as each race and gender are brought to light in the darkness that they go through.
There’s the Chicano son who wants to be accepted by his mother because of his homosexuality, and a struggle of a German and Indian woman who wants to fit in, and be part of the culture, and many more stories of trials and tribulations that both men and woman go through.
The book is divided into many sections to breakdown different issues such as sexual identity, feminism, lesbianism, social class, gender, etc. Each section reaches out to everyone who has faced oppression. Many of these women share these experiences to identify one another and seek equality. The title includes the word bridge. A bridge is a connection from one place to the other and this book focuses on connecting to one another. A voice is only heard when it is spoken and each of these men and women identify with one another once they hear a voice of another who has been in the same boat.
Anzaldue and Keating did a good job in making connections and building this “bridge” or as they called it an “opening” in this book. It was interesting to see so many diverse experiences all emerge together to identify with one another. This book definitely was able to take experiences that were so far apart, to building a bridge step by step to filling in that gap. Many woman of color, transgender males, lesbians, and those who were oppressed due to their identity confide in this novel and “bridge” their experiences together.
How to Read
About the Authors:
Gloria Anzuldua is a Chicana lesbian feminist. One of her most famous works was Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza, in 1987. In her work she talked about her childhood stories growing up as a child of Tejano sharecroppers. She was born in the Rio Grande Valley of south Texas on September 26, 1942. She received her B.A. from Pan American University and her M.A. from University of Texas at Austin. She completed her course work for comparative literature at the University of Texas. She has made contributions to the definition of “feminism” and the cultural theory and chicana and queer theory. Being a lesbian, she writes in many of her books the experiences she had to face.
AnaLouise Keating is an associate professor at Texas Womans University teaching womens studies where she teaches introductory undergraduate and graduate courses.
Form of Text:
The book is a collection of many anecdotes, poems, from different writers. The text is written as conversational. Many anecdotes were told in a way as if it was being told to you in person.
Violated Assumptions
• Sexual identity and race are two oppressions that are hard to be accepted in ones culture
• It is only through telling of stories and experiences that a bridge is made.
• Many woman of color confide in each other just by telling their experiences.
• A connection is only made if a voice is heard.
Summary # 3 “Gender in Real Time” by Kath Weston
The book “Gender in Real Time” talks about how gender has changed over the years. Weston who is a profound researcher has mentioned that time is the one problem that gender has struggled with. From the 80’s to the 90’s, time was always precious. It was from the 80’s until now that gender studies have been fixated on the visual personification. In her book, she quotes, “In overturning the 'politics of silence' the goal cannot be merely to be seen: visibility in and of itself does not erase a history of silence nor does it challenge the structure of power and domination, symbolic and material, that determines what can...”. Weston focuses on seeking gender studies into the future by relating gender to Darwinism, the history of mathematics, the political economy and some physics.
One aspect of gender that Weston focuses on is performance. How lesbians are judged to be “butch” or act lady-like. Judgment is seen all around through the outward appearance or intellectually. Today gender needs to be seen through the lens of the social class, racially and sexuality. Furthermore, the history of gender has always been hidden and out of the light. Looking at photographs, monuments, historical data, gender has been seen and forgotten. Gender history is frequently misled because history is always forgotten and unstable.
Weston comes up with the zero concept of gender which basically says that a person has no value or place. A person can be classified within a short period of time. She links “time and space” together and reveals that in a short period of time, a classification can be made. Today, Weston encourages globalization to more apparent through connections and teaching one another about gender. She mentions that groups promoting gender issues need to criticize globalization and bring it into a whole new light.
How to Read
About the Author
-Kath Weston is a sociocultural anthropologist. She serves as the Director of the Committee on Degrees in Women Studies. She is famous for various books such as Render Me, Gender Me, Long Slow Burn, and her newest release Gender in Real Time. Weston is a profound researcher in which she studies gender, the political economy, race, class, and many aspects of identity.
Form of text-
Weston writes as to promote gender studies. Her writing is very strong and aggressive encouraging people to speak out on gender and make it known. She tells groups that promote gender studies to question globalization and make connections within one another. She brings out gender historically and links it to theories of time and space.
Topics
- How have you experienced gender as to who you are today?
- Do you see everyday gender discrimination?
- Zero concept of Gender
- Weston’s style of writing
Violated Assumptions
- How gender can be connected towards the political economy, Darwinism, and mathematics
- Performance is vital in judgment
- As time passes, gender studies is brought to light
How Like A Leaf -Donna J. Haraway
How Like A Leaf is a profound interview with Donna Haraway, interviewed by Thyrza Nichols Goodeve. Haraway who is a professor in the History of Consciousness Department at the University of California talks about her views, ideologies, and beliefs in life as a child growing into an adult. Being raised with a strong Catholic background, she was strongly influenced by her family, nuns of the catholic church and her peers. She triple majored in zoology, philosophy and literature. Her writings were greatly influenced by her father who was a newspaper writer. While growing up, Haraway was into politics, communism and Catholicism. Her childhood and the people that have influenced her have shaped her into the influential, feminist she is today.
Haraway focuses many of her ideologies on biology and psychology. She says “Biology is about endless variation, whereas in psychology there is the notion of repetition compulsion.” Even from high school she had always been interested in the regeneration of cells. Still today she is interested in the history and shaping of form, furthermore embryology and developmental biology. She focused biology as a way of how the world works biologically and also how the world works metaphorically.
Later when meeting her husband, Rusten, she taught Marxist feminism and was part of the Feminist Union. The Feminist Union was an organization targeted towards violence-against-women issues in Baltimore. From her first book to her most recent book –Crystals, Fabrics,. And Fields to Simians, Cyborgs, and Women they all come together to tell a historical narrative. Her main interest has been nature and who gets to inhabit natural categories. Biology is the central theme throughout all her books. However each book takes on a different approach of biology. Haraway discusses biology from the different aspects of cross-disciplinary connections into history, anthropology, and literature. One important general theory that Haraway goes by is “you can’t adequately understand the form by breaking it down to their smallest parts and then adding relationship back.
Haraway discusses and relates her theories into metaphors in which she is often misinterpreted. Another one of Haraway interest was Primatology in which she looks through from a feminist perspective. From her interest in apes and monkeys, Haraway sought out how primatology can be part of Western representation through terms of “animal”, “female”, “nature.” Haraway continues throughout the interview to talk about biology as the main foundation of her ideologies. Her many books contain methodologies, and relates them to the world practices through critical modernism.
Topics to Discuss
• Haraways methodologies that everything reverts back to biology
• Haraways “trickster” as a major theme in all the essays
• In today’s society are we ever going to reach a cyborg surrealism?
• Why was this book called “How like a leaf?”
How to Read:
About the Author: Haraway is a professor at the University of California teaching the History of Consciousness. Her ideologies are mostly based on biology. She is a feminist in which she focuses on the scientific aspects of life such as primatology. In college, she triple majored in zoology, philosophy and literature.
Form of text: The form of text was a free flowing interview done by Thyrza Nichols Goodeve. The interview was very intellectual and profound. The aura of the interview was light and at the same time deep. There was an ongoing connection between Goodeve and Haraway that made the reader intrigued to keep reading.
Violated Assumptions
- Everything cannot all come back to the basis of biology.
-Haraway's theory of Cyborg Surrealisms
- how the unconscious process is just an individual process
Summary #5: “The Twilight of Equality?” Lisa Duggan
“The Twilight of Equality” is an in-depth analysis of the politics in the 1990’s. Throughout the book, Duggan gives a breakdown of the historical perspective of our the economy to the present time to the future in response to gender, sexuality, class and race. In chapter 1 in which she titles “Downsizing Democracy”, she talks about the twenty first century being off to a shaky start. Our relation with the middle east in regards to a political war has put the lives of many civilians on the line. Government actions such as increases in military spending, budget cuts for social services and public welfare has increased instability in the U.S. However, this instability has given U.S. a fresh new look at the politics of equality and democracy. There are more opportunities for a global peace movement today that gives hope to an equitable and democratic world. Duggan furthermore talks about capitalism, and to quote the New York Times, says “capitalists could actually bring down capitalism.” She also mentions how Liberalism is a mystery where many of the inequalities of wealth and power of class, sexuality, race and gender are all hidden under capitalism. However Liberalism has another side to it that makes sense where they try to build organizations to support their beliefs. Recently there have been many neoliberal welfare reforms.
Furthermore, Duggan argues that Neoliberalism structures material and political life in relation to race, gener and sexuality intertwined with economic class and nationality or ethnicity. The early nineteenth century was the pivotal time for liberalism in the U.S. From liberal theorists such as Adam Smith, and John Lock, the concept of public vs. private have remained the same. The most publicly known Liberalism is the “proper” location of publicness while the most private is within the family. In the nineteenth century racial slavery and political equality of white men were two of the many innovations adapted in the Anglo-European Liberalism. In neoliberal conversation, married women were automatically assumed to be the home-maker taking care of the children and dependent on the bread winner- wage earning husbands.
In the middle part of her book, Duggan talks about her experience at New York University and the controversy issues of “sex wars” which occurred in the late 70’s to late 80’s. At the university there was controversy over the topic of sexuality in a women’s studies conference which led to many debates and voices being heard. This outbreak was one of the flaws that women have in freedom. The “Revolting Behavior” conference held at SUNY New Paltz occurred in order to be an outline for the “culture wars”. The negative view on this conference was that the statewide public thought that tuition for the university were going into the “pockets of sexual perverts”. Education in New York and in the U.S. focused their direction to privatize education by decreasing funds to support higher education and focus more on private business needs.
The tragic occurrence of 9/11 has brought about new light to the community of gays and lesbians. There was greater recognition and agreement to the gay population. There were more efforts towards sexual minorities, and acceptance of diversity. This movement towards more diversity also brought about “equality politics” which also brought about “equality feminism”, and gay “normality”. Since September 11th, the inclusion of marriage and the military for gays has grown. The Human Rights Campaign and the National Coalition of AntiViolence have been two organizations in fighting for gay rights in the political field.
In her last part of the book, Duggan titles the last chapter “Love and Money.” In this chapter she talks about “making peace with neoliberalism.” Duggan writes that as we continually stand on economic grounds alone, we will fail. It is through care, love, and the “egalitarian circulation of money” that will pave the ways towards a equal political world. In this day and age, Duggan has strategies to redistribute wealth and power, and how to live in this society to make it a better place.
Topics to Discuss:
• Why did Duggan decide to have a question mark at the end of her title?
• Do you agree with Duggan’s view on how the neoliberal revolution has advanced?
• Will we ever get to a democratic and egalitarian order?
• What do you think of economic and cultural leftists?
How to Read:
About the Author:
Lisa Duggan is an associates professor at New York University. She teaches American Studies and history. She is currently working on a book about Senator Jesse Helms and U.S. political culture. She is the author of various books such as Sex wars: Sexual Dissent and Political Cultures, Sapphic Slashers :Sex Violence and American Modernity.
About the text:
The book is full of historical facts leading up to the present time. Duggan incorporates a lot of her insights bouncing off many facts about the economy and neoliberalism. It was hard to follow her opinion due to the fact that she uses many facts and her views together. Her views are very strong and profound.
Violated Assumptions:
1. How much the neoliberal revolution has evinced
2. How racial and gender inequities are connected to neoliberalism
3. The notion of a left wing movement
4. Capitalism is cruel.
Hafeezah Abdullah
Wmst300/King
November 27, 2007
Portfolio
Introduction
Hey guys, my name is Hafeezah Abdullah and I am a Women Studies and American Studies double major. I'm in my final semester here at Maryland and after I graduate I plan to go abroad for a year. I'm a person that loves to stay busy so this semester I have 2 jobs, an internship, and 15 credits. I became interested in women studies, because it covers such a diverse range of issues that I'm never bored in my classes. I love the fact that I am constantly challenged to examine and question what I think I know about the subjects being studied.
Violated Assumptions 1- Dykes to Watch Out For
1. After reviewing her website I realized that if she had looked more feminine hairstyle and clothing while that my perception would have changed. I realized that although I feel like I am not making any assumptions about the author’s appearance based on the subject of the book that I actually am.
2. I assumed that only certain books made into the Library of Congress and that Alison Bechdel’s Dykes to Watch Out For because of the fact that it’s a cartoon strip and controversial nature would not have been collected by the government.
I also assumed that educational books do not necessarily need graphic nudity scenes and sexual encounters in order to prove a point. However, because of the rawness of the material it actually made me think on a deeper level about the effect that images have on society.
Violated Assumptions #2
1. After reading chapter 4 “Why Marriage Became a Goal” my assumption that wills and making people beneficiaries on insurance policies safeguarded partners from having to deal with contestation of authority issues regarding their partner was violated.
2. I assumed someone so renowned for his study of lgbt would not make unsupported statements, such as the one made in chapter 2 regarding the progress of gay rights, “None of this change is inevitable, just as none of it is irreversible” (Chauncey, 23).
3. I assumed that the reason the lgbt movement progressed was from involvement in political organizations. Not one on one contact, as explained in chapter 2 like “their efforts to change people around them transformed gay movement into a mass movement.” (Chauncey, 47)
4. In chapter 4 it stated, “Old social patterns, in which former sexual partners became friends and many men sustaining emotional ties were with a small group of friends of instead of single partners were celebrated,” I assumed this was a modern idea not old school.
Summary #1
Part 1
Summary:
The book Why Marriage? by George Chauncey chronicles the history that led to the contemporary legal battle for legalizing same sex marriage, including why and how it became a forefront issue. The first chapter, “The Legacy of Antigay Discrimination” informed the reader about how all the anti-gay legislation of the past has been basically forgotten. It recounted how the U.S. Department fired more gays than communist, how even after prohibition ended it still was illegal to serve the lgbt community alcohol, and how gay men were systematically denied their civil rights. The second chapter, “Gay Rights, Civil Rights” discussed how the lgbt used the black civil rights movement. It also describes how the movement shifted from trying to prove lgbt community was just like everyone else to embracing the differences as a part of empowerment. The fact that stunned me the most was that while most heterosexuals’ expressed moral disapproval, that they are supportive of lgbt civil rights. It also drove in the principle point that lgbt community suffered the same oppression that other minority groups were subject to, closely chronicling connections between the civil rights of slaves and the lgbt community.
In the third chapter, “How Marriage Changed” described specific changes in the institution of marriage itself that have made it more amendable to same including same sex couples. The four factors were: the right to choose one’s marriage partner, how traditional marriage roles have evolved legally and within the home, how marriage has become the center for allocation of public and private rights and benefits, and lastly the fact that the power of religious groups to impose marriage rules on other has declined. The fourth chapter, “Why Marriage Became a Goal” explained the different opinions within the lgbt community on the right for lgbt couples to legally marry, which demonstrated the heterogeneous opinions that exist within the community. It places the lack of rights, benefits, and security that partners are denied when their significant others become ill, die, etc at the root of why legalization of marriage has become a necessity. It also specifically details how the AIDS epidemic not only emphasized this, but the self-reliance necessary within the lgbt community when dealing with the AIDS epidemic. The last chapter, “ The Present as History” just summarized modern day issues. Most importantly it clearly stated the principle point that the freedom to marry is regarded as a fundamental civil right and is a symbol of a full equality and citizenship within a nation.
Part 2& 3
About the Author:
This info helped me understand that he’s very knowledgeable on the topic, considering he testified in the landmark case and works for an Ivy league university. It also showed that he’s well respected and actively involved within in fighting for lgbt rights consider the fact that he is the lead author of the Historians Amicus Brief in Lawrence v. Texas the landmark case overturning the nation’s sodomy laws.
About the Publisher:
Learning about the publisher helped me to understand that while they are a major distributor they are looking for quality work not necessarily work that would lack quality but be very profitable. The reason the publishing company was started made me have a higher level of respect for the company and specifically look for books that are published by them because there motto that “an innovative model is possible, where the power of the group supports editorial freedom, creative energy, and quality publishing” coincides with my personal beliefs.
Related Court Cases:
Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), which was a United States Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of a Georgia sodomy law that criminalized oral and anal sex in private between consenting adults. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case. In the 6-3 ruling, the justices struck down the criminal prohibition of homosexual sodomy in Texas. Allowed me to have background legal knowledge on the progression of lgbt rights in the law.
Topics to Discuss:
· How a mass movement was formed out of person to person interaction
· How and why the AIDS epidemic has influenced the push for marriage
· The influence of other political movements such as black civil rights movement and feminist
Summary #2/The Bridge We Call Home
Summary
The table of contents is divided into several sections beginning with, Giving Thanks, Preface, Charting Pathways Marketing Threshold…A Warning, an Introduction, and the Forward, followed by the chapter divisions. There are six chapters and each chapter is broken down further into article. The titles of several articles are in both Spanish and English, and many of the authors have non-European names. Each divided section is introduced by an artwork and quote from women of color. The various summaries online describe the book as including very noteworthy professors, activist, and artist. It seems to be a multicultural feminist voice on issues that have frequently been ignored or unreported. The fact that this book is classified in so many different categories in book stores such as lesbians’ writings, minority women, literary criticism and autobiography, demonstrates how it’s composed of diverse subject matter. Also, at 608 pages the length seems appropriate for the amount of information that is included.
Part 2&3
About the Editors:
· Gloria E. Anzaldua was one of the first to publish an entire anthology of writings by U.S. women of color in 1981. After her death the National Women Studies Association, created a scholarship in her honor, which demonstrates how significant of an impact her works had in the field. Every article I found during my research was positive response to her work, which seems a little to harmonized for women studies.
· Analouise Keating was a contributing editor the updated version of the 1981 anthology. It was very difficult to find any information about her unrelated to this novel or Gloria Anzaldua.
About the Publisher:
· Routeledge Publishing is actually based out of London and is a global power house. I assumed that a book on this subject matter and articles written by mostly American women would have a smaller publishing company that was based out of America.
Violated Assumptions:
· I assumed from the titles of the article that this was going to be similar to a self help book prior to actually researching.
· I also assumed that I would not read anything I haven’t before, but several of the passages on Google scholar, actually seemed to be from an innovative perspective.
Topic to Discuss:
· What other people who actually were able to read the introduction and conclusion have to say about the book.
Presentation: Section 7
“i am the pivot for transformation”... enacting the vision
73. “Thawing Hearts, Opening a Path in the Woods, Founding a New Lineage” -Helena Shulman Lorenz
Lorenz discusses how and why we are taught to conform to the majority culture subconsciously and consciously. She asserts that women’s studies academia is frozen in its current methodologies and suggests a new social theory for change, “…I began to dream of a new social change movement in which instead of a fixed platform or party line, we could accept the necessity for the community rituals of dialogue, evolution, and restoration. The starting point would not be obedience to a master narrative describing a single hierarchal and linear process, which always leads to scapegoating those with different and creative impulses. Rather, we might start the with recognition that every formulation was provisional and open to reframing; we would always need the ritual of community dialogue and storytelling to periodically restore the energy of our projects.” (p. 499)
75. "And Revolution is Possible": Re-Membering the Vision of This Bridge -Randy P.L. Connor and David Hatfield Sparks
Randy P.L. Conner and David Hatfield Sparks reflect on This Bridge Called My Back. They describe the feelings of community they shared with Gloria (editor of both editions of This Bridge), as well as the resentment they felt at being asked to vacate their home when lesbian separatists visited. They assert that they "recognized the need for women-only space, as [they] recognized the need for gay male space at events like Radical Faerie fatherings," but nevertheless resented being dismissed from their own home (p. 511).
77. "Forging El Mundo Zurdo: Changing Ourselves, Changing the World" - AnaLouise Keating
Keating asserts that we have been trained to define differences oppositionally, and that This Bridge authors expose stereotypes, split open labels, challenge false assumptions, and demonstrate that "it's not our differences that divide us but rather our refusal to openly discuss the differences among us" (p. 520). Keating is drawn to Gloria Anzaldua's vision of El Mundo Zurdo (the 'Left Handed World', a visionary place in which diverse people co-exist and work together to bring about revolutionary change).
She believes that we need a two-way movement to change the world. In other words, by changing ourselves, we can change the world. She says “I cannot offer pronouncements on how we can transform the world, or even how you can transform yourself. But I can tell you about my own efforts to engage in this two-way movement” (p. 522).
