Perpetuating Gender Roles

Gender roles are reinforced everywhere we look; whether it is in the toys that are marketed to children, or the types of vodka we are told to drink. One place that we hope to be free from such gender reinforcement is from parents. Of course parents will perpetuate certain norms (e.g. dressing their children in gender appropriate clothing), but one would hope that parents would treat their children fairly and equally regardless of gender. But it appears that this is merely wishful thinking. Highlights magazine polled children asking how many performed household chores. The results revealed that significantly more girls than boys had chores. Thus, not only are parents abiding by conventional gender norms, but they are enforcing them in less overt ways than one might assume.

So, as a call to action, breaking down restrictive and oppressive gender roles start in the home, in the most basic ways. If we all adjust to how we interact with our children or children around us, we can influence how gender roles are embodied in future generations. Distributing chores fairly and allowing kids to be kids and play with whatever toy they please, rather than the toy associated with a particular gender, can inspire change.

Rihanna Speaks for the First Time

Rihanna is speaking out for the first time about her violent encounter with Chris Brown. Thursday morning a portion of her interview with Diane Sawyer aired on Good Morning America and the rest will be revealed in a special report on 20/20 tonight.

Shortly after pictures of Rihanna’s bruised and battered face surfaced, the country was quick to rush to her side and support her as a victim of domestic violence. But, when Rihanna decided to go back to Brown she was quickly turned on by many who had ignorantly concluded that she either wanted to be abused or deserved it by going back.

One source of unwavering support came from the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence who noted that “[r]easons for staying in or returning to an abusive relationship are more complex than a statement about the victim’s strength of character. For most of us, the decision to end a relationship is one of the most difficult we will ever make. A battered woman’s emotional ties to her partner may still be strong, supporting her hope that the violence will end. Also, it is extremely common for battered women to return to their abuser multiple times before she leaves for good. Gaining strength, relinquishing hope, or letting go of someone we love is very hard and takes time even when violence is not present.”

I am happy to hear that Rihanna is taking steps toward becoming a survivor of an abusive relationship and I hope the interview tonight will provide a new prospective into dating violence and will not prove to be a publicity stunt calculated to generate interest in her new album. Also keep a look out for Glamour magazine’s Woman of the Year issue which has chosen this year to honor Rihanna.

"Taboo" Provides Look at Body Modification

The other day I was flipping through the channels when I came across a show called Taboo on National Geographic. The show’s website provides this description of the show, “Taboo takes you on a journey beyond the comfort zones and cultural borders to explore rituals and customs that are acceptable in some cultures, but forbidden, illegal, or reviled in others. Understand seemingly bizarre and shocking practices from around the world.”

The particular episode that I watched was titled “Body Modification.” The show covered procedures and customs that people underwent in different cultures with the purpose of altering their bodies. First, it covered the long-necked women of the Kayan tribe in Thailand who wear brass rings around the neck, which, overtime, elongate the neck. The show also talks about the surgery which people undergo in China where the legs are broken and lengthened. Finally, the show covers the subculture of corset-wearers.

After watching this show, I was thoroughly disgusted. How could people do all this to change their bodies? Then I thought about the plastic surgery phenomenon in the US, and, as the show pointed out, the Western practice of attaching metal to teeth and twisting and moving them around (braces). Although I am not personally a proponent of plastic surgery (as many are), I have never thought of braces as something unnatural or wrong. So why do we normalize some types of body modification and cast off others? What makes one practice “ok” and the others wrong? Furthermore, why do we have such an obsession with changing our bodies?

I hope that this blog is thought-provoking and helps to open dialogue on the subject of body modification. Also, kudos to National Geographic and Taboo for bringing different cultures and topics to light in a way that many shows do not.

Marriage Name Changing: a Mandate or Choice?

After stumbling across an article published in August 2009 entitled “Should a Woman Change Her Name When She Marries? 70 Percent of Americans Think So” on Alternet.org, I couldn’t help but feel compelled to expand the search. As evidenced by the title, 70 percent of Americans think women should change their surname after getting married, with 50 percent feeling it should be mandated by law. Perhaps it is important to first examine the reasons as to why a woman might feel obligated or compelled to change her name. An article on Suite101 outlines potential reasons and the pros/cons of various name changing options:

“1) Woman Takes Her Husband’s Name: It’s the most socially acceptable option. It’s the easiest bureaucratic option. Naming the kids is easier. Family cohesion.

2) Women and Man Both Keep Their Names: Feminist concerns. Changing your name is a pain. Career concerns. Easier than hyphenating. Attachment to a name. If you get divorced, you don’t have to change your name back.

3) The Hyphenated Name: Compromise. Both partners can hyphenate. It’s not as hard as it used to be.

4) Woman Adds on Her Husband’s Last Name: Compromise. Easier than hyphenation. Honoring your family. Career concerns.

5) Woman Changes Name, Uses Maiden Name Professionally: Best of both worlds. Less confusion at work.

6) Couple Creates a New Name: Design your own name. Perhaps the least patriarchal option.

7) Man Takes the Woman’s Name: Nonconformity, but with the benefits of having just one name. Family cohesion. A way for a man to honor his wife.”

**YES, a MAN taking his wife’s name. It happens more than most people would think, as reported by USA Today.

“'Never in my wildest dreams would I have thought it would have caused as much of a stir as it did,' says Mike Salinger, 27, of Seattle, who was married in November. 'We knew people might be surprised, but we figured they'd say 'Huh' and get on with it…Three months later, I'm still taking (flak) from one of my college roommates.'"