80. “now let us shift...the path of conocimiento…inner work, public acts” –Gloria E. Anzaldùa
Anzaldùa concentrates on the concept conocimiento, which is the journey to finding ourselves, through using all of our senses. She asserts that there are seven stages of conocimiento where, “Bits of your self die and a reborn in each step.” (p. 546) She also discusses Coyolxauhqui, which is a part of conocimiento and it is defined as personifying “…the wish to repair and heal, as well as to rewrite the stories of loss and recovery, exile and homecoming…stories that lead out of passivity and into agency, out of the devalued in our lives.” (p. 563) Anzaldùa presents this paradox that comes with conocimiento, “ …the knowledge that exposes your fears can also remove them. Seeing through the cracks makes you uncomfortable because it reveals aspects of yourself (shadow-beasts) you don’t want to own. Admitting your darker aspects allows you to break out of your self-imposed prison.” (p. 552)
Discussion Questions:
· Connor and Sparks claim that they recognize the need for women only space, just as they recognize the need for gay male space. When are exclusionary spaces helpful, and to who? When are they not appropriate?
· Keating gives examples of premises that guide her in her life in the home, written word, and classroom that she believes help her promote transformation. What do you think of her premise that “out of all the categories we today employ, “race” the most destructive”? (p. 523).
· What kinds of premises do you embody to promote transformation? If Keating is right that “by changing ourselves we change the world,” what things can we do in our daily lives to change ourselves and by extension the world?
· Lorenz’s article discusses subconscious conformity to a majority culture. Can you think of instances in your life were this occurred, why, and how it could be changed?
· Anzaldùa asserts that conciemiento will lead to meaning in things that are “devalued” in our lives. What are things that are “devalued” that would if valued would lead to positive social change in our lives and transnationally?
Summary #3
Summary
The book Gender in Real Time by Kath Weston is five chapters and has 142 pages of text. Each chapter begins with a quote, which sets the tone of the chapter. The book underlining topic thus far is how feminism may be stuck in a rut, which I believe is what the diction “Zero” is being used for. This book is deeply rooted in concepts and feminist theories. The book also frequently asks you to put yourself in the event that is being discussed in order to personalize it which can change the perception and the interpretation of what is being discussed. The first chapter is, “What the Cat Dragged In: Gender Studies Today—An Elegy and Introduction.” It discusses the amount of writings about masculinity/femininity, raced/gendered bodies, and other feminist concepts. It discusses how the vision of gender equality has evolved over the past three decades. Also talks about conceptual problems with feminism such as improvement, liberation, and advancement, which definitions have evolved. The second chapter, “Unsexed: A Zero Concept for Gender Studies,” begins by telling a story with an artistic ending then the actual ending. It also discusses how lack of history and documentation of a groups’ history can cause invisibility, especially on the subject of violence towards or within a marginalized group. The third chapter, “Do Clothes Make the Woman?: Performing In and Out of Industrial Time” focuses on the “process of gender’s meaningful creation.” (Weston, 57). It further discusses what encompasses gender, from physical attributes to learned behaviors. It reinforces the notion that gender is learned through constant repetition behavior that is deemed either male or female, and is not biological.
Parts 2 & 3
About the Publisher: The publisher is Routledge and this is second book that we have read in this class that focuses on feminist/gender studies that has been published by them. This publishing company seems progressive and not afraid to publish books that may be controversial in nature. Also this book is available on every major online bookstore, demonstrating its availability to the masses. The book is also categorized under several topics including social science, gender identity, and feminist theory, which further demonstrates the intersectionality of the topic being discussed.
About the Author: Kath Weston is a sociocultural anthropologist . She has numerous books out on gender studies including Families We Choose, Render Me, Gender Me, and Long Slow Burn. All these books seem to have gotten praise as innovative because they demonstrate a cultural change in relationships such as kinship, race, gender and sexual identity. The numerous articles found during my research repeatedly state that she discuss the intersection of history, the social meaning and the politics in her work, which can be difficult to adequately express.
Topics to Discuss:
· Is feminism really stuck in a rut and not sure which direction to progress towards?
· Concept of zero gender and ungendered
· The jargon created to discuss concepts, does it make the book elitist?
Violated Assumptions:
· I assumed that unless the book was centered around prisoners, that quotes from people in jail would not be included in an academic book.
· I assumed that this book would focus on the lgbt community because the rest of the books have been centered on this topic in class.
· I also didn’t expect there to be stories or events to be retold though the writer, because usually women studies uses collective anthologies.
Summary#4
Summary
The introduction of Lisa Duggan’s The Twilight of Equality?: Neoliberalism, Cultural Politics, and the Attack on Democracy is a text that is a mere 88 pages and seeks to explore what has influenced the change from social welfare reform to military and security being top priority in America. The first chapter, “Downsizing Democracy” uses a lot of language that seeks to elicit fear in the readers, terminology such as, “dangerous and unchanging” or “dangerous and tragic start” when referring to modern American society and its politics. It sets the tone for the text to appear to be another warning to the oblivious American public about the negative changes and effects that it is having on our freedoms domestically and power and perception globally. It continues to discuss the notion of public and private spheres and how its reconstructed American values during the 1950s and 1960s conservative and liberal politics. It also discusses statistics on the disproportionate amount of black inmates in contrast to U.S. population and how declining profits, scandals within corporations and the government are signals of the current crisis among neolibearlism. The second chapter, “The Incredibly Shrinking Public” begins discussing the sex war debate that occurred from the 1970s to the 1990s as a result of Revolting Behavior annual conference and ultra conservative propaganda. The third chapter, “Equality, Inc.” examines the post September 11th actions such as not giving allowing domestic partners to receive benefits of 9/11 relief funds and further explores lgbt marriage and gay politics as the country shifts more towards left wing conservatism as a whole. The final chapter, “Love and Money” examines the positive outlook on our economy and public policy at the beginning of the 1990s. It also points out the narrowing of perspectives, such as progressive thinking and activism becoming below the radar. As well as emergence of dichotomies in influencing governmental and citizen positions, such as the war on terrorism.
About the Author
Lisa Duggan is the Director of the American studies department at NYU and a professor Gender and Sexuality studies. She’s written several other books including, Our Monica, Ourselves: The Clinton Affair and the National Interest and Sapphic Slashers: Sex, Violence, and the American Modernity. She graduated from University of Pennsylvania in 1992 with a PhD. Unlike other authors read in this class, information is not abundant on her, and mostly resonates from the NYU website.
About the Book and Publisher
The book was published in 2003 which did not allow for a complete analysis of post September 11th actions, because the consequences were still being molded. The book was published by Beacon Press a company based out of Boston, Massachusetts. The company is owned by the Unitarian Universalist Association. The company prides itself in publishing serious fiction and non-fiction, including classics such as James Baldwin’s Notes of a Native Son.
Discussion Questions
1. Same sex partnership exclusion from 9/11 relief fund.
2. New Deal and Civil Rights Movement being considered one in the same.
3. Is neoliberalism truly responsible for all the changes suggested in the last four decades
Violated Assumptions
1. Same sex domestic parternerships were excluded from relief funds for 9/11.
2. New Deal and Civil Rights Movements were lumped together by conservatives, although many ND programs were not accessible to minorities.
3. That support for candidates on sole legislative issues such as support of Roe v. Wade regardless of the rest of politicians record is a new phenomenon.
LEARNING ANALYSIS
After examining the syllabus I believe that the class has been broken into two main arguments. Each argument further divides into themes that build it and support that arguments idea. The first half of the class focuses on typical arguments of women studies such as gay marriage and sexism and how the individual is affected. The second half of the class focuses on non-typical themes such as science, time, and economics and the individual is challenged to see past social norms and to question how such norms came into place.
The first half of the class consists of the books “Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For,” “Why Marriage? The history shaping today’s debate over gay equality,” and “This Bridge We Call Home.” The first book, “Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For,” is a comic strip that focuses on social movements that affect feminism. The subject matter is broad. For this reason it is a good way to begin the class. The book consists of a wide variety of political subject matter such as war, gas prices, the economy, and gay marriage so many individuals can find something interesting within it but it also sets the mood of the course where individuals have to take a further look at social movements and systems of power that are currently in place. The second book focuses on a specific social movement, gay marriage. George Chauncey, the author, gives a detailed account of the history of gay marriage and its current position within today’s debate. The third book within the first half of the class focuses even closer on the individual. “This Bridge We Call Home” is an anthology consisting of many individuals’ personal accounts with race, class, gender, and sexuality. The writings within this book are very personal and describe the individuals’ emotions in response to different experiences. An example being the anxiety a mix raced individual feels when trying to identify themselves and the problems they face when being labeled. Due to the themes found in the first three books I found that the first half of class focuses on personal struggle and we began with the macro and moved to the micro. The argument of this is how the individual is affected by society and also how society is affected by the individual. The first three books focus on what I believe are more typical ways of viewing feminism. The topics of gay marriage, racism, and sexism are issues in which I relate to feminism and I work with such issues in relations to feminism in other courses.
The second half of the class focuses on issues in which I am unfamiliar with and challenges me to recontextualize the way in which I view social relationships. The second half of the class consists of the books “Gender in Real Time,” “How Like a Leaf,” and “The Twilight of Equality?” After reading these books we further examine the information during the roundtable debate Fables and Formulas: The Sciences and Arts & Humanities Look at Each Other. “Gender in Real Time” questions how the reader views progress and time. Whose time frame are we using to document our lives and how does gender relate to the changing time? The second book of the second half is “How Like A Leaf” and it is an excellent interview with Donna Haraway. Donna Haraway is a professor in the History of Consciousness Program at the University of California, Santa Cruz. Haraway challenges the individual by questioning how our body and feminism work together through the notion that we are “living inside biology”. She questions what is natural and terms the idea of the “cyborg” when studying how the individual is no longer natural but a product of technology. The third and final book we discuss is “The Twilight of Equality?” which questions public and private social order. We study neoliberalism and its affects on feminism along with feminisms affects on neoliberlism. Neoliberalism is a political stance which believes in economic privatization for further advancement while still believing in many conservative social causes and keeping such in the public eye, such as marriage. This relates directly to issues that students at the University of Maryland are dealing with in regards to tuition and funding. Like in the first half of the class the discussion went from a macro level of time and progress to a micro argument relating to the individual, in this case ourselves. The overall argument was of a new way to approach feminism and to view the possibilities of feminism.
Both these arguments lead to the overall argument of the class where the individual is challenged to take a deeper look into social structure and systems of power and use resources to mold their own idea and use resources to mold existing ideas and take advantage of current mediums to share knowledge. Throughout the course students are encourage not to take information at face value but go beyond the text and learn more about the author and information she references.
I have become a part of the argument of this course. As a straight woman from an upper middle class family my life has been directed down certain paths. It is important for me to note that these paths are not a natural progression. I fit into the argument that an individual is affected by society but society is also affected by the individual because I have become more interested in activism through this class. I have been able to spend my time volunteering in a women’s clinic and participating in events such as walk for the homeless in DC and a program that gives food out to homeless in Baltimore. The argument that feminism has many possibilities has taught me there is more than one perspective to look at problems and one must use many different perspectives to completely understand an issue. While discussing “How Like A Leaf” the conversation focused around “cyborgs” lead to makeup, I veiw makeup as a way for a woman to be controlled, but I learned that women in the middle east wear make up as a sign of rebellion because they are not suppose to be sexual beings in public and makeup allows them to do so. Through this I know that while individuals and society affect one another, they also affect one another differently in different cultures. One can view the many possibilities of feminism through Donna Haraways work or the application of feminism in “The Twilight of Equality?” Through class I contributed by posting topical information on the class blog and by researching topics before class so that I was able to share with the class confidently. I posted the suggestion to view the film “God of our Fathers” which is a history or patriarchy. I also posted an article about monkeys in Kenya which was never discussed but I found to interesting because of the idea if monkeys learned offensive behavior toward females or such behavior was and why that is. During our discussion of “The Twilight of Equality” I provided the link www.theyrule.net. The link shows how businesses are related which is a reason why they want to be private so that consumers think they have a choice but in reality they do not. During class I voiced my opinions and was respectful of the opinions of others. I took my classmates opinions to heart and many of them taught me how they personally work to change society and the ways in which they currently push the boundaries of feminism into different arenas. I think this is especially clear when one studies the majors and interests of the class because many individuals are double-majors or plan careers that do not directly relate to women’s studies. The group discussion really works for me. I enjoy being able to learn from my classmates view points. The violated assumptions do not always work for me because I often have trouble putting in to words exactly how I feel. I frequently felt something was off but I could not pinpoint what or why I had that feeling. I could have gone beyond more when researching the background information for the books. As class progressed my appreciation for the background information grew, but at the beginning of the course I wish I could have understood its value. I missed class on October 24th when I was sick and I contacted my classmates about the assignment that was due the following class along with any information in which we discussed that day in class. I also went to the class blog to see what was covered and to look at any links that were suggested for that day. I find my classmates to be very helpful throughout class and when I have questions regarding assignments they are easy to work with.
This course connects to other women studies courses in which I have taken because it discusses similar themes of race, class, and gender along with the problem of placing people in a binary. This class is different because the second half of the course presents a new way of viewing feminism which I have not been exposed to. The ideas of time and neoliberalism are not tangible and are therefore harder to understand because there are not obvious cause and effect relationships. This allows me to place more value in such courses. My emphasis in women’s studies is in health and I can immediately apply the information I learn regarding health. These courses are teaching me that the value is what you make it and the more I am active in my learning process the more value I will receive from such courses. An example being the more I learn about sweatshops the more I do not want to support them so I become active in my learning and beliefs and choose not to buy clothing made in sweatshops. We did not specifically learn about sweatshops in this course but the drive to learn more about my surroundings I gain from this course has inspired me to peruse more information. As a women’s studies major this is the first class I have taken with all women’s studies majors and it allows me to feel more comfortable in expressing my opinions. I am able to take this class more seriously because I feel as if the students in the class are also interested in the material and are not using it only to receive a CORE credit. The main tool I receive from this class is my ability to read critically. By doing so my feminist education and political mind are better prepared to filter information and seek out the truth. Ideas for my own personal future this class has helps me envision is that if I do not become a doctor I can still combine my interests in women’s studies and science, inspired by Donna Haraway, and I could possibly even pave the way to a new area of study by merging the two as I see fit.
Four readings that I particularly enjoyed were “Why Marriage: The History Shaping Today’s Debate Over Gay Equality,” “The Twilight of Equaltiy?” and two passages from “This Bridge We Call Home” entitled, “Los Intersticios: Recasting Moving Selves” and “Living Fearlessly with and within Differences: My search for Identity Beyond Categories and Contradictions.” I was able to deeply connect and learn from these reading and I believe they helped to establish my relationship with the course.
In George Chauncey’s book, “Why Marriage: The History Shaping Today’s Debate over Gay Equality” I found the history of gay individuals in American to be fascinating. I was not aware that up until The Great Depression gays were not criticized and it was not until men lost their jobs and family position that scrutiny of what a real man was occurred. I think this response to gay men is similar to the response which occurs to powerful women as a response to the male fear of not being dominant. As women become more independent there are increased attempt to devalue typical women tasks and objectify women seen through the beauty and porn industry which are both controlled primarily by white men. I was also not aware that as recently as 1987 78% of the US viewed homosexuality as wrong. This history is important because I forget that everyone does not think like me and many people are still struggling for acceptance. Gay marriage relates to the argument of the class of how individuals and society affect one another. Support for gay marriage directly affects the passage of bills that allow for it, as seen in California, but this right was just as easily taken away. I enjoy the history of this debate because I know I am living during a pivotal time in gay marriage and I believe that while I can make a difference to convince others that it is a right for all to be able to be married different approaches with feminism are needed to convince the majority. “Progress” has occurred, such as Civil Unions, but as seen through the civil rights movement and in Brown vs. Board of Education separate is not equal and I believe the same argument can be given to gay marriage. Chauncey demonstrates that marriage has evolved and is no longer the system of control it was originally ergo our definition of marriage needs to evolve further. The definition has changed but break throughs such as interracial marriage should not be the limit progress. This reading changed my relationship with the course because it enabled me to have a greater understanding of the past which allows me to more confidently defend my opinions on the subject of gay marriage.
The book “The Twilight of Equality?” challenged me to research a subject matter in which I find to be confusing. This effort paid off and this book became one of my favorites of the class. Terms such as “neoliberalism” generally turn me off, but by slowly reading I was able to understand the concepts surrounding neoliberalism. The way in which neoliberalism adapts to changing social movements is very interesting and it teaches me to increase my political awareness to why groups take certain stances. It is not always because they believe in the choices of the people they represent but they need money and will do what they need to stay in power. An example of this is the acceptance of gays into the neoliberalist group because they wanted the voting group and did not want to seem anti-gay. Insincere moves like this are dangerous. The movement of education from public to private is also dangerous because of increasing cost and the ability to censor certain types of education. The resources I found most helpful came during this discussion. The material provided on Mayor O’Malley’s plan to allow slots so that revenue can go towards constant funding of higher education was very beneficial in incorporating the ideas of the book into my own life.
Two passages from “This Bridge We Call Home” further connected me to the class and significantly change my outlook on race and feminism. “Los Intersticios: Recasting Moving Selves” by Evelyn Alsultany describes every day occurrences where a Muslim woman must defend her identity and is questioned because she does not fit into a stereotypical “box.” I identify with this writing not because I am questioned but I believe I am often questioning others regarding race so that they can be safely categorized to me. This relates to the argument of the class for me because feminism is not about women like me but I must learn to relate and understand women from other backgrounds and their needs. This argument was further built upon my other favorite passage entitled “Living Fearlessly with and within Differences: My Search for Identity Beyond Categories and Contradictions” by Shefali Mikzarek-Desai. This story describes Mikzarek-Desai encounter with third-world feminism, where women work within their role to rebel and gain rights. This furthers the argument of possibilities of feminism because I am now learning that the possibilities of feminism do not solely rest on western beliefs. This relationship has forced me to look at my own plans for my future and motivations. I have planned to go abroad after becoming a doctor and work with women of third world nations to improve their health and prevent female genital mutilation. This passage teaches me that I can not go in and make a difference on my own but I must work with others and understand the culture so that my ideas can be considered. Mikzarek-Desai struggles with her relationship with her Ba and when living with her learns to appreciate the way in which she demonstrates acts of feminism that women in western cultures do not always appreciate and that one can not define a culture with a single narrow definition. “This Bridge We Call Home” allowed me to personally relate to the struggles of other women in how they identify themselves which I think was one of the most important insights I had within this course because it forced me to go beyond myself and really think about how women and feminism as a whole relate.
1. description of the argument of the course:
I perceive the argument of the course to be that feminist knowledge can be reconceptualized to be inclusive of all individuals and communities – that we as feminists can be part of creating a community that is not bound by race or gender or sexual orientation or class or any other social division.
From examining the titles of the syllabus, I can recall that the beginning of the course was focused on examining feminist communities and what it means to be a feminist. For example, reading Bechdel allowed us to think about what a lesbian community was, and who could be in one (e.g. a main character in the book who was married to a man). We moved on to look at Chauncey’s “Why Marriage,” and questioned whether and why gay marriage is a feminist issue.
To me, the middle portion of the course focused more on interconnections between communities. We looked, for example, at “Gender in Real Time,” and the title for this class day was appropriately “A global economy now, Modern pasts and memory.” We also looked at “This Bridge We Call Home,” and focused on “impact, labels, new issues;” in other words, measuring feminist progress and looking at who is affected by feminist issues since the previous Bridge was published.
Finally, we talked about transformations (with the second half of This Bridge), interdisciplinarity (with Haraway), and reconceptualizations and democracy (Duggan). The end of the course focused on transformations, interdisciplinarity, and reconceptualizations of politics. To me the purpose of leaving these analyses for the end of the course was to wrap up the information we analyzed in the first two sections of the class (questioning what feminists communities are and who count as feminists then making connections between global communities) was to bring all of our ideas together and think about reconceptualizing feminism to:
1. recognize the connections between feminists and non-feminists, and think about the ways in which feminism applies to everyone
2. think about practical ways that we can accomplish social change that affects people on individual levels, not just based on different identity/social groups
2. put yourself into this story:
I am a part of the argument of the course because I believe the argument of the course is that everyone is a part of feminism – everyone is interconnected and the challenge of feminism is to be accessible, desirable, and approachable to increasingly broad ranges of people. I am part of the argument because I am a person.
While I very much theoretically understood the argument of feminism (for me, anyways) to be about inclusivity and equality, practically speaking, I can see how my writing (particularly discussion questions/topics) shifted throughout the semester. For example, one of my violated assumptions when reading Bechdel was that I was surprised when Cynthia came out as a lesbian, because she was a Republican. While I theoretically value and respect the right for individuals to be a part of any social group and maintain any political or religious affiliation, it is clear when I wrote that assumption that it did not make sense to me that a lesbian could be republican. When reading Haraway, one of my topics for discussion was whether feminism could be reconciled with religion. I thought about this subject a great deal seeing as Haraway was raised Catholic, and although she did not seem to identify with Catholic beliefs anymore, she made it clear that her Catholic upbringing affected her way of thinking, studying, and learning a great deal. This made me think about how we get to be where we are – without questioning whether it is right, wrong, or irrelevant that Cynthia was a lesbian, I can think critically about what kind of challenges face her as a Republican lesbian as opposed to a lesbian who differs greatly politically. Additionally, I think about how her two identities may have affected each other.
As a fictional story, of course, Cynthia’s concept of how her two identities have affected each other is accessible only with limitations (we see her only as a minor character in the book, and have little knowledge of her family, background, or childhood). However the point I take from this (synthesizing what I learned from Bechdel with what I learned from Haraway) is that identities are not separable: Cynthia was a Republican lesbian (among many other things), and because she is one particular “type” of lesbian and one particular “type” of political affiliation do not make the two things separable. She very well may have been affected as a lesbian by a Republican upbringing, or vice versa, or both, much as Haraway acknowledges the Catholic influence on her work.
I think my comments and thoughts changed as I completed readings, but mainly as I listened to others in the class. Because I mentally tried to reconcile theoretical interconnectedness between everyone with practical applications of feminism, it was important to me that I be able to take everyone’s thoughts, opinions, judgments, and theories into consideration. I would say that is the main way that I was brought into the argument of the course – the more information I learned, the more I wanted all information to be at the table. That is, the more I could see different sides of an argument (nature vs. nurture, hard sciences vs. social sciences, etc.), the more the argument blended together to seem less like a binary divide and more like two pieces of a larger argument that I want to understand better. For me this growth was essential, as even though I theoretically appreciate different opinions and arguments, I am focused very much on social sciences, postmodernism, and social constructionist arguments. Reading works such as Haraway and Duggan was enlightening because fields that I don’t know much about, such as biology or economics, were made to feel relevant and somewhat more approachable to me.
3. put the class into the context of a WMST curriculum:
I think because this class is for WMST majors, the conversation flowed more easily than in other WMST classes. We certainly educated each other about topics we were unfamiliar with, but overall everyone had a solid background of WMST which doesn’t happen often in other WMST classes. This class holds a solid place in the construction of the WMST major, because it allows the students to think about what it means to be a WMST major: what skills or knowledges we get out of being WMST majors but also how we want to construct our major, what do we want to get out of it and how can we shape feminist knowledge.
This class has helped me envision a WMST curriculum that is inclusive – that takes in opinions, thoughts, visions from all (whether people are students in the class or not) and focuses on making change for the good of humankind. While I have certainly gained insights from other WMST classes, my biggest complaint with them was usually that they were too focused on analyzing oppression and not focused enough on practical applications, or actually producing change. I still struggle with thinking of ways to apply what I know outside the classroom, but reading work such as This Bridge We Call Home has made me believe that it is actually possible, and worthwhile to be a WMST major.
4. discuss 4 readings and 1 or 2 websites from the course connecting you to the class
The Bechdel reading connected to the argument of the class by expanding images of the lesbian community. For me it connected people who might not necessarily be viewed as a part of the community to lesbians, whether it be through romantic, parent/child, or friendly relationships. It made lesbian issues important issues outside the context of actually being a lesbian.
I found it particularly valuable as someone who identifies as a member of the lesbian community but not as a lesbian. Because one of the main characters who identified as lesbian was in a straight relationship, it heightened my confidence that I could be a member of a community even if I do not always identify in the same way as members of the community. Going in to the reading, I expected that it would be difficult to find violated assumptions because I considered myself already “free” of biases about the lesbian community, but it proved to be a valuable reading and I certainly did find a number of violated assumptions from completing that reading.
Reading Chauncey’s “Why Marriage” was also a valuable tool for me. While I absolutely believe that same sex marriage should be legal, I usually find myself thinking that the fight for same sex marriage should be part of a larger fight to change the way that relationships are valued and recognized in the U.S. Chauncey’s historical explanation of how marriage came to be a major issue in the gay rights movement as well as his detailing of how the institution of marriage itself has changed allowed me insight into why marriage is so important for some people, and why I should back a struggle that I sometimes don’t believe is my own. For instance, instead of saying that I don’t believe in marriage, I would now simply say that I don’t want to get married – which is a distinction that still values the choice of others to get married.
A website that enhanced my understanding of the civil rights struggle for marriage was the blog written on the South African parliament decision to allow same sex marriage. I found it fascinating to read about same sex marriage rights in what appears to be a homophobic and hostile environment. While I know the opinions of many individuals in my life to be not outwardly homophobic, but to say things like it isn’t the “right time” for same sex marriage until public opinion shifts on the matter, it makes me think that while public opinion affects policy, the reverse may also be true. What if same sex marriage were legal – would this shift public opinion on the matter? Some crimes (such as underage drinking) are regarded as wrong, but only in the particular context of a statutory crime (strict age). This makes me think that public opinion is highly affected by what is already law: if something is already in place it is seen as right, if it is not, it as seen as wrong.
This Bridge We Call Home was absolutely the reading I enjoyed most this semester. It fight directly into the argument of the course by tying individuals together in a feminist politics, regardless of gender, race, age, background, religion, sexual preference, etc. Reading from so many people who were trying to determine the same thing (where did the first Bridge leave us and where do we go from there?) was empowering. It changed my relationship to the idea of safe spaces or exclusionary spaces, which was extremely negative before, and helped me understand why individuals place such a high value on exclusionary spaces. As the editors of the anthology would argue, I believe that we need to access each others’ spaces and ideas in order to improve social conditions for all, but I think achieving this requires us to understand what people are getting out of there safe spaces in order to promote what we can all get out of larger, collaborative spaces.
Finally, Duggan’s book addressed concerns that I’ve long had regarding the economy. I have seen classmates (and myself) try to tackle economic issues without having background in the field of economics. It is challenging to try and make connections between social and economic issues, when as Duggan suggests, we have been trained to view these two entities as separate from one another. Yet I’ve somehow always known a connection existed even if I was unable to articulate why or how. Duggan’s work helped me to see the historical relationship between the two “types” of political issues: how they were divided, why, and why they remain divided. She inspired me to become better versed in economic issues to be able to articulate as well as she can about social and economic issues.
Introduction:
Courtney said:
My name is Courtney Holmes and I am a Communications/PR and Women’s Studies double major. I am really excited for this year and this class! I decided to double major in Women’s Studies because I found myself filling my elective class spaces with Women’s studies courses semester after semester. I am becoming more and more interested in the different types of thinking and reading that go along with the courses. I read some things this summer that opened my mind to more ideas and allowed me to identify with other people’s thoughts and accept my own. This course seems to be able to cover a broad range of topics and the reading list looks very interesting. You have posed some great thinking questions to get our minds rollong and it will be interesting to see how everything comes together to answer the questions in the end. I am excited to start!
Chauncy
Courtney said: The argument of marriage for lesbians and gay men has become a hot topic in today’s society and George Chauncy’s Why Marriage discusses why. Chauncy begins the book with the history of prejudice against homosexuals, reaching back as far as the turn of the century. He discusses all of the laws that the government set to ensure unequal rights for people that were seen as “sexual deviants.” The novel then turns from the overview of history to an in depth look at attitudes towards homosexuality throughout the decades. Around the turn of the century the gay community was more accepted. It was seen as a sub culture of the Jazz community. Many activist groups were more concerned with stopping prostitution than bothering with homosexuality. This history section moves through the post Second World War era where homosexuality was seen as a mental illness. Chauncy uses this to explain why so many homosexuals decided to hide their life styles. Moving further into the 1960s and 1970s the connection between the gay and lesbian movement and the civil rights movement is discussed. After this, the Reagan administration, which called for a nuclear family and the AIDS epidemic appeared around the tine that homosexuals, mostly gay men, were blamed for child molestation and violence. The movement of the book continues through to today and the leaps and bounds that the homosexual community has made in overturning restrictive laws and being more out in the public eye. This allows for the subject of gay and lesbian marriage. The chapter, How Marriage Changed, discusses the changes in marriage in the last few decades and how these changes have opened the world of marriage up to the homosexual community. The end of Chauncy’s argument discusses the goals of the homosexual community and how the fight going on now will change the future for homosexuals.
How to Read
1) The book first outlines the shocking laws, then the history, then the reasons for why marriage should be open to homosexuals.
2) George Chauncy is a history professor, which would be why he includes historical fact.
3) He always gives an example, such as the changes in marriage, then lists the changes and then discusses them in detail, helping the reader understand.
4) The first chapter goes over history and each paragraph starts with the phrase “fifty years ago.” This gives a time and the ability for the reader to compare to the present.
5) I used the technique of underlining key words or phrases that were shocking or that were important to the body of the text which helped in summarizing the novel and allowed me to see the things that I found interesting or that could be a violated assumption.
Class Discussion
1) Why is it that all of the laws against homosexuals are “forgotten” in history?
2) I thought that it was interesting that Chauncy references the fact that the gay man was seen as a “sissy man” and yet when it came to blaming men for child molestation and violence, it was gay men that were being changed.
3) Words used to discuss the homosexual community – “gay” was not a term for homosexuality until after the 1970s and people used it as a code word.
4) Discuss the four changes in marriage – the ability to marry whoever you want, the switching of gender role stereotypes in the home, public and private rights and benefits, and one religious group not imposing marriage rules on another – and why these have opened the opportunity for homosexuals to fight for marriage.
This Bridge:
Courtney said:
This Bridge We Call Home is an anthology put together by Gloria E. Anzaldua and Analouise Keating and it is made up of original writings of people of all ages, races, and genders. The book is a response, or more of an “updated” version of This Bridge Called my Back, which was comprised of stories by feminist women of color. Anzaldu and Keating divided the book into seven different sections, grouping similar stories together. The stories address issues that range from classism, racism, heterosexuality, feminism, homophobia, etc. By doing this, the meaning of each story is made clearer.
In the preface, Anzaldua begins by vividly describing different bridges and how they are made and constructed. At fist she describes the cliffs of the Natural Bridges and how they were formed from water beating against stone and wearing it away. One of the three bridges collapsed under pressure, and another was destroyed by a rumbling earthquake. The middle bridge stands alone strong and arching over the waters. These bridges symbolize the people represented throughout the anthology. People’s stories discuss racking under pressure, becoming something beautiful after being beaten and withered away and standing on their own, or outside pressures that force them to crumble before picking their lives up and solidifying their views.
The book includes stories from men and women of all different backgrounds, which is interesting. A main focus off Analouise Keating is the fact that This Bridge Called My Back used differences as a way to bring people together. Many people found This Bridge Called My Back a safe place for women of color to read about each other and express their similarities and lives. This Bridge We Call Home branches out and expresses a point made by Anzaldua that there are no safe places and that we must all learn to accept differences.
How to Read
Gloria E Anzaldua grew up and gained an education in Texas. She has taught as a university professor at a few different colleges and has also written and co-edited some best-seller books. Anazaldua writes in a fashion where she includes English and Spanish together, as to break down individual borders,
Analouise Keating is an associate professor of Women’s Studies and is a self proclaimed nepantlera and spiritual activist.
The editor’s backgrounds play a role in the book in that Anzaldua was an editor of This Bridge Called My Back and Keating related to the book, both being women of color. They both have a focus on taking away boundaries and using difference to bring people together.
Class Discussion
1) What is El Mundo Zurdo?
2) How do differences between people actually bring them together and make them more similar?
3) Does allowing men’s stories and ideas make it irrelevant as a book about women’s sufferings or is it beneficial to have a different point of view?
4) Nepantlera
Violated Assumptions
1) It was difficult to understand some of the writing by Anzaldua. I understand that she is trying to break down boundaries, but her points are overshadowed by the fact that I cannot grasp what she is saying if I cannot read it.
2) I did not realize that there was such a division inside the feminist community to the degree that some feminists do not focus as much on women’s rights as a whole but mainly in the white-middle class society.
3) It is interesting that Anzaldua and Keating discuss the attempt to get rid of labels and how they should not be needed in society, and yet in This Bridge Called My Back the focus is on feminists of color and their stories. Isn’t that labeling by saying that other people cannot be included because they are not of color? It just seems to be hypocritical.
Weston
Courtney said:
Kath Weston’s Gender in Real Time takes a look into where we have come from with gender studies and a glimpse into where we are going and where we need to go. There are five different chapters in the book and each has a specific purpose to Weston’s argument. In the first chapter, she discusses the three paradoxes that “shadow contemporary discussions of gender...” (1,2) The first is the paradox of liberation achieved and denied simultaneously. The second described the paradox of spacetime, where theory exalts the visual at the expense of the temporal.” (2) The third paradox describes where gender studies needs to go and puts survival against representation. These three paradoxes incorporate problematic assumptions.
The second chapter discusses the concept of being gendered and what it means to not fit into the categories brought on by society. Weston explains the violence that can come from being unidentifiable; people reject what they do not understand. People, in this case, are then judged by the society and become a zero, or a person with no value.
In Gender in Real Time, the third chapter introduces this idea of a performance and that people who are a certain gender are actually performing. Gender is looked at as a performance and not necessarily something that it a natural reaction, causing confusion for people who feel the need to perform a specific role.
The next two chapters look back into the past to show an idea of where we have been and where society needs to move to in the future. Weston’s book opens the lines up to many different ideas and ways to look at gender and the gender movement and calls to action those who can help it move further in the future.
Topics to discuss:
1) the zero concept
2) Gender as a performance. Is it?
3) The paradoxes and how they work
4) How does the difficulty of the read intrigue or deter readers?
How to Read
About the Author
Kath Weston is considered to be a sociocultural anthropologist. She is the author of a number of books including Render me, Gender me and Long Slow Burn. She also serves as Director of Studies for the Committee on Degrees in Women’s Studies. Her studies focus on "intersections" of gender with race, class, and other aspects of identity, sexuality, and science metaphors in the social sciences, just to name a few.
Violated Assumptions
1) People could be considered to be a zero, or to have no value because of gender
2) I haven’t read anything in any of my other classes dealing with gender that tied it into mathematics
3) Never thought about the gender movement slowing down since it is such a strong focus in many of my classes
Haraway
Courtney said:
How Like a Leaf is a book compiled of an interview conducted by Thyrza Nichols Goodeve eith Donna Haraway. The book begins with a description of the scenery where the interview is conducted, in Haraway’s house. The interview begins with Haraway’s childhood, which played a significant part in her studies and lifestyle. Her father was a sports writer and sparked her interest in words and conveying ideas to others. Goodeve intertwines the experiences of Haraway along with the works that she has done to express her ideas about culture, society, human development, etc. Haraway’s interest in science directly influences her studies and theories. Using her deep rooted faith in the Catholic church and her love for biology and sciences, Haraway has developed her own ideas on the construction or race and gender and Goodeve’s interview displays how these ideas came about. She also discusses Haraway’s relationships and devotion to her students at the University of California, Santa Cruz along with the way in which her relationships with her lovers have shaped her life experience. I believe that the interview aspect of the book made a connection with the reader. It allows the reader to believe that there is a conversational aspect to the information and allows them to connect with the interviewee. Also, the reader may be more accepting to the ideas of Haraway if they can see her background and know the thought process behind the ideas.
Discussion Questions
1) How can a person’s background shape the individual’s thoughts and ideas, which lead to actions?
2) Can there always be a tie between religion and sciences or are the discrepancies often in the way?
3) Discuss further the cyborg
4) Discuss the Utopian Relationship
Learning Analysis:
The Feminist Reconceptualizations of Knowledge is the gateway class into the Women’s Studies discipline. To conceptualize something means to make an idea into a concept using all of the information presented on a subject. To re-conceptualize concepts is to look at that topic from a new perspective and to apply new thoughts and ideas to reshape the initial concept. In this class, prominent ideas about within our society are looked at through different theories that apply to feminism.
Goals of the class
The goal of this class is to educate students on the different manners in which feminism can be looked at in our society. Through the use of novels written by authors from all different focuses, we have looked into ideas from the lesbian and gay community, fields in science, and safe spaces for the oppressed, along with ideas about gender, race, and sexuality. Two main skills gained from Women’s Studies classes are critical thinking and application. Being exposed to all of these different ideas and reading, it is easy to see how our minds are being challenged to look at feminism from different angles than the stereotypical, radical feminist.
Description week by week
Each week a different book was read and it was discussed during our class time. The first book, Alison Bechdel’s Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For was an easier book to read and a good starting point for the class. The book was done in comic strip form and grabbed my attention from the beginning. The issues brought up about feminism and activism through the gay and lesbian relationships intertwined with a political aspect. When I began to read the book I wasn’t aware that there would be so much politics involved, and at first I was caught off guard. I read the book cover to cover in one sitting. The style of writing was easy to understand and the comic strip format made it easy to grasp each character’s personality and actual actions. It was easy to summarize. My violated assumptions stemmed from my previous knowledge of lesbian life and what was considered politically correct. Through this book I was able to learn about feminism in the lesbian community. Women need to fight for their rights as a woman and as human beings. Looking t feminism through the eyes of a lesbian’s experiences gave me a new perspective on the fight for women’s rights since I had not been exposed to this setting before.
The next book that was discussed was Why Marriage? The history shaping today’s debate by George Chauncy. The author provides a history of the Gay and Lesbian community in the beginning of book to give background for the argument. He then discusses the reason that there is a fight for marriage between same sex couples. This includes the discussion of why there needs to be a fight, for human rights, and why there even is a fight, since people feel that same sex couples should not have the ability to wed. The book was extremely interesting and I was actually able to use the book for information for another class. Though this book was written by a man, it gave a perspective of a group that was fighting for a right that they would like to have as individuals to help enrich their lives. Feminists believe in equal rights along with the LGBT community. By reading Chauncy we were exposed to a parallel movement.
This Bridge We Call Home by Gloria Anzaldua and Analouise Keating was a compelation of stories written by women and men. Each of the pieces had a different message dealing with experiences in women’s lives, with their heritage, sexuality, poems discussing feelings, etc. Each section of the book was split between groups to present so that each topic was looked into in detail. Each piece gave a different experience. This Bridge was more difficult to read. Some of the stories required prior knowledge of authors or backgrounds of customs. This was also the first time that there was noticeable linkage between people’s backgrounds and theories about feminism. The majority of the writers featured are colored and their experiences with racism and oppression outside of being female played a lot into their writing. The summary for this book was difficult because of all of the different sections and each individual story. It also made me uncomfortable because some of the experiences of the authors dealt with issues that I have never had to deal with. I understand that this reading is necessary to the course. It is meant to show a safe place for people to share their thoughts and experiences. However, I found the readings frustrating and difficult to relate to.
Unsexed. This concept can be quietly accepted or widely debated. In Kath Weston’s Gender in Real Time, this concept was the most interesting to read about. The book discusses the scrutiny of those whose gender is ambiguous. People that do not conform to the gender binaries face questions and uneasy glares. Weston explains that there would be somewhat of an answer to this problem if people were able to stay in the stage of “unsexed.” She states “unsexed is what happens when a person – any person – gets thrown up against the question that need not speak its name: ‘What are you?’” (28). This concept is important to the feminist movement since women are scrutinized simply because of their appearance as a women. Women face discrimination in the corporate world, along with any other industry in society, because they are female and could be looked at as insufficient. Feminists fight for a sense of keeping themselves “unsexed.”
Donna Haraway is a feminist theorist whose background in the sciences affects her work. In How Like a Leaf, Thyrza Nichols Goodeve interviews Haraway at her home. Their discussions were interesting, but some of the language was difficult to understand. Her discussion on cyborgs was difficult to understand, and it wasn’t until I read another person’s interpretation in another book was I able to understand the concept better. A cyborg is consolidated from cyber organism and she explains that contradictions within feminism should be combined, just as a cyborg is a combination of machine an organism. She describes this to be cyborg feminism. This book was necessary to the course to show that there are contradictions within concepts and that ultimately they can coexist and could potentially combine to become more effective. Unfortunately I was not able to grasp this concept from originally reading the book.
The final book read this semester was Lisa Duggan’s Twilight of Equality: Neoliberalism, Cultural Politics, and the Attack on Democracy. This week was the most difficult and the book went completely over my head. After class discussion I was able to grasp more of a concept of the connection between economics and feminism. This book has elements similar to the others read throughout the semester, but I was unable to make a successful summary because I was unclear on the concepts of the book.
How does this class differ from other classes?