The same article also discusses the idea perpetuated by some that a man who takes his wife’s name should “turn in his man card.” I can’t help but ponder the idea of a woman being told to “turn in her woman card” if she took her husband’s name. It would no doubt be cited as irrational and confusing. I recognize that a woman taking the man’s last name is dictated by certain religious texts, but considering that many other traditions have been tossed aside to accommodate the demands of society…why isn’t it more common for a woman to keep her name? Sure, feminism has certainly made it more acceptable, and, in certain instances, more expected (to be a truly liberated woman/feminist) for a woman to keep her name, but if female name changing still remains at the heart of what it means to be an American family, how can woman truly feel comfortable making a decision that isn’t given the same prestige and equality as the norm?

With all these options in mind, why is it that so many women elect to change their last name following marriage without first considering all alternatives? Not to mention, the hassle of changing information for credit cards, social security, insurance, and the like. There are many variables to consider when deciding whether to keep, change, or recreate one’s surname following marriage, as outlined by Alternet contributor, Jill Filipovic, in the previously mentioned article (READ IT!). An organization called Lucy Stone was originally created in the 1920s with the belief that “a person’s name is fundamental to her/his existence, and is therefore dedicated to: Equal rights for women and men to retain, modify and create their names and equality of patrilineal/matrilineal name distribution for children and equal actual frequency of name retention, modification, and creation between men and women at marriage and throughout life.” To many, these ideas and this notion may seem a bit radical and unnecessary, but to me they represent just another way in which feminism continues to ensure that women AND men are given the same opportunities to express themselves and relate to one another in bonds of equality.

The Business of Cherry Popping (Round 2)

Hello all those in the blogosphere. I know you all probably missed me last week, because I was unable to get a blog out. BUT, not to worry, this week I have found something completely outrageous to blog about, and it definitely makes up for last week. So, prepare yourself…

Ready…

Artificial Virginity Hymen. Oh yes, and you thought the only way to reclaim your virginity was through Christianity. I stumbled upon this new sex device (if you can call it that), in an article on Alternet. And, to be quite honest, when I began reading, I was already infuriated with the product. Here is the product description that the distributor, Gigimo, posted on its website:

"No more worry about losing your virginity. With this product, you can have your first night back anytime. Insert this artificial hymen into your vagina carefully. It will expand a little and make you feel tight. When your lover penetrate, it will ooze out a liquid that look like blood not too much but just the right amount. Add in a few moans and groans, you will pass through undetectable. Its easy to use, clinically proven non-toxic to human and has no side effects, no pain to use and no allergic reaction."

This Artificial Hymen reinforces all of the repressive standards about women’s sexuality. Jessica Valenti wrote a whole book about all of the misogyny that surrounds a woman’s virginity called The Purity Myth. Women have long-been sexually oppressed, and products such as this further reinforce the crappy idea that women are supposed to be "pure." There are so many things wrong with this product; I do not know where to begin. Between the vaginal rejuvenation craze and this artificial hymen, it seems that vaginas are never quite up to snuff. Taking a lesson from the Vagina Monologue play-book: for all the women out there worried about the state of their vagina, instead of being insecure, you should be angry about all the injustices being imposed on your vagina and others like it.

-End Rant 1-

As I stated, when I began reading, I was furious with the product. But, as noted in the Alternet article, there are some positives for this product. Although this product reinforces many senseless, archaic stereotypes about women’s sexuality, there are still places in the world where a woman’s virginity can be a matter of life or death. If this product is truly convincing, and its use might prevent a woman from being murdered over her virginity (which might I add there is no medical definition for virginity), then by all means it should be used. BUT, being realistic about who is using this product, it is likely not women in life and death situations. After all, the product is sold online for 30 U.S. dollars; therefore, it is not exactly easily accessible to the women who really need it.

-End Rant 2-

So, if my feelings are not exactly clear, I think this product is ridiculous, and it reinforces a restrictive view of women’s sexuality. However, there is potential for it to be used in extreme cases, like when a woman’s virginity is a matter of life and death (which I feel is an unlikely scenario).

Guerrilla Girls

The Guerrilla Girls are coming to Chicago’s Museum of Contemporary Art on November 10-11! This group of masked avengers has been touring the country and the world since 1985 speaking out against sexism, racism and corruption in politics, art, film and pop culture. The group has appeared at more than 90 universities and museums, not to mention The New York Times, The Washington Post, The New Yorker, Bitch, Artforum, NPR, the BBC and CBC.

To make their point, the Guerrilla Girls maintain their anonymity by wearing Gorilla masks while presenting public interventions, performing satirical skits to help inspire others to create their own sophisticated acts of aesthetic resistance.

So if you happen to be around the Museum of Art November 10-11, be prepared for a spectacle of creative protesting mixed with thoughtful insight into the world of art.

Helping Women who have been raped not a government priority?

In all of my blogs I attempt to throw in a little pop culture related to important issues of the day. This particular blog, although serious in its subject matter, is explained though this clip of The Daily Show:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Rape-Nuts
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Ron Paul Interview

It is absolutely ridiculous that private contractors are allowed to put clauses on rape in their employee contracts. Al Franken's Bill is not proposing gratuitous suing; it is allowing women who are RAPED to get some form of justice. It is sad that Republicans (considering they cast the 30 nay votes) attempted to block a bill intended to help women. We should be questioning the motives of representatives that are voting down bills that help the corporations and not the public.

If you want some more information on this story I found this post from The Nation.