The Feminist Rreconceptualization of Knowledge class is an intricate part of the department of Women’s Studies and looks further in depth at potential theories of different feminists. The class is based on student’s ability use critical thinking skills and to dissect women’s rights and the role of women in society. Students are asked to look at gender binaries and discuss how feminism is affected by these binaries, along with who is allowed to be a feminist. In many of the reading, the authors used personal experiences. Stories of oppression or successes helped shape different theories by different people. Many of the classes offered in the lower levels, before the WMST300 class, discuss women’s history, women in society, women in art, and women in literature. It is important to know where women are coming from, which is why these lower level classes are necessary. Critical thinking skills begin to develop in these classes, but it is not clear how intricate it is to women’s history. This is basically fact based and does not leave much for interpretation. The Women in Society has some theory but mainly consists of discussing women’s place in society and the way that it has grown and changed throughout history. However, in order to continue to the upper level classes it is necessary to look at feminist theory from many different perspectives. This is why the gateway class is necessary. It introduces major ideas about women’s rights, sexuality, social standing, oppression, relation to sciences, etc. The course looks at what feminism is, what it does and where it is going.
How do you fit into this course?
There seems to be a stigma in our society around the word “feminist.” When I began the class in September, I was hesitant to identify as a feminist. I was unsure if I could identify with such a forceful group of people when I was not actively working for the cause. I felt that my ideas and morals aligned with some of the basis behind feminism, and as much as I worked to push stereotypes aside, I was not sure that I could be as radical as feminism seemed to require. After taking the Feminist Reconceptualization of Knowledge course, I can confidently identify as a feminist. Though I had been aware of the notion of theory and feminist theory, I had not been exposed to any significant amount. Throughout the course it became evident that there was not one specific classification for feminism. There are radical feminists, post modern feminist, feminism in relation to biology and technology, feminism in relation to economic standpoints, and the change in women’s role within the family and within same sexed couples. Being exposed to the readings and discussions necessary for this class, my ideas on feminism and women’s rights became more developed. The readings helped me understand what parts of feminism I agree with while understanding that there are theories and ideas that I do not necessarily understand completely. Binaries and labels were discussed frequently in the course when we dealt with different genders and ethnicities. Another binary could be considered as feminist or not feminist. After evaluating what I believe in for women’s right and reading about women’s life experiences, I can say that I am a Feminist.
Introduction
Hi everybody! My name is Amy Hartman and I am currently a sophomore majoring in Government and Politics and Women's Studies. I am also minoring in Philosophy and International Development. I added the Women's Studies major after taking two Women's Studies classes last semester that I absolutely loved! I found myself very interested in women's rights issues and all of the different aspects of feminism, whether it be political, social, or economic freedoms for women. I hope this class will give me a better understanding of myself as a feminist as we explore various feminist concepts and theories. I hope that after four years, the Women's Studies major will give me a good background for law school and ultimately a career in working for freedom of women's reproductive rights globally. I am definitely looking forward to this class!
Violated Assumptions in “Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For”
1. Assumption: Mostly homosexuals would read this comic strip as they could relate to most of the humor and relational conflicts.
How Assumption Was Violated: As I was not able to actually purchase the comic strip because of it being unavailable at Vertigo Books, I looked at many of the reviews of the comic strip online and also looked at some of the comic strips in the archives of a magazine called “The Advocate.” I found that in many of the reviews, heterosexual people were reading this comic strip regularly. I thought it was interesting that in one review, a homosexual male commented that there wasn’t enough male presence in the comic strip and he therefore, did not want to read it. A heterosexual male responded, asking “Do you have to be a tiger to read Calvin and Hobbes?” One person mentioned that the comic strip discusses the human condition in general so that anyone can relate to his comic strip.
2. Assumption: Usually transgender, lesbian, bisexual, or gay people are not very open to heterosexual people about their sexuality.
How Assumption Was Violated: I found that in this comic strip, homosexual people were very open about their sexuality to homosexual and heterosexual people alike. In one strip, Lois nonchalantly tells a heterosexual man that he has to leave in order to go to the first international drag king extravaganza in Columbus.
3. Assumption: Most homosexual people have many relationships and therefore, engage in casual sex much more often than heterosexuals do because they don’t have the same risk of pregnancy.
How Assumption Was Violated: This comic strip shows a very clear example of a committed homosexual relationship in which Toni and Clarice have a “commitment ceremony” in their backyard to symbolize their love for one another. They even have a son Raffi and are not only committed to each other, but also to their child.
4. Assumption: I assumed that with homophobia and anti-gay sentiment being much more prevalent in previous decades that this comic strip was fairly new with recent popularity.
How Assumption Was Violated: After reading some of the background about the comic strip, I realized that Bechdel first began publishing the comic strip in 1986. I was actually surprised to see how popular it is as it is published in many gay and lesbian magazines and newspapers. I had personally never heard of it before, but it is surprising that a comic strip as controversial as this one would last through a tumultuous, hostile time for homosexuals in the 1980s.
5. Assumption: I assumed that homosexual couples fight and have conflicts over very different issues than heterosexual couples would fight about.
How Assumption Was Violated: I realized by reading several of the comic strips that homosexual couples argue over many of the same issues that heterosexual couples fight about. For example, in one comic strip, they fought over one partner wanting more sexual activity than the other partner. In another, they had a disagreement about one partner taking off work to be with the other partner when they had scheduled an appointment the same day. In a final comic, they fight over one partner’s smoking habit. These are common issues that both homosexual and heterosexual couples alike seem to have conflicts over.
Violated Assumptions in George Chauncey’s “Why Marriage”
1. Assumption: I realized that homosexual people have faced great discrimination throughout history; however, I did not know the true extent of the systematic governmental discrimination.
I was shocked to discover the many injustices that homosexual people faced in the 20th century. Several things in particular surprised me. First of all, I couldn’t believe that Hollywood films were prohibited from including gay or lesbian characters, discussing gay themes, or even referring to the existence of homosexual people in our country. Secondly, I knew that President Eisenhower had banned homosexuals from government employment, but I did not know that the State Department systematically fired more homosexuals that communists during the McCarthy era. Finally, I didn’t realize that in the 1950s, there were no gay business associations or gay bars advertising in newspapers. The presence of homosexuals in an establishment made that establishment “disorderly.”
2. Assumption: All churches or religious affiliations have always been opposed
to homosexuality and gay marriage.
Before 1980, some religious affiliations did support gay rights and some even held gay meetings in their churches. These affiliations included Lutherans, Unitarians, Methodists, the Church of Christ, Protestants, and Presbyterians. Catholics even allowed a gay Catholic group for a while called Dignity. However, it was soon forbidden by higher Catholic officials. Other denominations were strongly opposed to legal discrimination against homosexuals.
3. Assumption: The AIDS acronym had always been the name for the illness of
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome and it was not always thought of as a homosexual issue or as being caused by homosexuals.
Before the title of AIDS came about, the syndrome was called GRID, which stood for Gay-Related Immune Deficiency. In the 1980s, society thought that the disease affected only homosexuals and Haitians. People never thought that the “general public” was at risk for getting AIDS. I also previously thought that as soon as the government became aware of the virus, they started acting on it. I realized that it wasn’t until six years after the virus was discovered that the government actually began addressing the issue.
4. Assumption: Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush had addressed and recognized, but not necessarily helped or included, homosexuals during their presidencies.
I couldn’t believe that President Bill Clinton in 1992 was the first president to acknowledge homosexuals even being a part of society. He had little experience with gay issues as a governor in Arkansas, but he included gay people in his “vision” for America and was the first president to actually meet with and welcome various gay groups into the Oval Office.
Summary #1
George Chauncey gives a detailed argument in support of same-sex marriage in his book, “Why Marriage.” First of all, Chauncey introduces the issue of same-sex marriage on a positive note of writing how much society has progressed in its opinions of same-sex marriage and other gay issues. Chauncey then begins the book with a history of the struggle for not only same-sex marriage, but also gay rights as a whole. The examples of discrimination that homosexuals have faced throughout history, especially in the past fifty years, would be shocking to even the most educated person. We see throughout the book, especially in the beginning, the significance of other movements, such as the feminist movement and the civil rights movement, in helping homosexuals to rise above the discrimination and to ultimately, fight valiantly for their cause. Chauncey also discusses the history of the struggle to bring AIDS to the forefront as not only as a homosexual issue, but as an issue that everyone must deal with.
In the next part of the book, Chauncey discusses many of the ways in which the fundamental structure of marriage has changed in favor of gay marriage. For example, interracial marriages were not allowed in past. Marrying someone of a different religion was looked down upon, if not completely illegal. However, both of these examples have changed to be somewhat more accepted in society today. Chauncey argues that by looking at trends, it is hopeful that same-sex marriage will become more acceptable. We then are given the reasons that homosexual do want to get married and be together legally in the eyes of the government and others of society. Chauncey gives us several examples of committed couples wanting to officially become married. Finally, Chauncey discusses the current issues at hand and what can be done to allow same-sex marriages by looking at the political, religious, and social aspects of our country in relation to the same-sex marriage issue. As someone who before felt somewhat informed on this highly contested issue, I have certainly become more knowledgeable about the argument from Chauncey’s book, “Why Marriage.”
In regards to the “How to Read” handout, I tried to put into practice several of the suggestions for how to read more actively. First of all, I usually try to highlight whatever I’m reading. This usually does cause me to go back over the sentence or paragraph that I have previously read in order to highlight. However, when reading “Why Marriage”, I highlighted important points and then also went back and actually wrote down the important points at the end of each chapter. I also wrote down ideas to expand on what Chauncey wrote. Another way I incorporated the “How to Read” suggestions was by looking at the biography and background of the author. I found that Chauncey is able to give much of the historical background of the gay rights struggle because he is a professor of history at Yale University. Chauncey has credibility in the political side of the issue as well. He has been an expert witness in several major gay rights cases and wrote the Amicus Brief in the court case of Lawrence vs. Texas. These were just two suggestions from the “How to Read” article that I used while reading this book.
There were several topics brought up in the book that I would like to further discuss in class. As a Government major, I am interested in the political aspect of the same-sex marriage issue. I want to know more about governmental involvement in gay rights affairs before President Clinton and what exactly President Clinton did in order to change the tides and renew the struggle. Another thing I am interested in learning more about is the involvement of Jerry Falwell and the Christian right in basically negatively influencing millions of people to oppose gay rights and same-sex marriage. Going along with religion, as a practicing Catholic, I am curious as to how I can bring my feminist beliefs along with my belief in same-sex marriage and gay rights into my practice of Catholicism, when the Catholic church is extremely anti-feminist and anti-gay. Finally, I am interested in the issue of AIDS and how people who lived through the early 1980s felt about this struggle. It amazes me that the government would wait for six years before finally addressing the issue and I am curious as to how not only homosexuals, but other people in general handled this injustice. These are just several issues discussed in the book which sparked my interest and which I would like to discuss with people my own age as well as older people who have lived through much of this struggle with gay equality.
Violated Assumptions in “this bridge we call home”
1. Assumption: I thought that more men were feminist-oriented and would be more open to contributing to this book.
The editors of this anthology had a very hard time getting submissions from men for this book. It is mentioned several times that not only did they not have men contributing, but they also had to worry about how women would handle men’s opinions and stories being included in this book when it’s mother book had only included stories from women of color. I realize that the majority of men would be embarrassed or afraid of scrutiny if they voiced their opinions in favor of feminist issues. However, I was still surprised that more men did not contribute to this book, which has a goal of radically transforming society as a whole.
2. Assumption: I thought that academic writing of theory was practiced by all feminist theories, not just white feminist theorists.
Keating has a theory that women of color do not write academic theory as they are simply not trying to achieve status within the academic system as white women are. Both of our assumptions were violated in Keating finally concluding that we simply altogether cannot make assumptions about who does theory and who does not do theory. She calls it another “false division” to assume that one group does or does not do academic feminist theory.
3. Assumption: I have always assumed that feminists were in favor of using labels or titles in order to identify ourselves and in order to be proud of the identities that make each of us unique.
Keating feels that using labels causes us to “build walls and isolate ourselves from those we’ve labeled different.” She feels that using labels causes us to have the mentality of labeling “them” and “us.” Using labels can prevent us from seeing that we are all interconnected and embracing the ideal that we are all interconnected. Therefore, we should refrain from using labels to define and thus, divide ourselves.
4. Assumption: Thinking that feminists were inclusive of all groups in society, I never realized how many groups feminists left out or simply ignored in their struggle for women’s rights.
This book seems to be rooted in the experiences of feminists who have basically been ignored in the white, middle class women’s feminist movement. Audre Lorde recognized this when she wrote about the “absence of significant input from poor women, black and third-world women, and lesbians.” This is a major reason these books have been so successful in these “absent women” being able to relate to the stories of other women who have been absent in the feminist movement as well. The feminist movement is based on helping people who face all types of oppression. It is good that it has been pointed out in this book that the feminist movement itself was actually ignoring and oppressing some of the biggest components in the movement.
Summary #2
In the anthology, “this bridge we call home”, we see the passionate, explicit, and life-changing stories of women and men of all races, sexual orientations, religions, and ethnicities. This book along with its “mother text” of “This Bridge Called My Back” has been very successful in allowing “absent” groups in the feminist movement to have a voice and an opinion when they were overlooked, or simply ignored before. In the preface of this book, one of the editors, Gloria Anzaldua, discusses the meaning of a bridge in these books. The metaphor of a bridge is used to describe the efforts of people involved with social change to reach out, accept, and embrace people who are different from them. It is only when we build bridges with others and thus, connect with other people that we can truly see a radical transformation in society. Anzaldua’s main purpose of this book is for all people to be able to “imagine a reality that differs from what already exists.”
In the introduction by AnaLouise Keating, the reader is given a timeline of events in creating this second anthology. Keating discusses the trials and tribulations that the editors had to go through in creating this book. She also discusses the editors’ idea of having people from many different groups contribute to this book as opposed to the first book that only women of color contributed to. Keating also discusses the meaning of nepantla, which is a point where we’re exiting from the old worldview, but have not yet entered or created a new one to replace it. A common theme throughout the book is whether or not people are able to exit from the patriarchal society in which they have always lived and enter a new society where everyone is seen as equals and treated fairly. Keating calls this the whole challenge of the book as she writes, “may this book challenge you to choose, challenge us to cross over.” In the foreword, Chela Sandoval discusses the meaning of emancipation in terms of social change. She focuses on “emancipating citizen-subjects from institutionalized hatred, domination, subordination: it is a methodology of love.” Whether male or female, black or white, homosexual or heterosexual, rich or poor, I think that all people can truly benefit from this book and the message that it offers to all of us in working towards the “progression of political, social, and spiritual movements for justice, peace, and love.”
One of the main suggestions in the “How to Read” article allowed me to understand this book and it’s background much more fully. This suggestion was the idea that we should always look at the author’s life and how their particular life led to them writing this book. Doing research on Gloria Anzaldua, I realized that by the many identities in which she classified herself, she was oppressed and discriminated against in every aspect of her life. She described herself as a Chicana lesbian feminist writer and poet. Not only did Anzaldua not meet the standards of the white, middle to upper class, heterosexual woman that was the main staple of the feminist movement, she also did not meet the standards of all of society in not being a white, young, middle to upper class, heterosexual male. Her oppression due to her race, sexuality, class, and gender led her to write this book in giving women and men who did not fit the preferred standard to tell their stories and voice their opinions so that others like them could relate. After researching the background of this particular editor, the idea for both the books made complete sense to me as Anzaldua realized that these oppressed groups of the feminist movement needed much more of a voice.
There are several issues raised in this book that I would like to discuss in class. First of all, I want to discuss when women of color, lesbians, or even men started speaking out about being absent or ignored in the feminist movement. How could the feminist movement so blatantly ignore these groups in society when their goal was to fight the oppression of all people? Secondly, the editors both write that they decided to do the second book because they felt that there really had not been enough progress in the struggle for women’s rights over the last 20 years. Do you think that some improvements have been made or do you think we are still fighting the exact same battles as before? Finally, I was unsure of the whole idea of spiritual activism. How exactly does this play into the feminist cause? Do these women prefer this over other denominations and religions? Do they feel that other denominations oppress women? In reading the foreword, introduction, preface, and two of the passages, I am looking forward to reading more of the stories of these incredible women and men who have recognized their oppression and truly tried to act on it. Many of the contributors continually comment that not to sound cliché, but that this book undoubtedly changed their lives in so many ways. I hope that as a white, middle to upper class, heterosexual feminist, after reading through many more of the passages, I can feel that this book has profoundly impacted and changed my life as well.
Violated Assumptions in “Gender in Real Time” Chapters 1, 2, and 3
1. Assumption: The majority of feminists see a genderless world as their ultimate goal.
Kath Weston makes it very clear that she does not feel the ideal of a genderless world should be the ultimate goal of feminists and all people in general. She even questions as to whether or not a genderless world would even be possible. Weston writes that maybe we should start seeing gender as a “resource for play and for pleasure.” She writes that we should value the ways that gender can come together with race, class, and religion to give “texture to everyday encounters.” Weston goes so far as to ask the question, “What is a world without color, dalliance, and difference?” Her suggestion, instead of a genderless world, is to “reconfigure gender relations so that they need not entail hierarchy and oppression.”
2. Assumption: Most women realize the oppression that they face from a patriarchal society, even if they don’t admit to it or actively try to resist it.
Many women actually feel that they are living in a much different, much more liberated society than their mothers and grandmothers. They basically feel that the feminist movement and struggle for women’s equality have both already been fought and won. Weston writes that a typical response from an American young woman about whether or not she feels oppressed would be as follows, “a woman can do anything she wants as long as she tries, women can legally marry women in some state somewhere, and new technologies make women’s lives easier.” Weston begs to differ and says that statistics and evidence disproves these claims that women are much more liberated.
3. Assumption: Feminists promote actively using the different labels of what sex a person may identify with, such as calling yourself lesbian, gay, transgender, or bisexual.
Kath Weston seems to really promote the ideal of being “unsexed” in this book. She says that there are several fleeting moments in people’s lives where they are “unsexed” in not openly classifying what their sexuality is. Weston writes that being unsexed never lasts because “ambiguity resolves back into certainty, doubt into gendered absolutes.” I am still unsure of how exactly we could make this “unsexed” status last permanently. However, it is disappointing that people feel the need to declare what sex they are simply because of society constantly questioning them or making them uncomfortable by wondering what sex they actually are. It seems that each person should have this period of “unsexed” time to figure out what sexuality they actually identify with, as opposed to basically being dictated to by society as to what sexuality is socially acceptable to identify with.
Summary #3
Author Kath Weston explores a whole different perspective of feminist thought and theory in her book, “Gender in Real Time.” Weston takes a historical look at feminist movements to see how time has played a role in the fight for women’s equality. She feels that gender studies has too often only had a “visual orientation” when it should have been looking at time in relation to gender studies. In the preface, Weston explains that she wanted this book to “traverse time” in two different ways. One way she wanted to do this was by “emphasizing the importance of historical legacies and historical moment for understanding gender relations.” The second way that she wanted to traverse time was by “exploring the limitations of the visual emphasis incorporated into performativity theories of gender.” Weston uses different ways of understanding gender studies by using such tools as political economy, the history of mathematics, Darwinian evolution, and some physics. Ultimately, she wants her readers to look at this book as a voyage through time in search of understanding gender studies.
In the first chapter, Weston discusses three paradoxes that she feels all intertwine with each incorporating “problematic assumptions about time.” The first paradox is the paradox of “liberation simultaneously achieved and denied.” She feels that statistically, there have been some improvements for women in society. However, the gender gap between men and women is not closing anytime soon and women are almost giving up on the battle and feeling like they have achieved as much equality as they are going to get. The second paradox is the paradox of “space time, in which gender theory exalts the visual at the expense of the temporal.” In this paradox, she feels like we are constantly talking of social change in terms of when it will take place. For example, feminists have constantly asked when liberation or the abolition of gender would occur. The third paradox is the paradox “that pits survival against representation in an economy with an increasingly global reach.” In this paradox, Weston discusses the efforts to separate what issues our identity or representation causes us to care about. For example, “western feminists” are more concerned with concepts of gender and struggling with academic theory, whereas “African feminists” are struggling just to get an education, to get food and clear water, and to lower the infant-mortality rate. These are the three paradoxes that Weston outlines in the first chapter.
In the second chapter, Weston discusses the idea of being “unsexed” in society where you don’t have to classify yourself by any sexual orientation until you are truly sure what sexuality you identify with. Weston discusses the pressure of society in this chapter in never wanting to have to second-guess about a person’s gender or sexuality. If you are a lesbian, society wants you to have the typical short haircut with masculine-looking clothes and boots on. If you are straight, society wants you to be the blue-eyed blonde that dresses in a very feminine fashion. In other words, society does not want to have to deal with any ambiguities in deciding a person’s sexuality. Weston discusses the many sociological studies that have been done to understand how individuals learn to categorize others as “women” or “men.” In an “unsexed” society, no one would wonder or question your sexuality.
In the third chapter, Weston discusses a new theory that arose in the late 20th century about the process of gender’s meaningful creation. She discusses the “performance theory” in how people come to perceive gender as “a collection of recognizable attributes or traits, individually possessed.” Weston writes about culturally gendered cues, such as eyeliner, thick-soled boots, or hands on hips, that people associate with a certain gender or sexuality. She also writes about a “Prom Nite” dance in looking at it as an event that “pumps up” images of gender identification. As I have only yet read the preface and three chapters of this book, I think that Weston’s arguments and perspectives are interesting as I have never before looked at gender in relation to time. However, looking at gender through time can give us much more insight as to what feminists and society as a whole have done wrong in the fight for gender equality as well as what feminists and society can improve on in the future for understanding gender relations.
Violated Assumptions in “How Like a Leaf”
1. Assumption: Most people interested in gender studies or sociological studies are not as interested in the fields of math or science.
Donna Haraway’s life work has completely proven my assumption to be wrong. After getting an undergraduate degree in zoology, philosophy, and English literature, she went on to graduate school to study the history and philosophy of biology. This is such a wide variety of subjects and ideas that one person would not only be interested in, but would also be able to master. Typically, I think of people as being stronger in the math and science fields or stronger in reading and writing skills. Donna Haraway has certainly proven herself to be strong in both of these very different interests.
2. Assumption: It wouldn’t be acceptable during the late 1970s and early 1980s to live with your husband, your former lover, and his boyfriend.
Donna Haraway seemed to go completely against the social norm in having this living arrangement with these three important people in her life. She really has made it out to be a great utopian arrangement in having them all live together. I very much doubt that this would be socially acceptable in today’s society. As Haraway continually worked for gay rights and was involved in gay activism, she was very adamant about going against the social norms in terms of how society accepts homosexuals. Not only did her former lover and his partner live with her, but her former lover and her husband also had a relationship at one point when they first met.
3. Assumption: The “racial politics” on both the East coast and the West coast would be somewhat similar even though it is racism against two different groups of people.
After working in Baltimore at Johns Hopkins University, Haraway moved to the West coast to begin working at University of California, Santa Cruz in the History-Consciousness Department. After thinking that the racial politics were black and white as she saw in Baltimore, it was completely different in Santa Cruz as there were many Mexican and Chicano students that brought a whole different array of discriminations and prejudices. The woman who interviewed Haraway commented that moving from the East coast to the West coast was in a sense, like traveling to another country. Because the racism is against two completely different groups, the stereotypes are different and the two races are treated in very different ways.
Summary #4
After reading Donna Haraway’s interview “How Like a Leaf”, I was completely shocked, yet also excited about the various intellectual frontiers that Haraway has pursued while still relating them to gender studies. This book is essentially in an interview or conversational format in which Haraway discusses her personal life story, with topics ranging from her relationships to her role in gender studies to the books that she has written. The book begins as Haraway basically talks about her family, especially her parents and the role that they had in her life, including the early death of her mother when Haraway was sixteen. She discusses the relationships that she has had throughout her life and how she has struggled in identifying her sexuality. Haraway goes into detail about the various fields of study that she tried before deciding to combine all of her interests. She also discusses her history of jobs at numerous colleges before she found herself at the University of California, Santa Cruz as a professor in the History-Consciousness Department. The first half of the book mainly focused on Donna Haraway’s personal life.
The second half of the interview consists more of Haraway discussing her dissertation, her books, and her work in feminist theory. First of all, she discusses her interest in primatology as she wrote a book called, “Primate Visions: Gender, Race, and Nature in the World of Modern Science.” Secondly, she talks about the meaning of her theory of cyborgs and the book, “The Cyborg Manifesto”, that she wrote explaining this theory. Haraway says that most of her books have their foundations in science and biology, but also reach out to and relate to the field of gender studies. It is truly amazing how she is able to connect all of her unrelated interests into this one theory. After talking about several of her other books, Haraway reflected on the moments in writing her books that were most meaningful to her. She says, “My sense of intricacy, interest, and pleasure- as well as the intensity- of how I imagined how like I leaf I am.” Thus, this idea ultimately became the title for this interview. After reading this book, Haraway is definitely the most radical feminist I have read about in terms of her intelligence in a wide variety of subjects, not just gender studies or feminism.
After going over the “How to Read” handout, I found that looking at the form of the text in this particular interview definitely made a difference in how I read the book. It was a dialogue between two women that covered everything from Haraway’s personal life to her professional jobs to her various books and theories. In this sense, I don’t think that we could say that it is only a biography because it is also very informative in terms of reading about her theories and the ideas behind them. Because of the conversational style, I found this book very easy to read and to follow along with. I also looked at the book’s mood in order to understand more closely what was being discussed. While I think that the second half of her book with many of her theories and books has an academic tone and is sometimes completely data-filled, I think that the mood in the rest of it seem to be very passionate and genuine as Haraway is able to freely and proudly talk about their life experiences and her accomplishments. Looking at the form of the text and the mood of the text were just two ways in which I was able to read this text more closely.
As there are definitely some radical ideas that Donna Haraway puts forth in this book, I have a lot of topics I would like to discuss in class. First of all, I was intrigued at the relationships that Haraway had with gay men, straight men, and bisexual men. I thought it was really interesting that she would be able to live in a house with her husband, her former lover, and his partner. Do you think it would still be possible and acceptable today to have this type of living arrangement? Why or why not? Secondly, as much as Haraway attempted to explain it, I am still not clear on the idea of cyborgs. What exactly are cyborgs? How can we relate the ideas of cyborgs to women’s or gender studies? Finally, as women interested in women’s studies are usually doing work and theory in feminist studies or different sociological studies, I thought it was interesting that Haraway pursued both the fields of biology and women’s studies. How exactly does Haraway connect these two unrelated fields in her work? Do feminists and women’s studies theorists approve of this? Overall, I thought Donna Haraway’s life up to this point had been very interesting. She is truly an intellectual that seems to just have a constant yearning for knowledge and new information. More so than anything, I think it is very admirable that Haraway has practiced and has lived the same thing that she has taught and written about throughout her life.
Violated Assumptions in “The Twilight of Equality?”
1. Assumption: The aspect of the social class of a person would be included in their identity politics along with their race, gender, and sexuality.
Duggan feels that there has been a liberal distinction between the economy, the state, civil society, and the family. Because of these distinctions, class politics, which she defines as “the critique of economic inequality”, and identity politics, which she defines as the “protest against exclusions from national citizenship or public participation”, have been separated to create a division in progressive politics. She gives the example that in the early 19th century many people who were involved in identity politics with issues like abolitionism and the women’s suffrage movement were not involved in class politics with issues like worker militancy, socialism, or anarchism in the United States. The social class and status of a person seems to play so heavily on a person’s identity that it doesn’t seem to make sense as to why class politics and identity politics could not be combined.
2. Assumption: The “welfare state” would not cause people to commonly see the New Deal and the Civil Rights Movement as having the same motives and thus, receiving attacks from conservatives.
Even though Duggan argues that these two historical events of the New Deal and the Civil Rights Movement were “heterogeneous”, she writes that many other people felt very differently about these events. Many conservatives felt that these two events were lumped together in an effort to “expand the state and reduce the freedoms and prerogatives of private economic, associational, and family life.” With the New Deal and Civil Rights Movement happening about forty years apart from one another, it is hard to see how these movements would be lumped together and seen as working towards the same purpose as going against conservative beliefs and fundamentals.
3. Assumption: The increased welfare state was due to drug use, domestic abuse, or low wage work that caused many women and men to be unable to support themselves and their families.
I was completely taken aback to read that many people against the welfare state thought that the issue of welfare was one group’s problem and only one group’s problem. Many thought and continue to believe that “the sexual practices and household structures of poor women, especially black women, are the central causes of poverty and of associated social disorder and criminality.” I can’t believe that a person could blame one group of people, specifically black women, for increased welfare, sexual promiscuity, poverty, social disorder, and high crime. I would be interested to see the statistics of how valid this belief really is.
Summary #5
Violated Assumptions in “The Twilight of Equality?”
1. Assumption: The aspect of the social class of a person would be included in their identity politics along with their race, gender, and sexuality.
Duggan feels that there has been a liberal distinction between the economy, the state, civil society, and the family. Because of these distinctions, class politics, which she defines as “the critique of economic inequality”, and identity politics, which she defines as the “protest against exclusions from national citizenship or public participation”, have been separated to create a division in progressive politics. She gives the example that in the early 19th century many people who were involved in identity politics with issues like abolitionism and the women’s suffrage movement were not involved in class politics with issues like worker militancy, socialism, or anarchism in the United States. The social class and status of a person seems to play so heavily on a person’s identity that it doesn’t seem to make sense as to why class politics and identity politics could not be combined.
2. Assumption: The “welfare state” would not cause people to commonly see the New Deal and the Civil Rights Movement as having the same motives and thus, receiving attacks from conservatives.
Even though Duggan argues that these two historical events of the New Deal and the Civil Rights Movement were “heterogeneous”, she writes that many other people felt very differently about these events. Many conservatives felt that these two events were lumped together in an effort to “expand the state and reduce the freedoms and prerogatives of private economic, associational, and family life.” With the New Deal and Civil Rights Movement happening about forty years apart from one another, it is hard to see how these movements would be lumped together and seen as working towards the same purpose as going against conservative beliefs and fundamentals.
3. Assumption: The increased welfare state was due to drug use, domestic abuse, or low wage work that caused many women and men to be unable to support themselves and their families.
I was completely taken aback to read that many people against the welfare state thought that the issue of welfare was one group’s problem and only one group’s problem. Many thought and continue to believe that “the sexual practices and household structures of poor women, especially black women, are the central causes of poverty and of associated social disorder and criminality.” I can’t believe that a person could blame one group of people, specifically black women, for increased welfare, sexual promiscuity, poverty, social disorder, and high crime. I would be interested to see the statistics of how valid this belief really is.
WMST 300 Learning Analysis
As I walked into the classroom on the first day of class, I was looking forward to my first small Women’s Studies class where there would be only Women’s Studies majors from a variety of backgrounds who were passionate about advancing the causes of women as they respectfully articulated their views, opinions, and suggestions openly. In this Women’s Studies 300 class, I have found exactly what I hoped for and much more. Through the readings, the presentations, and the use of our class blog, this course has truly been multi-faceted in learning through the various styles of reading, presenting, going to campus-wide lectures, writing, discussing, and blogging. Looking over the syllabus, the readings truly determined the direction of the class as we went from learning about the feminist experience from the queer view in Allison Bechdel’s book to learning about a major feminist issue of gay marriage in Chauncey’s book to learning about the experiences of many types of feminists in “this bridge we call home.” The main point and the main argument of this course, however, seemed to be the idea that as feminists, it is absolutely necessary that we look at and reinvent many of the women’s issues in society today as we reconceptualize these issues in making them more relevant and more substantial to the greater public, thus allowing the greater public to understand the work of feminism and possibly even coming to support feminist work.
Putting myself into this course, I have found that I truly deepened my understanding of myself as a feminist as I have learned from other feminists about what it means to be passionate about women’s rights. First of all, as a heterosexual woman, I found the experiences of several queer women in the class to be very interesting. For example, one of the women in the class considered herself to be polyamorous, a term I had never heard of before. Her lifestyle of having two or more lovers during the same period of time with each of her partners knowing about her other partners was an interesting, revolutionary concept to me. Coming from a small, conservative town, I did not personally know one person that was queer before coming to college. It is still unusual for me to hear a woman refer to someone when talking as her girlfriend or ex-girlfriend. However, I felt that being around many women of different sexualities was eye-opening for me in being able to understand the different lifestyles that they lead. Secondly, as a Caucasian woman, I was intrigued by the very different feminist experiences of women from other cultures, specifically the black culture. For example, one of the black females in our class discussed women and their relationships with men in her culture. As she put it, black women simply expect their boyfriends and spouses to cheat on them. It is almost a passage of manhood for black men to cheat on their girlfriends and wives. She said that black women just want to be the main woman in their partner’s lives as that is all that they expect. I remember being appalled at this as I would never continue a relationship with someone who regularly cheated on me, however, this was a learning experience for me in understanding this woman’s culture.
Finally, as an agnostic who was a devout Catholic until going away to college, I found the religious backgrounds and experiences of others in the class to be fascinating in how their religions intertwined with their feminist beliefs. For example, one of the women in our class who was Jewish and attended Jewish schools up until college was continually taught the appropriate, proper way for women to act and to hold themselves. Her mother constantly told her that there was an appropriate, acceptable way for her to be a lady and an inappropriate, unacceptable way for her to hold herself. Another one of the women in the class who is Catholic talked about her experience of everybody in her family being married in the traditional Catholic ceremony and having children within the Catholic faith as she felt that was what she wanted to do as well instead of breaking away from the conformity of her family and the Catholic Church. Putting myself into the course, through different sexualities, ethnicities, and religious backgrounds, I learned a lot about my own identity as a white, heterosexual, agnostic female as many of my assumptions and ideas about feminists different from me were violated, challenged, or changed.
As the portal course for the Women’s Studies curriculum, this class strengthened my passion for women’s rights and feminism as it also reminded me of the importance of Women’s Studies as a major in a college curriculum. I had not before been in a class with only Women’s Studies majors so it was very refreshing and rejuvenating to be around many like-minded women when it came to our views on the necessity of feminism in today’s society. I honestly can’t count how many times I have been asked why I am a Women’s Studies major, why I consider myself to be a feminist, or simply asked why the heck would you believe in something as ridiculous as feminism. In fact, in mentioning that I am a feminist and a Women’s Studies major, I have had close friends essentially laugh in my face. As many other students in the class agreed, it hasn’t exactly been easy to consider yourself a feminist in peer groups or to discuss your feminist beliefs among others. In fact, the majority of people that I associate with on this campus are not feminists. However, because of the motivation of others in this class, I have a renewed sense of dedication to the cause of women’s rights and women’s advancement in society.
Because I more thoroughly understand what it means to me to be a feminist, I am more able to explain to others why I am passionate about this issue of women’s rights. In a meeting with Professor King in the middle of the semester, she suggested that I find more feminist outlets or friends on campus with whom I can discuss many of the feminist issues that I care about while getting legitimate feedback from someone that is like-minded. As my major cause in the struggle for women’s rights is reproductive rights, I have become more involved in a pro-choice group called Terps for Choice on campus. The people in this group have been a wonderful source for being able to express my feminist views and ideals. I also enjoy the work that I have done with them in such areas as providing lower-costing birth control, helping to fundraise for the National Abortion Rights Action League, and escorting women to and from Planned Parenthood Clinics. I feel that this class and my Women’s Studies major are supplements to the feminist activism that I am able to participate in outside of class. Being a Women’s Studies major to me means that you do learn and read about feminist concepts and theories in class, but you put those theories and concepts into practice through activism. Putting these two areas together is my goal for my next two and a half years as a Women’s Studies major at the University of Maryland.
One of the readings that was very meaningful to me was George Chauncey’s “Why Marriage?” Before reading this book and participating in the discussion about this book, I was very much on the fence in terms of how I felt about gay marriage. However, after reading this book, I am fully in support of gay marriage, whether it be a church or government-recognized. I was truly outraged at the examples of people that have been opposed to the idea of same-sex marriage. I am especially outraged at Jerry Falwell and the Christian right for their regressive and ignorant, yet adamant stance against same-sex marriage in this country as they would be so narrow-minded to blame the 9/11 attacks on groups of people such as gays, abortionists, and feminists. This book not only caused me to change my political beliefs in terms of this topic, but it also caused me to change many personal religious beliefs about this topic. As a Catholic my entire life, I basically never questioned the church’s position on not allowing same-sex marriage within the church. Over the past two years I have gradually separated from the Catholic Church finding that I disagree with more than I agree with when it comes to the church’s political and social beliefs. Along with many other issues, this issue of gay marriage was yet another topic on which I completely disagreed with the Catholic Church. These are just two ways in which this book directly impacted my political and religious beliefs.
Another book that I found to be very meaningful was “this bridge we call home.” Doing a presentation on only one section of this book, I found myself so enriched by the stories in that one section that I also read many of the other passages in the book. Seeing myself as particularly lucky and having it fairly easy as I consider myself to be only one deviation from the standard norm of a white male, I rarely thought about the experiences of feminists from other cultures and other sexualities. For example, one female black lesbian feminist who wrote in the book would have to face the oppression of being three deviations from the norm as she dealt with three very oppressed, separate identities. The work of feminism and the women’s movement means many different things to many different people. As a Caucasian, heterosexual feminist, it is important for me to know about the experiences of other women from different ethnicities and sexualities in order to help unify the feminist movement. Feminists of previous generations have too often made the mistake of excluding women from other ethnicities as they narrow-mindedly focused on white women’s issues in society. Feminism is about helping all women to overcome oppression in the world and this book made me realize that I need to be more aware and more sensitive to the experiences of women different from myself.
Another reading that I found particularly thought-provoking was the Allison Bechdel book, “Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For.” As this book used what most would consider provocative language and controversial themes, I think that this comic strip was an important lesson for our class in having the courage, like Bechdel, to challenge social norms. As far as I know, there has not been a lesbian-themed comic strip in history. Bechdel is truly brave and revolutionary in writing these realistic comic strips that show the realities of a feminist lesbian lifestyle while sometimes making light of the situations in which she portrays. As our first book of the semester, this was important for our class in having the strength to be open with other people about our beliefs, no matter how radical or extreme they may be. I know that I often struggle with explaining myself and my beliefs to people different from me and this book gives me the motivation to see that there are other women out there pioneering their cause and not being afraid of what others may think of them.
A final reading that continually dramatically impacts me every time that I read it is “White Privilege.” This reading was just briefly brought up in class, but it is a reading that I continually find myself thinking about in my daily life. Until I read this article for the first time last year, I never before thought about the experiences of those that have different ethnicities from mine. “I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.” “I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.” “I can easily buy posters, post-cards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children’s magazines featuring people of my race.” These were just three of the examples that Peggy McIntosh gives to show the privileges that white people have. After reading this article, I sent it to many people I know, including my family and many friends. Before holding prejudices, stereotypes, or even allowing yourself to be racist, I think every white person reading this article could make an enormous difference in their attitudes towards others different from them. I did not consider myself to be racist before coming to college, but I will admit that I was ignorant to many traditions of other ethnicities as the town I grew up in was 99% white. Coming to college, I felt that I definitely did form stereotypes about various groups of people and this article allowed me to step back and understand what I was doing in judging others. Of all of my readings so far in my college career, this reading has definitely been one of the most life-changing and thought-provoking.
One of the websites that I particularly enjoyed was the video of the Ciara song, “Like a Boy”, that we watched in class. I had not seen this video before as I had heard the song, but had not closely listened to the lyrics. Before seeing this video, I had assumed Ciara to be like many other female artists in today’s society who play into and validate the many stereotypes about women being subservient or inferior to men. I was definitely surprised when watching this video as I felt that this video sent a strong message to all women and men alike about the social norms in relationships of women serving men. As people get many of their ideas about social norms during childhood, we see traditional norms on television daily of women constantly dressing up and changing themselves in order to impress men. It is about time that someone with the famous status of Ciara be able to step up, get people thinking differently, and possibly change the ideals that children have about relationships between men and women. While this video may not be viewed by young children, adolescents are a huge audience for such channels as MTV, where this music video would most certainly be played. These adolescents are still forming their ideas about social norms as well and this video would serve them in questioning previously-held beliefs. This was just one website of a music video that I felt was particularly powerful and moving.
As the main argument of this course was to reconceptualize feminist issues and causes, I think we see people, whether women or men, doing just this in the readings that we covered throughout the class. Who would have thought of a feminist-lesbian comic strip where a lesbian author makes light of a situation that many people disagree with and shun? Bechdel’s book definitely reconceptualized the idea of feminist lesbian interactions in portraying these interactions to the greater public. Keating and Anzaldua’s “this bridge we call home” reconceptualizes many feminist causes in showing the very different lives that many feminists of different ethnicities and sexualities lead, thus showing other feminist causes that the women’s movement had not previously considered. Kath Weston’s “Gender in Real Time” reconceptualizes feminism in terms of how history has affected the various feminist movements over time and how we can learn from the mistakes of previous generations in being able to advance feminist causes. These various readings allowed us as students to reconceptualize our own feminisms and to think more deeply about what causes we are passionate about and how we can strive to work towards success in those causes. Ultimately, this class gave me a better understanding of myself not only as a feminist, but also as a person. Overall, I enjoyed this portal course to the Women’s Studies major and I look forward to my future classes in the Women’s Studies major.
Portfolio:
My name is Katie and I am a WMST major. My emphasis is in health and I plan to go to med school upon graduating in 2009. Since taking this class I have re-evaluated some of my goals regarding activism through women's health. Previously I planned to go abroad to help prevent FGM and I still plan to do so but more by helping the community then just going in and "stopping" the problem. I have learned through ideas such as third world feminism that there is more than one way to approach the problem and it would be most benefical to work with the community than to point out what they do wrong.
To be posted on Amazon.com
The second section of “This Bridge We Call Home” edited by Gloria E. Anzaldua and Analouise Keating entitled “still struggling with the boxes people try to put me in… resisting the labels” discuss race identity. The section is broken in to thirteen parts. The parts consist of short stories, poems, and art created by women and men of color. The underlying connection between all works is a desire to find a place in the world where you are not questioned for what you look like and others do not assume anything of you due to your outward appearance. This section questions the function of race and indicates that accuracy was never its intended purpose. Many of the authors found that they felt the need to move through public space as if they were putting on a public performance, masking their true identity to live within a developed standard of how to act. These people feel as if their face is marked with instructions of how to be. All the while these individuals often receive contradictory messages from family and culture. In the thirteenth work by Evelyn Alsultany entitled “Los Intersticios: Recasting Moving Selves” Alsultany documents her struggle with continually being asked, “Where do you come from” due to her dark skin. She is of Arab and Cuban decent and finds answering questions tricky because she is never able to satisfy the listener to “what” she is because she grew up in New York and does not identify primarily with how individuals label her. The fourteenth work entitled “Gallina Ciega: Turning the Game on Itself” by Leticia Hernandez-Linares again discusses the frustration of being racially labeled. Hernandez-Linares finds that labeling “invites assumptions and conclusions” and feels self doubt due to her constant stress of how her race fits. Hernandez-Linares becomes ill, unable to escape her feelings of powerlessness due to her feelings of having to answer questions about who she is. The sixteenth work written by Mita Banerjee entitled “The Hipness of Meditation: A hyphenated German Existence” tells the tale of a woman who wishes to be authentic. Banerjee is from German and Indian decent and wants to fit in and to be accepted where she was born, Germany. The nineteenth work by Marla Morris entitled, “Young Man Popkin: A Queer Dystopia” deals with sexual identity and discusses the trauma that “queer” individuals face leading to high rates of suicide in queer teens. Morris suggests we build an accepting community and not to place people in categories of boy, girl, or other. The twentieth work entitled “Transchildren, Changelings, and Fairies: Living the Dream and Surviving the Nightmare in Contemporary America” by Jody Norton again deals with sexuality but is from the perspective of a transgender individual. Norton comments on how while gay is now more represented in the media, transgender does not exist in mass media. We are challenged to seek activism and social justice. The twenty-first work entitled “The Real Americana” by Kimberly Rappolo is a poem about a woman who is telling you she will do whatever she needs to survive and will not feel guilty for it. Rappolo has a take no prisoner attitude which is very empowering but throughout the piece she is defining herself with many different labels. The twenty-fourth work by Minh-Ha T. Pham entitled “(Re)Writing Home: A Daughter’s Letter to Her Mother” is a letter written by Pham to her mother whom abandoned her. Pham is Vietnamese and grew up in America. She is searching for answers, clinging to her Vietnamese history and her American identity hoping for her mother’s approval. This second section of “This Bridge We Call Home” is written by individuals seeking change and equality for all. Third world feminism is brought up in this section and is defined as self-reliance while upholding traditional values of family, community, and marriage. Many of the authors struggle with this when trying to incorporate western feminism with their culture. Third world feminism allows these women to make their situations work for them. Through this section the authors had the same underlying theme that one can not leave an identity behind but one must investigate and embrace them all and the public must be willing to embrace that individual for their decisions.
“This Bridge We Call Home” is the sister book to “This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color” published in 1981 by Gloria Anzaldua and Cherrie Moraga in response to the feelings of alienation felt from white western feminism. Anzaldua states that, “This Bridge We Call Home takes the model provided by This Bridge Called My Back and gives it a new shape.” “This Bridge We Call Home” includes a wider variety of women from different backgrounds along with perspective from male and white authors. As a whole the book describes the affects of globalization while the second section focuses primarily on race along with the embracement of third world feminism. This section is written so that an everyday person could understand and relate to the material. The second section has a very active tone and the reader is inspired to take part in the activism challenged by the authors throughout each passage.
Topics to Discuss:
1) How does western feminism need to be recontexualized so that feminist from other countries and cultures can be included?
2) Do you think that race labeling for standardized test should be eliminated? Does it have any benefits?
3) In the USA “white” is not the native race, therefore do you believe white individuals should not label themselves as American but rather identify with the country they originate from as do individuals who are Indian or Chinese?
Violated Assumptions:
1) There is more than one branch of feminism. I had not considered that there are western feminisms or third world feminisms. I had believed there was just feminism with different routes to reach the same endpoint of female equality.
2) There is no right or wrong way to be a feminist. I thought that women of third world countries were 100% oppressed and could not understand why they would submit to the role they are forced into but I am learning they women of third world nations do rebel in a way that their culture sees fit and they do not need to leave the country and their culture to be a feminist.
3) Western feminism is entirely different from the feminism occurring in third worlds. In the United States women are not forced to cover their body but their bodies are controlled and objectified and they must wear other “covers” such as makeup and appropriate attire to be accepted in the culture.
Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate Over Gay Equality written by George Chauncey describes the history that has set the stage for the debate over gay marriage today. The book begins with a history of gay and lesbian individuals in the US and their struggle to enter and gain acceptance in the public sphere. Up until the 1930s during the great depression gay and lesbians were not viewed with such critique and demonization. During the great depression there was a push for traditional families when men lost their jobs and no longer had the same role in their family and found homosexuals to be a threat. Continued discriminatory practices continued in the following decades and gay clubs and restaurants were closed and individuals presumed to be homosexual were jailed. During the 1950’s Broadway plays were band from having gay themed plays and an agreement was made in Hollywood not to represent gay characters or issues. During the 1970’s public opinion was shifting and heterosexual couples were living together before marriage. Birth control was gaining popularity and sex was being viewed as a means of pleasure and not just for reproduction. During the 1980s through the 1990s the AIDS epidemic started and gay men were both stereotyped and feared as being diseased by the public and healthcare workers. Gay men came together with the support of female activists, who had experience in health due to work in the women’s movement, to battle discrimination. In 1987 78% of the US viewed homosexual relations as wrong. During the 1990s gay characters could be seen in the media and movies such as Philadelphia were hits and gay support was increasing significantly. In 1993 the military enacted a “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy on homosexuality forcing many gay individuals to lead a double life. Chauncey describes how marriage has evolved overtime from a system of control, where people wed for political reasons and one could not choose a partner, to a system of love and compassion. Since the nineteenth century marriage has evolved and the freedom to choose a partner is viewed as a right, gender roles with in married families have changed and no longer need a stereotypical “man” or “woman”, marriage is economically beneficial and often necessary, and is thought of less on the basis of religion, even though some churches do allow it. Marriage is desired by gay and lesbian couples because without the privilege they are second class citizens with no rights and protection if a partner becomes ill, as seen in the AIDS epidemic, or dies along with protection for their children. In 2004 gay couples received the right to marry in Massachusetts and California along with other counties throughout the US. Gay couples flocked to get married but this ability to wed was short lived when President Bush two weeks later set forth a constitutional amendment to end gay marriage.
Taking notes through this reading allowed me to reflect on what I was writing its significance to the overall issue of gay marriage. I found this to be very helpful in understanding the context of this book. There was a lot of information presented and many different movements were occurring simultaneously so I benefited from taking short breaks to layout what I had learned within the greater picture. The tone of this book was informative and I did not find it to be biased. Being unbiased was important to me because I believe individuals from any walks of life would benefit from this book and not feel as if they were being attacked. I liked the way Chauncey approached the subject from a very factual and less philosophical frame. When reading similar information on gay marriage the argument tends to be emotional and philosophical but the factual way this book was presented was much more beneficial to me as a reader. Chauncey is able to present the material from a factual approach because he is an expert in the field and has testified as an expert witness in several major gay rights cases. He was also a head author of the Historians' Amicus Brief in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), which resulted in the Supreme Court's landmark decision overturning the nation's remaining sodomy laws.
Topics to discuss:
1) Does the AIDS epidemic still affect gay culture? Gay individuals were affected personally, socially, economically, and politically. Gay individuals were personally affected in the 1980s because the majority of those infected with the disease were gay men. These men suffered from health issues and had to pay inflated amounts for healthcare because pharmaceutical companies did not want to treat a “gay” disease. Healthcare professionals were also scared of the disease. Gay individuals were targeted as social outcasts and heterosexual people did not want to eat or drink from where an individual with AIDS may have eaten or drank from. Gay partners had no right to visitation and upon death lost financial stability and security. Politically it was used as another way to prove gay inferiority.
2) Gay characters in the media – Is this as great as it seems? While I believe it is great that gay characters and themes are portrayed in the media I still find that most of these characters are very stereotypical. Shows like “Will and Grace” are positive but I do not think it is positive when I hear girls say, “Oh, I need to find a gay friend.” Assuming that all gay men are the same, like fashion, and care about the same things that they see on TV is not representative of gay men as a whole. Now that gay characters are on TV do you think it is time that their characters have a more diverse role?
Violated Assumptions:
1) Birth control does not affect gay individuals. I did not recognize that sexual freedom found within heterosexual couples could correlate with sexual freedom experienced within same sex couples.
2) That during the 1930s-1970s being gay was viewed as being a molester. This idea surprised me because gay stereotypes I have are very feminine and not being able to control urges is not a current feminine quality.
3) That men sought out male prostitutes rather than female to protect against STDs in the early to mid 20th century. I have heard of a subculture, like in prison, where men can do “gay” acts but not be gay but I thought that was a recent development.
4) Marriage is a way to make some couples better than others. I have not always been the biggest supporter of marriage and I never could figure out why but I like the way this is phrased and it made me really think about the system of marriage and how it is economically and politically used.
Learning Analysis
ARGUMENT AND STORY OF THE COURSE
The argument of the course is to understand feminism through the broadest form we can possibly achieve and surpass that by actually discovering, theorizing and creating a new horizon as new scholars. Our syllabus takes us on that journey of invention by asking critical questions on each reading and topic we have discussed. We find the correlations between them all and draw a larger picture to contribute to the feminist ideology. The idea comes through different stories from the various authors that have contributed to the third wave feminist movement. New terminologies and applications of feminism are discussed in forms unknown to many of us who consider themselves feminists.
Our course and journey of self discovery and creation began with Alison Bechdel’s Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For. A sense of humor is a great way to begin feminist curiosity. Bechdel gives us a comic strip full of LGBT issues wrapped in to one political novela involving memorable characters that are sure to make us think of how we view others and ourselves through a gender lens in contemporary politics. I learned that there are more genders to contend with in society and we all live our realities according to our perceptions of the world that does not always include everyone. The satire of contemporary politics is always funny but it shows how far behind we are in gender politics and deconstructing social attaches of gender. Bechdel make us laugh when Jonas runs around in a tube top without thinking of the proscribed taboos that surrounds a boy wearing female clothing. This a first glimpse of Feminist reconceptualization, understanding and realizing what it means to reconceptualize prescribed notions in society.
We then moved to the topic of gay marriage by reading renowned author George Chauncey with his latest book Why Marriage? It is a historical overview of the political development for gay equality in the United States. Chauncey clearly articulates important historical accounts from the 19th and 20th century pertaining to the indoctrination of marriage in society especially through gender lens, which is an unlikely perspective found in most traditional historical texts. According to Chauncey, marriage became a primary institution to allocate state and private benefits. This propagated newer egalitarian marriage laws, whereas, in the past “marriage was one of the primary social institutions through which gender differences and inequality were produced...it now became a relationship between equals”(66, 70Chauncey). Therefore, marriage is about equal benefits and entitlement to individuals in a marital contract, this right should not exclude non- heterosexual relationships. This propels gay right activists to demand for the same equality and not be discriminated against because of their sexual or gender orientation. I realized the privilege of heterosexual marriages is more than the romantic institution. A violate assumption I had was that everyone in the LGBT community agreed on the marriage issue but to my surprise queer theorist disagreed. Why join another oppressive institution? when all you need is an alternative social contract preferably one in which your financial benefits and entitlements are protected if you are in a long- term relationship with your significant other. Coupling does not have to be defined by the patriarchal system.
Gender politics does not end with racy comic strips and gay marriage. We continue to explore more radical feminist ideas by reading This Bridge Called Home by Anzaldua and Keating. The authors of these short stories in the book have drawn together more tales of experiences felt by many women of color and now even men. These stories are supposed to bridge the differences between people through empirical knowledge, feminist curiosity and solidarity, but the Goal of Anzaldua and Keating is to “examine the current status of multicultural feminist theorizing and to reinvigorate Bridge’s call for new forms of community, identity and activism.” This Bridge will fuse and create new alliances among us to bridge us back together into a community of solidarity. Forming alliances and sisterhood is one of the highest tenets in feminist studies. To bridge all we have learned in this class about feminism is also rather intricate.
We continued the journey to expand our knowledge of feminism in ways I never knew possible. One of the most challenging and frustrating readings I had was Kath Weston’s Gender in Real Time. Kath Weston provides a deep analysis of gender movement measured through time and space. There are formulas that Weston provides for this gender movement in mathematical equations. Weston states, that where there is space there is time and temporal aspects can go unexplored if gender is limited in focusing strictly on vision and space. Starship Gender is an anthropological study of gender through time. Weston provides an analysis of past and present improvements for women but explores the skepticism of what truly has progressed for women and gender studies throughout time; she believes time is the liberation paradox. All the efforts made by women through time to improve the lives of other women globally have not sufficed to end the suffering of women globally; therefore, liberation has not occurred for all women but for others it has been liberating in a different context. A zero concept of gender is when zero represents an absence but later it may be occupied making this relational to time and also to absence of gender. According to Weston gender theory requires presence, temporal sequence and position of absence and zero is ambiguity. Zero is the corner stone of where gender actually begins from absence to present thus taking you on a gender time travel.
This concept became difficult for me to grasp no matter how I looked at it but it proves that feminism lives in a multidimensional sphere and it cannot be boxed into one concept.
The second most challenging book we read was Donna Haraway’s How Like a Leaf. The biological construct of gender, as I know it is based on the definition of sexes. A cyborg is not something I considered to be part of feminism or did I understand its linkage to feminist studies. She combines nature and biology to explain the existence of human life through philosophical and spiritual storytelling and scientific evidence. There is this multidimensional analysis of life experiences explained through biological lenses, which she refers to as biologism. Haraway explains, “You take something –an object of knowledge or culture-and you move further and further inside it, to what it’s structure is.”and then you move inside of whatever webs of meaning you discover from that analysis and so on and so forth.”(82)
She historicizes her life through the 70’s movement, her catholic spirituality along with her personal and sexual relationships. She believes there is a symbiosis between people and nature that can be understood by studying “Biopolitics of the post modern body.” She admits to have been influenced by bioscientific ways of thinking. How Like A Leaf gives the reader a unique insight to another dimension of feminist theory through scientific analysis. It has a diverse approach in answering life’s most complicated questions.
I put myself into a story that is as infinite as the universe and try to figure out where it all ends. There may not be an ending but there is a continuous path to unknown knowledge. We finished our course with the book Twighlight of Equality by Lisa Duggan. She details the affects of neo-liberal policies and globalization has had in the twentieth century. She speaks of the eroding democracy in our country beginning with the slow chipping away of our civil rights and any equality based laws. Neo liberal policies have empowered the wealthiest and transnational corporations have expanded to other impoverished countries to bleed them out of their resources for their own profits. She explains the policy that has taken the U.S to war with Iraq for the sake of oil and imperialism.
Duggan recounts the commentaries made by Conservatives in blaming gays, feminist and the ACLU for causing September 11. Conservatives were attacking multiculturalism as the main conspirator in September 11, giving white supremacy carte blanche to continue their discriminatory practices even more so with the assistance of the White House. She also presents the argument of masculinization nationalism after Sept 11th. The personification of male heroism during Sept 11th included only firefighters, police officers, and the military; there is no mention of others that lost their lives especially women. The disaster that globalization and neo-liberalism has had on identity politics has been unparalleled. It is important for us to focus on a global scale what it means to be a feminist in current times. Political activism comes in many forms and its not always in a social context but it can be scientifically. It takes different forms and shapes, unlimited and infinite in possibilities.
I’ve discussed all the readings in short length but there have been many websites to chose from. Donna Haraway and Alison Bechdel were the two that I most found enlightening. Donna Haraway clarified the cyborg theory and the bioscience aspect to feminism and Bechdel gave us a glimpse of her personal thoughts of mainstream media accepting her after being in a highly marginalized literary sector. To reconceptualize feminism is mind provoking and challenging in a personal aspect. There is no one-way or true way at looking at feminist issues. I believe we have only scratched the surface of what is truly out there for feminist. My class has taught me more than just textbook definitions of feminism; I had an experience of feminism from a highly scholarly approach of creativity and discovery.
PORTFOLIO
MY INTRODUCTION
My name is Leyda Molina and I'm a Women studies major. I hope to graduate in May. I love the Women's studies program because it's highly revolutionary. I enjoy anything that is not mainstream and breaks new grounds when it comes to a new concept or alternative way of thinking. I like to think out of the box and out of the normative of society. I believe it's the path to denaturalization and to unlearn many of the horrible prejudices and discriminatory ideas that have been prescribed to us.
Why Marriage?
Written By George Chauncey
George Chauncey gives readers a historical overview of the political development for gay equality in the United States. Chauncey clearly articulates important historical accounts from the 19th and 20th century pertaining to the indoctrination of marriage in society especially through gender lens, which is an unlikely perspective found in traditional historical texts.
According to Chauncey, marriage became a primary institution to allocate state and private benefits. At one time in society, marriage was the only contractual agreement a woman could consent to, but only to secure the turn over of her property to her husband in exchange for protectionism. Division of labor affected much of the marriage laws until the law changed and declared the right to marry one’s partner of choice became a fundamental civil right. This propagated newer egalitarian marriage laws, whereas, in the past “marriage was one of the primary social institutions through which gender differences and inequality were produced...it now became a relationship between equals”(66, 70Chauncey). The allocation of benefits became a primary role for marriage especially since healthcare and other benefits were not socialized, it became the employer’s responsibility to offer benefits but usually only to the male dominated work force. Women stayed home and were dependent on their husband’s benefits but were only entitled to these benefits through them. Therefore, marriage is about equal benefits and entitlement to individuals in a marital contract, this right should not exclude non heterosexual relationships. This propels gay right activists to demand for the same equality and not be discriminated against because of their sexual or gender orientation.
Part II
I focused on the historical and gender aspect of the book. I recognized many of the fallacies I grew up with regarding marriage and all the hang ups I still have over marriage.
PART III
1) I would like to discuss in further the laws that pertain to civil unions and how they can be advanced.
2)Discuss the importance of marriage in current times, is marriage really necessary.
This Bridge We Call Home
By: Gloria E. Anzaldua and Analouise Keating
This Bridge We Call Home is a compilation of stories that are central to feminist learning. Analouise Keating with the help of Gloria Anzaldua have intended to continue the legacy of the well known feminist book called, This Bridge Called my Back written in 1980 in which it became a pivotal key in unleashing many themes of concern to women of color that had not been explored from various perspectives and profound concerns.
The authors have drawn together even more tales of experiences felt by many women of color and now even men. These stories are supposed to bridge the differences between people through empirical knowledge, feminist curiosity and solidarity but the Goal of Anzaldua and Keating is to “examine the current status of multicultural feminist theorizing and to reinvigorate Bridge’s call for new forms of community, identity and activism.”
The existence of This Bridge We call Home, exists from “the complete dissatisfaction of the state of feminist movement,” according to Keating. What must be learned from this book is how to recapture the spirit of sisterhood through acknowledging and accepting our commonalities. This Bridge will fuse and create new alliances among us and bridge us back together into a community of solidarity.
This Bridge We Call Home
By: Andalzua and Keating
TOPICS OF DISCUSSION:
1) I’m interested in discussing various issues that are common and not common to women and men of color.
2) There are so many misconceptions about people of color that I would like to discuss all of them in detail.
3) Multiculturalism is great but does it mean that discrimination lessens because there is more of it?
4) Get to know more feminist of colors and their theories?
Gender in Real Time
By: Kath Weston
Kath Weston provides a deep analysis of gender movement measured through time and space. There are formulas that Weston provides for this gender movement in mathematical equations. Weston states, that where there is space there is time and temporal aspects can go unexplored if gender is limited in focusing strictly on vision and space. Starship Gender is an anthropological study of gender through time.
Weston provides an analysis of past and present improvements for women but explores the skepticism of what truly has progressed for women and gender studies throughout time; she believes time is the liberation paradox. All the efforts made by women through time to improve the lives of other women globally have not sufficed to end the suffering of women globally; therefore, liberation has not occurred for all women but for others it has been liberating in a different context.
A zero concept of gender is when zero represents an absence but later it may be occupied making this relational to time and also to absence of gender. According to Weston gender theory requires presence, temporal sequence and position of absence and zero is ambiguity. Zero is the corner stone of where gender actually begins from absence to present thus taking you on time travel.
PART II
FOCUSED EXERCISE
I focused on the time travel through the history of the various social movements specified by Weston.
The form of the text was mathematically complex, confusing elaborations of terminology.
LIST OF TOPICS
1) Has time liberated some women in a capitalist society?
2) How to use the tools given by Weston to analyze gender studies
VIOLATED ASSUMTION
Time equates to progress for women
Gender does not have a mathematical beginning
Liberation is the same for all women
Economics is not essential to liberation
HOW LIKE A LEAF
By: Donna J. Haraway
Donna J. Haraway is interviewed by Thyrza Nichols Goodeve on the most significant literary work of her life, Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. The interview is filled with personal details, analogies, anecdotes and metaphors of Haraway’s life and theoretical work on feminism and science. She combines nature and biology to explain the existence of human life through philosophical and spiritual storytelling and scientific evidence. There is this multidimensional analysis of life experiences explained through biological lenses, which she refers to as biologism. Haraway explains, “You take something –an object of knowledge or culture-and you move further and further inside it, to what it’s structure is.”and then you move inside of whatever webs of meaning you discover from that analysis and so on and so forth.”(82)
She historicizes her life through the 70’s movement, her catholic spirituality along with her personal and sexual relationships. She believes there is a symbiosis between people and nature that can be understood by studying “Biopolitics of the post modern body.” She admits to have been influenced by bioscientific ways of thinking. How Like A Leaf gives the reader a unique insight to another dimension of feminist theory through scientific analysis. It has a diverse approach in answering life’s most complicated questions.
Exercise From How to Read:
I used the historical approach and biological perspective in doing my how to read exercise and as result I realized that there is something to be said about the correlation between biology and life’s experiences. It is a form of science because you can’t have experiences without cells that makeup an organism that creates life. Historically I’ve followed the life of Haraway to observe how her life has concluded through the development of bioscience and since her first thought in this particular theoretical way of thinking.
List of Topics for Discussion:
I found the book a bit difficult to understand without reading her previous work. I would like to discuss her other books to get a clearer idea of this particular type of theory.
How does feminism come to fruition through biology and how does gender develop in the same scope?
My research on Haraway is that her work is in the History of Science and her interest are feminist theory, cultural and historical studies of science and technology, relation of life and human sciences, and human-animal relations.
SUMMARY
THE TWIGHLIGHT OF EQUALITY
By Lisa Duggan
Lisa Duggan in the Twighlight of Equality details the affects of neo-liberal policies and globalization has had in the twentieth century. She speaks of the eroding democracy in our country beginning with the slow chipping away of our civil rights and any equality based laws. Neo liberal policies have empowered the wealthiest and transnational corporations have expanded to other impoverished countries to bleed them out of their resources for their own profits. She explains the policy that has taken the U.S to war with Iraq for the sake of oil and imperialism.
Duggan recounts the commentaries made by Conservatives in blaming gays, feminist and the ACLU for causing September 11. Conservatives were attacking multiculturalism as the main conspirator in September 11, giving white supremacy carte blanche to continue their discriminatory practices even more so with the assistance of the White House.
Duggan also presents the argument of masculinization nationalism after Sept 11th. The personification of male heroism during Sept 11th included only firefighters, police officers, and the military; there is no mention of others that lost their lives especially women. The disaster that globalization and neo-liberalism has had on identity politics has been unparalleled. Duggan explains the effect it has had on the social movement but it hasn’t been enough to stop neo-liberal advocates. She encompasses policies that have eroded equality, feminism, reproductive rights, social activism, and gay rights and the economic disparity between rich and poor around the world.
How to Read guidelines:
HISTORICIZING
When reading Twighlight of Equality I could recall many of the political downturn she writes over that has lead us into a darker outcome. The economic fall of the United States can be blamed on the neo-liberal policies the U.S has engaged in the last 20 years. Many countries have suffered from these policies and view the U.S as an imperialist trying to steal the resources of others for their own greedy consumption. For Latin Americans we see Mexico as an example, the U.S exploits the people of Mexico in Mexico as well as in the U.S. They steal their resources with these transnational companies and then implement these restrictive policies on immigration to keep them from coming to the U.S.
Duggan does understand the mass opposition to neo-liberalism in South and Latin America and how there is a new force in the social movement working diligently to make this voice heard.
Discussion Questions:
I’m always wondering why Americans cannot see what is happening around the world because of neo-liberalism?
VIOLATED ASSUMPTIONS
#1
Allison Bechdel. Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For
VIOLATED ASSUMPTIONS
1- Women are peaceful and antiwar
2- LGBT are comfortable with sexuality
3- Not all LGBT are for gay marriage
4- LGBT use derogatory words referring to their gender
#2
George Chauncey. Why Marriage? The History Shaping Debate
VIOLATED ASSUMPTIONS
1. The law protects homosexuals
2. Homosexual could live freely in society
3. Doctors considered homosexuality a mental disorder
4. If Homosexuals did not adjust to social norms they were psychopaths and child molesters
#3
This Bridge We Call Home
By: Anzaldua and Keating
VIOLATED ASSUMTIONS
1) The concerns of women of color are all the same. Latino, African Americans, Asian Americans they have the same issues of concern.
2) Sisterhood is impossible because of all our differences.
3) Discrimination is not as prominent for white ethnic women as ethnic colored women.
4) Everyone that considers themselves different whether it be ethnicity, race, class sex es "Zurdo."
#4
Why Marriage?
George Chuncey
VIOLATED ASSUMPTIONS:
1) All LGBT want to get married
2) Marriage is all about love not benefits.
3) The struggle for equal rights for LGBT people has been easy.
4) The law protects all
PRESENTATION
SECTION 1 of Bridge
Section 1
This Bridge We Call Home
G. Anzaldua & A. Keating
EXIGENCE: A Bridge Called my Back is the inspiration of This Bridge Called Home. The writers speak of the level of influence the first “Bridge” had on each of their lives. Bridge represents liberation from self and expectations of others from a gender perspective. Each individual expresses their discontent through life acting out roles for others to approve.
The bridges are then built to ease the pain and express joy, pride and acceptance of oneself. It is the longing for identity that eventually bridges everyone to self -acceptance.
The bridge represents reaching out to others, healing and liberation. The importance of pride and self- esteem is what the bridge makes possible.
“After a lifetime- passive, timid and apologetic -of seeing, worrying about, and compensating for what she was not, she longed to see who she was.” (Martinez,42)
“To record what others erase when I speak, to rewrite the stories others have miswritten about me, about you. To become more intimate with myself and you. To discover myself, to preserve myself, to make myself, to achieve self-autonomy. (Andazaldua)
ARGUMENT: Self-acceptance is a central theme for all the first six stories in section 1. Self-discovery is a secondary theme for the stories. The writers all have experienced Discrimination in some form or fashion.
Self-acceptance and self- discovery is achieved through a set of negative and positive experiences and obstacles in the lives of individual. It is propelled by acts of discrimination from others and the feeling of being marginalized from everyone else.
EXAMPLE:
“ Being a Chicana and a Lesbian, my parents daughter and a Lesbian alive and a Lesbian. This saga of a young adult’s struggle for sexual and cultural identity may seem almost a cliché. Yet even as I write these words, it seems as though I walked through fire- through the deeply ingrained homophobia of my world, outside within. This Bridge helped me see new pathways, options, realities… For the first time I heard the voices of Women of Color, especially Chicanas, proudly proclaim their Lesbianism; other daughters of mixed race ancestry spoke of passing; and all writers unabashedly and unapologetically named racism and societal privilege.”
PORTFOLIO CONTENTS
9/4/07 (Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For)
Violated Assumptions #1
9/18/07 (Why Marriage?)
Summary Assignment #1
Violated Assumptions #2
9/26/07 (This Bridge We Call Home)
Summary Assignment #2
10/3/07 (Gender in Real Time)
Summary Assignment #3
Violated Assumptions
Free-Write on “My Moment of Being
Unsexed”
10/17/07 (This Bridge We Call Home)
Presentation Discussion Questions
Presentation Survey Activity
10/31/07 (How Like A Leaf)
Summary Assignment #4
Free-Write on “Why Interdisciplinary is
Risky?”
11/7/07 (The Twilight of Equality)
Summary Assignment #5
Violated Assumptions
(1) The “moral” of this course’s “story,” so to speak, is that feminism cannot be detached from the world in which it exists. The feminist movement must be understood as a movement deeply intertwined, if not rooted in, a diverse array of movements. The first “chapter” of the course used Bechdel’s Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For to reconceptualize feminism on two different levels. The book not only portrayed feminism as intertwined with LGBT communities, but also as a movement that can exist on artistic and comedic levels. Bechdel’s book ultimately served as a testament to the fact that feminism does not have to exist solely on an academic level to successfully convey its messages.
The “second” chapter of the course utilized Chauncey’s Why Marriage to further explore the connections between LGBT and feminist movements. However, unlike Bechdel’s use of humor and comics to convey this message, Chauncey uses the history and politics of gay marriage. In addition to positioning feminism within the issue of gay marriage, Chauncey’s book encouraged another reconceptualization regarding the scope necessary in the study of feminism. Why Marriage ultimately proves that feminism can be successfully studied on a micro-level, in this case through the issue of gay marriage, rather then on the more traditional macro-levels.
“Chapter” three of the course, as well as “Bridge: impact labels, new issues,” and “I am the pivot for transformation,” used This Bridge We Call Home as a tool for creating reconceptualizations of feminism on a personal level. These chapters examined the implications of terms such as “radical feminism,” “U.S. feminism,” and “inclusion and exclusion.” Above all, these chapters encouraged evaluations of our personal role in the feminist movement. Thus, the issues raised by This Bridge We Call Home encouraged reconceptualizations of our individual feminist identities.
Chapters four and five worked together using Weston’s Gender in Real Time to contextualize gender issues and feminism within the workings of capitalism. Chapter four encouraged reconceptualizations of gender as a temporal concept. Chapter five then linked this temporality to capitalism, explaining that the fast moving character of capitalism and the commodifying of gender create an impression of “progress” that does not actually exist. Thus, Weston’s book forces a reconceptualization of feminist issues as deeply tied to the economy, rather than isolated social issues. In turn, from this reconceptualization comes the recognition that feminism requires economic activism to achieve success.
“Chapter” six, entitled “Interdisciplinary is Risky and Worldly Practices Matter,” references How Like A Leaf to encourage the reconceptualization of Women’s Studies as an interdisciplinary field. This point is made in the book numerous times, as Haraway is frequently quoted applying feminist theory to biology and visa versa. The book also provides information about Haraway’s personal life, which encourages certain reconceptualizations about lifestyle, marriage, and love. However, above all the book serves to show the importance of interdisciplinary study in the feminist movement, and in particular between that of science and Women’s Studies.
Using The Twilight of Equality, the last “chapter” of the course calls for a reconceptualization of feminism in the political arena. Duggan explores neo-conservative choices and positions, especially those of feminist concern, and in this exploration sparks a reconceptualization of today’s government. Duggan proves that feminist goals cannot be achieved under the neo-conservative movement and therefore feminists must create a unified progressive left. Ultimately, Duggan presents a clear connection between feminist and political activism, and furthermore presents political unity as a means for achieving feminist goals.
(2) In order to keep up with the course’s continuous reconceptualizations of feminism, I was forced to reconceptualize my approach to knowledge. I learned not to question my ability to understand, but rather to question my understandings themselves. In the beginning of the course, I was paralyzed by the fear that I did not correctly understand the messages in Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For, and took two days to write the violated assumptions list. Consequently, my violated assumptions reflected this preoccupation with the “correct” understanding, citing assumptions such as “all ideas require analysis to be understood” and “statements require justification.” By the time we had reached “Gender in Real Time,” I was beginning to trust my ability to understand, however, I had to make a conscious effort to do so. I read the book very slowly and often re-read parts of it that I felt I did not understand, but ultimately I was able to confidently produce a summary and a list of violated assumptions. As our course came to a close, I finally learned to fully trust my ability to understand and instead question my interpretations. My experience reading “The Twilight of Equality” solidified the fact that I had made this transition, as I had been extremely intimidated by politics prior to this course, and yet was able to read the book with ease and enjoyment. Furthermore, my violated assumptions for the book reflected both a deep understanding of the contents of the book, as well as an awareness of complex assumptions, including assumptions such as “The right to private life is a right that furthers freedoms for all Americans.” Thus, I myself am a testament to the argument of the course, as my experience evidences the liberating value in reconceptualizing.
Through my personal reconceptualization of knowledge, I believe I was also able to contribute and gain more during class, specifically class discussions. By shedding my preoccupation with a “correct” understanding, the course became more and more about viewing an issue from as many angles as possible, and less about finding one definitive answer. As a result, I was less inhibited when sharing my ideas, as well as less judgmental of others’ ideas. The importance I saw in collaboration grew tremendously during the course. I began to understand that through collaboration comes new perspectives and ultimately reconceptualizations. Because of this, I think that overall my largest contribution was speaking, listening, and responding, because through this simple process I was able to contribute to rather than distract from our class’ reconceptualizations.
In reflecting on the various methods of the course, I believe the readings, assignments, and class discussions helped me reach the objectives of the course, while the blog was less effective in doing so. I found all the readings to be extremely relevant to the argument of the course, as well as thought provoking and engaging. The summary assignments and violated assumptions only furthered the success of the reading material, as they guided me through a deeper analysis of the text, and in turn helped me prepare for class discussion. The discussions then provided a forum for building upon my ideas through collaboration with others, as well as an opportunity to hear ideas that had not occurred to me before. The blog, on the other hand, became a cumbersome requirement. For me the blog was simply a place for posting and checking additional assignments. I rarely experienced the same immense excitement using the blog as I did during the process of reading, discovering, and discussing.
(3) This course is an interesting combination of feminist theory and everyday feminist issues. My previous Women’s Studies courses were largely steeped in the everyday women’s issues, such as eating disorders, domestic violence, and racism. While it is impossible to say that these issues were presented as completely detached from larger theories, the courses themselves were not extremely theoretical. I imagine that this was because the courses were introductory, and therefore needed to be easily relatable. On the other hand, I envision that the higher-level courses will not shy away from feminist theory, but rather will focus on it. Therefore, Wmst300 worked as a perfect portal course, connecting the everyday feminism of the introductory courses to the theoretical feminism of the advanced courses. This class will certainly help me continue my feminist education, as I now have the tools to learn about feminism both on a practical and a theoretical level, which together make for a well-rounded understanding of feminism. Furthermore, this course has encouraged me to pursue learning about as many different subjects as I can, because I now see that any subject has the potential to enrich my understanding of feminism and likewise my feminism has the potential to enrich my understanding of any subject.
(4) In section one I discussed how each book fits into the argument of the class, however I have not fully addressed how they affected me on a personal level. Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For had two major effects on me. First, the unconventional structure of the book caused me a lot of initial anxiety. I did not know how to approach this reading material, let alone keep the characters straight, and pick up on subtle LGBT satire. Second, the book made me feel guilty for not understanding so many of the referenced LGBT issues, neither the political nor the personal ones. While I eventually came to terms with the untraditional structure of the book, it was not until I watched a clip of Bechdel speaking that I felt less guilty about my level of LGBT knowledge. In the clip Bechdel emphasized above all else the significance that her book has reached such high levels of circulation. In listening to Bechdel repeatedly emphasize this point, I allowed myself to take pride in the fact that I had read the book, rather than feel guilty for not fully understanding it.
While George Chauncey’s Why Marriage? did not illicit quite as strong emotional reactions as Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For, it did deeply alter my attitude regarding the debate over gay marriage. For one, the book immediately allowed me to see the strong connection between the debate, gender issues, and the feminist movement. More significantly however, the book taught me just how much was at stake for LGBT in this debate. Prior to reading the book, I viewed the issue as a matter of equal rights, but after reading about the horrific consequences that have occurred in the absence of gay marriage, like in the case of a life partner’s death, my understanding has significantly changed. I now see the debate as a decision between inhumane and humane treatment. Consequently, I have also come to understand the vast ramifications that the controversy holds for LGBT communities, as well as the feminist movement.
As the only book in interview form, How Like a Leaf affected me differently from the other books. This book had a duel effect, simultaneously encouraging me to reconceptualize on both personal and academic levels. On a personal level, Haraway’s love for both her former lover as well as her husband, caused me to reassess and eventually reconceptualize my idea of love. I have come to accept that love does not need to be defined, rather love can exist in an endless number of forms and can be expressed in an equally endless number of ways. On the academic level, Haraway’s theories relating biology and feminist thought have helped me reconceptualize my idea of academics. I no longer find it necessary to isolate different fields of study, but rather am able to accept that these fields do not and cannot exist independently of one another.
However, of all the books, I believe it is The Twilight of Equality that has had the most significant effect on me. Prior to reading this book I was not particularly politically aware, let alone politically active. I identified as a feminist, but saw feminism as social activism and something completely different from political activism. However, after reading about neo-conservatism, specifically the movement’s intense public manipulation as exemplified by the “culture wars” and the use of “equality” politics, I understand that the survival of the feminist movement depends on political activism. I now see how a lack of political activism enables neo-conservatives to prevent numerous feminist objectives from being achieved, and possibly even paralyze the movement. Therefore, I now see the connection between social and political action. I have come to passionately believe that as a feminist it is my responsibility to support a united progressive left that can fight the threats posed by neo-conservatism.
Introduction
Okay, so five years later, I've figured out how to work this thing. My name is Mehrnoush Karimian and I am probably the most technologically challenged person you'll meet. I am majoring in Women's studies, with a focus on women in the middle east and south asia, and am getting a minor in persian studies. I currently work at a news station that broadcasts in farsi (aka persian) and broadcasts via satellite, internet, and radio to iran. other than that, I used to play club vball for Maryland, but am not doing it this semester, and participate in lots and lots of dance groups/classes outside of school. Other than that, I'm graduating this semester and looking forward to a little time off before either pursuing a career in journalism or human rights law (yeah, I know, they're real similar). See you all in class! :o)
---------------------------------------------------
Violated Assumptions for The Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For
1) I was surprised by the amount of sexual content because I assumed/had not seen another comic strip that had quite so much graphic sexual scenes in it.
2) I was surprised by the lack of diversity (in terms of heterosexual and homosexual orientations) in this novel because although I correctly assumed that this book was about issues that especially affect the LBGT communities, I also (incorrectly) assumed that there were would be more unbiased viewpoints and opinions shown by an author who so clearly feels that the Bush administration is biased and unfair.
3)I was surprised by the bold way in which the author chose to capture her audience’s attention because I assumed that she would, like many other authors before her have, choose a more tactile and understated way to get her viewpoints across (though I must say that although it was shocking, it was also refreshing to get such a clear viewpoint).
4)I was surprised and impressed with some of the issues that the author addressed, because I, like many others, sometimes forget that lesbian, gay, and transgender couples not only have to deal with issues that any heterosexual couples deal with, but they also have to grapple with problems that strictly affect the LGBT communities.
5)I was surprised by the author’s outright attacks on the Bush administration because although one can tell right away that she is against the administration, I assumed that she would go about attacking the regime in a less subversive manner.
--------------------------------------------
Summary: Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate over Gay Equality- George Chauncey
What is the significance of marriage in today’s society? The word “marriage” carries different implications for various cultures, generations, and communities. In the novel Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate over Gay Equality, author George Chauncey takes on the daunting task of attempting to define what marriage is and why it holds significance specifically for the homosexual community. Chauncey also exposes the historical discrimination that homosexuals faced throughout the history of the United States of America, pointing out the flaws in the government and the unjust laws and precedents set by policy makers. By revealing the history of discrimination against homosexuals in the U.S., Chauncey also builds a foundation of sympathy and support upon which he further compels the reader to join in on today’s societal debate over marriage in the homosexual community.
Why Marriage begins with gripping and revealing evidence about the history of prejudice against homosexuals in the U.S. Surprisingly, the discrimination felt by homosexuals throughout U.S. history was not only inflicted by the masses; rather, Chauncey discloses the governmental bans and limitations on the homosexual community, an example of such being in 1953, when “president…Dwight Eisenhower issued an executive order that banned homosexuals from government employment, civilian as well as military, and required companies with governmental contracts to ferret out and fire their gay employees” (6). Chauncey takes a close look at the extent and types of prejudice and injustices homosexuals faced from the early twentieth century up until the present day, specifically comparing gay rights to the civil rights movement. Moreover, he makes a significant observation: that the “history of antigay discrimination…is almost entirely forgotten. But calling this a forgotten history is really too benign. It’s more accurate to say this history of discrimination has been erased from the historical record, and that the erasure itself has been a central element of antigay politics” (12). Chauncey continues on to explain that marriage carries a different meaning for each person and that very interchangeable definition of marriage has changed throughout the course of time as well.
Chauncey explains that marriage is a significant issue for the homosexual community because the matter with marriage no longer lies within the lack of its definition. Rather, the problem within the homosexual community and not legally being permitted to get married is that such a legal impediment is a violation of a homosexual person’s civil rights. Hence, society must look beyond the issue of gay marriage as a concern strictly regarding marriage; in reality, the inadmissibility of a gay marriage is a reflection of a government that is not being tolerant and just to each U.S. citizen’s basic civil rights.
Keeping the “How to Read” concepts in mind when reading Why Marriage, I went about researching the life of author George Chauncey. Born into a Presbyterian family, Chauncey learned from his father to fight the injustices he saw within his surroundings. Revealing the fact that he is gay in college, Chauncey went on to become a historian and writer as an adult. Chauncey’s background and current career certainly come across in his writing; however, rather than using his emotions to get the argument of the novel across to his audience, Chauncey uses a stronger tool: historical evidence. Rather than hone in on his own sexual orientation and his struggles throughout life, Chauncey uses historical evidence to draw his audience to his point of view. As a historian, Chauncey exposes the intolerance and injustice of the U.S. toward homosexuals in the last century. By doing so, he leaves his audience the liberty of forming their own opinion in terms of what they believe to be just and unjust.
Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate over Gay Equality is a novel that clearly depicts and shapes the debate over gay marriage in today’s society. Although a person living in the U.S. would like to think that he/she lives in a tolerant society, this novel forces one to step back and truly reconsider such a notion. One is forced to wonder how it is that this country has been built to honor the civil rights of each individual, yet denies the institution of marriage to its homosexual citizens. In a most dignified and academic way, Chauncey compels his audience to step back and realize that in retrospect, the U.S. has not honored its civil rights guarantees to all of its citizens. By doing so, Chauncey educates his reader and also compels him/her to empathize with and truly under the situation that the gay community in the U.S. faces on a day-to-day basis.
Violated Assumptions #2: Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate over Gay Equality by George Chauncey
1)I was surprised by the amount of historical evidence Chauncey provided about antigay discrimination, simply because I assumed I knew a good amount about U.S. history, since history is my favorite subject.
2)I was surprised by the extent to which many policy makers, such as Eisenhower, went to in order to further spread antigay discrimination because I assumed/expected such prejudice from many of the people living in the U.S., especially in the early 20th century, but not from well-educated leaders of the country.
3)I was surprised and intrigued by Chauncey’s comparison of gay rights to the civil rights movement because I had not really thought of it in such a context before.
4)I was surprised that Chauncey’s work was so academically inclined; by that, I mean that he did a good job of keeping his personal biases and emotions out of this novel. I was surprised by this because I would expect that someone who has suffered some of these injustices (being that he is gay himself) would show more emotion and passion in his work. But, he stuck to the historical and social context of his novel rather than giving in to emotions.
5)I was surprised by some of the historical facts that Chauncey provided, such as the Catholic group that supported gay rights because I assumed that in Catholicism, homosexual behavior and inclination was forbidden.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: This Bridge We Call Home: Radical Visions for Transformation – Ana Louis Keating and Gloria Anzaldua
This Bridge We Call Home: Radical Visions for Transformation, compiled and edited by Ana Louise Keating and Gloria Anzaldua, is an anthology of memoirs, poems, and short stories that regard issues of race, gender, sexual identity, and one’s overall self-identification. This anthology strives to reconfigure stereotypes and force readers to re-conceptualize what they previously deemed to be true. Keating and Anzaldua compiled these stories with the purpose of “building bridges;” in other words, to alter what one believes to be true in his or her everyday life, to re-analyze what one thinks to be fact and rather, move from merely theorizing to putting these theories into action. This adaptation of one’s reality is termed “nepantla” by Keating and Anzaldua. This Bridge We Call Home serves as a sequel to This Bridge Called My Back, which originally explored notions of one’s identity. However, This Bridge We Call Home endeavors to further delve into the concept of identity, but more in context of race, sexual identity, and just in general, is taken more from the vantage point of minority women and men. Furthermore, it provided the reader with more stories and biographical anecdotes especially from minority women, all the while not excluding some anecdotes from men. The idea of this compilation is that just as a bridge can both separate or join two points together, so can different viewpoints. I think that in order for us to build a practical and strong future, the metaphor of the bridge is very potent when thinking about melding different opinions and notions together.
How to Read
Gloria Anzaldua
- Gloria Anzaldua was born on September 26th, 1942 in South Texas Rio Grande Valley .
- She was a chicana lesbian feminist who dedicated her life to her studies and helping to reconceptualize feminism to relate more to minority women as well.
- Was highly dedicated to learning and education; she had received her B.A. degree, M.A. degree, and was working towards her PhD degree at the time of her death.
- Won numerous awards for her writings and work in the feminist movement
- Her writing/edited works include: This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color, Making Face, Making Soul/Haciendo Caras: Creative and Critical Perspectives by Women of Color, This Bridge We Call Home: Radical Visions for Transformation, Borderlands/La Frontera: the New Mestiza, as well as many childrens books and poetic works
- Died on May 15, 2004 from complications with her diabetes
- (Information taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Anzaldua and http://voices.cla.umn.edu/vg/Bios/entries/anzaldua_gloria.html)
Ana Louise Keating
- Has B.A., M.A., and PhD degrees
- Professor of English and Women’s Studies
- Recipient of numerous awards/honors regarding women’s issues/feminist movement
- Her writings/edited works include: This Bridge We Call Home: Radical Visions for - - Transformation, Women Reading Women Writing: Self-Invention in Paula Gunn Allen, Teaching Transformation: Transcultural Classroom Dialogues, and Interviews/Entrevistas
Topics to discuss/Violated Assumptions for This Bridge We Call Home: Radical Visions for Transformation – Ana Louis Keating and Gloria Anzaldua
- I felt that in certain aspects, the women’s movement in the West had progressed, but I was surprised to see how little effect it actually had actually done in the everyday lives of minority women.
- I thought that I had a pretty good idea of the different types of activism that one could partake in; however, I found that many of the writers in this anthology gave me different perspectives on how women’s issues could be handled in different arenas.
- I was mildly surprised at how little I thought the authors/editors provided in terms of a concrete solution/approach to dealing with the issues that minorities (especially women) face and how to achieve gender/racial equality, etc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary for Gender in Real Time – Kath Weston
In Gender in Real Time, author Kath Weston uses concepts of time and space to explore gender and queer theory. Weston looks at gender theory on a time-based context, almost as a “time machine,” depicting what gender theory has developed into throughout history. Weston also describes the three paradoxes that she believes led gender theory to becoming what it is today and the downfalls of it thereof. One of the more interesting concepts that Weston refers to are the concept of becoming unsexed and ungendered, the idea of a “zero concept of gender.” Weston delves into the idea of abolishing the idea of gender, not merely neutralizing any such term, but erasing the notion of gender entirely. Weston uses this book as a “time machine” and explores, through a historical context, where the term gender has come from and based off the fact that it has come from a sociological standpoint, argues that it can, throughout time, come to be “zeroed.” Although her ideas were interesting, I originally found it difficult to read her work, in that I found it to be quite abstract, perhaps because I was not accustomed to gender theory being discussed in the context of space and time. Her style of writing was academic, definitely reflecting her academic background and depicting the amount of research that was put into this work. I found this work to be a bit challenging in the sense that I felt that it was a bit verbose and very theory-based as opposed to being more realistic. Nonetheless, I enjoyed the different vantage point that Weston offered in terms of gender theory, as she posed gender theory in the different context of space and time, which I found to be very interesting.
How to read
· Kath Weston “is a sociocultural anthropologist who serves as Director of Studies for the Committee on Degrees in Women’s Studies” at Harvard University
· Her works include: Families We Choose, Render Me, Gender Me, Long Slow Burn, Gender in Real Times
Topics to discuss/Violated Assumptions for Gender in Real Time – Kath Weston
· The idea of “a zero concept of gender” – is such a theory even possible?
· Is gender theory and the concept of gender in and of itself merely a product of socialization throughout history or does it have some sort of practical basis?
· How can we propel Weston’s theories into action? Is such a thing achievable or even practical?
· I had thought about gender being a performance before, in that I feel that it is such a socially constructed concept. However, I was surprised and interested to look at it from a different viewpoint e.g. space, time, mathematics, history, etc.
· I always felt that as time went on, gender movements were becoming increasingly stronger, not weaker; albeit, that is not to say that this work has changed my mind to that fact, but it is something that I now think about.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary for How Like a Leaf – Donna J. Haraway
In the book How Like a Leaf, Donna J. Haraway is interviewed by Thyrza Nichols Goodeye about different aspects and points in her life which contributed to the person she is and the work that she has done thus far in her life. Haraway, a professor at the University of California in Santa Cruz, has written many works that relate to relationships, gender, and have a special focus on science, especially that of biology, which Haraway deems to be “an inexhaustible source of troping,” a world “full of imagination.” One of her works that is especially focused on in this interview is Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. In this work, Haraway looks at gender from both a biological and sociological standpoint. Her interest in science fuels the work, as she combines feminism and science to delve into gender issues. How Like a Leaf is broken down in an interesting way; separated into five chapters, How Like a Leaf ranges in discussing Haraway’s life from early childhood to adulthood, to her beliefs, ideals, and theories surrounding science and feminism.
Biography of the author/How to read
· Born on September 6, 1944 in Denver, Colorado
· Acquired B.S., M.S., and PhD degrees
· Professor of Women’s Studies and General Science at the University of Hawaii [as well as] Johns Hopkins University, now at the University of California in Santa Cruz
· Works include: Crystals, Fabrics, and Fields: Metaphors of Organicism in Twentieth-Century Developmental Biology, Primate Visions: Gender, Race, and Nature in the World of Modern Science, Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, etc.
· Recipient of numerous awards/honors, including the J.D. Bernal Award
· This book was written in the form of an interview
· The language of the book was relatable; not very academic in terms of writing style
Topics to discuss/Violated Assumptions for How Like a Leaf
· The idea of cyborgs!??
· I found Donna and Jaye’s relationship very interesting and don’t know that I could be in a relationship like that. What made their relationship initially work? Would you be able to do that? Why or why not?
· How big of an impact does biology have in gender structuring?
· How much of an impact did Haraway’s experiences during her childhood/adolescence mold her into the person she became as an adult? Does science play any role in one’s behavioral upbringing/the person one becomes?
· I was surprised to see how much emphasis Haraway placed on biology in correlation with gender structuring because although I had heard biology discussed along with gender studies before, Haraway talked about different points of biology and their effects on gender that I hadn’t thought about before.
· I was surprised to see that Donna and Jaye still maintained a good relationship with each other despite the controversial and “unorthodox” manner in which they lived; I just figured that type of situation would be hard to live in.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
LEARNING ANALYSIS: WMST 300 – Mehrnoush Karimian
Introduction
Sitting at the dinner table with my relatives on Thanksgiving night, I found myself pondering some of the very questions that I am supposed to be writing about in this learning analysis. During dinner, one of my cousins asked me what my major is; when I told him that it is Women’s Studies, there began the conversation. A few of my relatives criticized the idea of having a major “entirely devoted to women,” one of my female relatives declaring that she was offended by the idea because it somehow took away from her worth as a person and instead categorized her into “only being a woman instead of just another human being.” My first reaction was to get defensive, to sit up and speak up for my major, for the concept behind what women’s studies is, what it stands for. However, I forced myself to sit quietly and listen to my relatives rant and rave until they eventually got tired. Before I finally spoke up, I thought about what everyone had said and it struck me at that moment that this was exactly what I was doing in our WMST300 class; reconceptualizing what feminism means, what women’s studies is, and being able to help others deconstruct stereotypes of what women’s studies is. Or perhaps, and more importantly, helping myself to deconstruct certain gender stereotypes and biases that I have.
My Description of the argument or story of the course
At the beginning of this course, I had set a goal for myself. I more or less had expected that I would have “reconceptualized” my old definition of feminism into a “new and improved” definition, one that would be more sophisticated and enlightened. However, by the end of this course, I was distraught to find that I had not come to a concrete definition of feminism or what women’s studies really is. Although I was originally very frustrated that I was unable to put a finger on exactly what feminism means, it soon struck me that that was more or less the point of this course: I am not necessarily supposed to have a set definition of what feminism is. Gender theory is an ever-evolving concept. Therefore, I always have to re-evaluate my beliefs and what I deem to be true, hence where the idea of reconceptualization comes into play.
Putting myself into this story
In order to be a part of the argument of this course, I first had to come to the realization that I was not all-knowing when it came to feminism. Although this was a fact I already knew, I must admit that I did feel as though I knew a good amount about women’s studies; moreover, I believed that the things I was aware of were certain to be true. However, when I came to acknowledge the fact that the things I have read, heard, or once believed could be wrong, or can at least seen from a different viewpoint, I realized that I had become a part of the course. By beginning to reconceptualize feminism, I also began to have a different outlook about the world around me as a whole. I learned so much about topics that I never really felt a concern for or, perhaps I should say, affected me very much on a personal level. For example, the readings that we studied in class concerning educational institutions used more as businesses rather than academic facilities struck me, not only because of the context of the article, but in terms of how they related to feminism.
Another activity I found helpful in achieving a reconceptualized definition of feminism throughout this course was working through the violated assumptions. Although this did not necessarily pertain to all the readings, I did sometimes find myself struggling with some of the biases and prejudices that I subconsciously held internally. Although this was a much argued point in the class discussions, I found the term violated assumptions to be just that: by admitting these assumptions that I had subliminally held, to both myself and the class, I was both exposing and confronting certain prejudices that I did not want to believe I had. Therefore, I was learning to reconceptualize something I had previously believed, changing my views of something that I had held in for so long.
One major misconception that I had coming into this course was that most women’s studies majors were less prejudiced and biased to events occurring around the world, mostly because of my assertion that women’s studies is such an interdisciplinary major that it requires knowledge about a variety of areas, including history, sociology, and psychology. Being that we, as women’s studies majors, partake in all these different areas of academics and therefore, schools of thoughts, I was surprised to read some of the violated assumptions that the students in our class posted to the blog. Reading and discussing violated assumptions that others had in the class really opened my eyes to the fact that even people who I honestly consider to be more open-minded about the vast majority of issues, have biases, which in turn made me appreciate my classmates all the more in that this activity made them more human in my mind; once could say that I even reconceptualized my opinion about my classmates, many of whom I had previously had classes with.
Beyond being pleasantly surprised by my classmates, I found that the structure of this class and in the way that we did posts on our class blog helped me to follow along with the class when I did have to miss a few sessions due to illness. On the first day of class, Professor King had us exchange contact information with at least two other students in the class, which ended up being very beneficial and practical when I was unable to come to class and needed to discuss the coursework with a peer.
Coursework
I found many of the readings in this course to be interesting, mostly because so many of them opened my eyes to issues that I had not really studied or considered previously. One of the books that I found to be very interesting in the sense that it was a different type of assigned reading than those I have had in my other college courses was Alison Bechdel’s Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For. I had originally written a summary about Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For expressing exactly why I found it to be so appealing: “Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For was an interesting read in the sense that it provided an intimate view into the lives of what life might be like for some lesbian, gay, and transgender people. Bechdel addresses some rather controversial issues in her comic strip, but by addressing these issues through the form of a comic strip, Bechdel lightens the atmosphere, serving as a means to reaching more readers” (summary paper- Invasion of the Dykes to Watch Out For). I was shocked by the frankness of Bechdel’s comic strip, both politically and sexually, yet intrigued at the same time. I found Bechdel’s sense of humor, sarcasm, and wit to be refreshing. Although I did not feel that I could directly relate what the characters in the story were going through, I felt that Bechdel did a good job of setting up and showing the lives of the characters in a way in which one felt that he/she could somehow relate to them, no matter how different his/her own life is from theirs.
Another reading I found very fascinating was George Chauncey’s Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate over Gay Equality. In this book, Chauncey does a commendable job of depicting the history of homosexuality in the United States. I found some of the historical context in Chauncey’s book fascinating and appalling all at the same time. Having studied a considerable amount of U.S. history, I naively assumed that I encompassed a good amount of information about the subject. However, I was mistaken to see that in fact, there was a whole large section of U.S. history that had been carefully concealed from me; after reading Chauncey’s book, I was baffled at how little I actually knew and moreover angered to come to the realization that the history of discrimination against homosexuals “has been erased from the historical record, and that the erasure itself has been a central element of antigay politics” (Why Marriage?, p. 12). After having read this book, I was stunned to learn about certain domestic policies that were taken by leaders of the U.S. against the homosexuals living in this country, as well as many other facts that fueled and promoted anti-gay discrimination. Chauncey’s Why Marriage? was truly an eye-opening read for me; although he maintained a certain air of academia about his writing, Chauncey’s style of writing appealed to me, as I felt that I was reading a work of scholarship, but nonetheless could relate to his style of writing.
This Bridge We Call Home: Radical Visions for Transformation, co-edited by AnaLouise Keating and Gloria Anzaldua was the reading in this course that I felt I could relate the most to. In this anthology of poems, stories, and memoirs, Keating and Anzaldua explore topics that minority women (and men) deal with, issues such as race, gender, sexual orientation, and identity. I felt that I could especially relate to this book and to its many stories because of the experiences I could draw upon from my own life. I was born in Iran, but was forced to flee my home country because of religions persecution (I am a member of the Baha’i Faith, a religion which is not accepted in the Islamic Republic of Iran). My family and I lived in Pakistan for a year and a half before finally moving permanently to the U.S. Although I have been raised here, I found myself questioning my own identity; did I consider myself Iranian or Iranian-American? Did it matter? Did I accept the gender roles assigned to me by own culture or by the ones of the society in which I was raised? Questions and concerns about my identity, especially that of my cultural identity, constantly troubled me throughout my life. To an extent, I still struggle with issues of self-identity. Hence, I found that I could connect to the many authors in this compilation. I also liked the idea of building a bridge, of taking one reality and linking it to another in order to promote some sort of positive change in feminism and in general, the world.
One of the things that I fought against at the beginning of this course was the idea of looking up the author of the books online, reading about their personal lives, their work, and their beliefs. I struggled with the idea that such an activity could beneficial to me. In fact, I thought such an activity would merely inhibit me from creating biases about the author’s work. To an extent, I still believe that; however, I realized that the internet was an important tool for me when researching these books and authors in that it allowed me to gain further perspectives and viewpoints outside of just the readings themselves, which was especially helpful when I felt that I had not gained a clear understanding of some of the readings.
How I’m Going to Use This in the Future
Being a women’s studies major, I suppose I subconsciously assumed that I more or less had a firm grasp on what feminism was, especially because I felt that I had studied feminism in every context in which it could be studied, i.e. historically and sociologically. However, works like Weston’s Gender in Real Time, which used the contexts of space and time to argue about feminism, opened my eyes to the fact that I actually have not explored all the different facets and components of feminism. Hence, I realized that I actually have met my goal from the beginning of the semester – my idea of gender theory and the word feminism have changed. I now consciously re-evaluate my beliefs and ideas on a constant basis in order to further my outlook on life.
Post a Comment