Safe Boys, Safe Schools

This article reflects on the ways in which stereotypical masculine qualities can make our schools more dangerous by teaching boys to express themselves in violent manners. It makes some good points about how the acceptable norms for girls have expanded in recent years while the acceptable behaviors and attitudes for boys have remained fairly static and narrow. Also, the author touches on the fact that not only are boys encouraged to be emotionally disconnected, they are also given a sense of privilege. Taken together, these factors create the perfect conditions under which someone might act out with violence. Allowing boys to express their emotions could conceivably help with this because it gives them the ability to talk out their frustrations instead of using physical means. Despite the thoughtful issues the author raised, I did have problems with a couple of points. For example, he states, “teenage boys of all racial and ethnic groups are more likely to die from gunshot wounds than from all natural deaths combined.” I found this a little difficult to believe and it would be interesting to look at the source of this information to see if it was based on an inner-city study or something of that sort, and also what is defined as a “natural death.” He also discusses sexual harassment as a “miscommunication” where the harassed and the harasser simply have different perceptions of the situation. This made me angry as it used men’s emotional ineptitudes as an excuse for sexual harassment.

Multicultural, Global, and Postcolonial Feminism

This is a discussion of women’s diversity, its challenges, and potential ways for handling these differences. These feminists encourage women to speak for all women, not just privileged women, which is what often occurs in the developed world. Of course, this is easier said than done, because we must think about how these other women feel about different issues instead of just imposing Western values on them.

There were a couple of points in this chapter that I found especially compelling. For example, I never realized that most women in third world countries do not consider themselves feminists because they are more concerned with the economic and political consequences of poverty than with reproductive and gender issues. Because of this, it is important to understand how women in all parts of the world are suffering but also to recognize that, although both men and women in third world countries are suffering from poverty, women are often hit the hardest and that initiatives aimed at them, such as micro loans, can be helpful in improving the economic situation of families as well as the status of women.

I think another really important point that Tong makes is how women in the developed world rely on women in the third world for our own material comfort. For example, we might say that women in the third world should receive fair wages, but these wage increases would make it more difficult for us to afford the excessive clothing and other material goods we consume. This makes for a difficult situation for many feminists (including myself), who are unprepared to make drastic changes in their own lives to effect such change.

Care-Focused Feminism

Care-focused feminism focuses on why society labels some values as inherently feminine or masculine. This school of thought also values the caring qualities typically attributed to females and thinks that conflicts would be better handled if men were encouraged to embrace caring and if caring were valued in the public as much as in the private sphere.

Tong discusses Kittay’s idea that humans are fundamentally equal because we all rely on each other when we are the ones needing care. This relates back to the first chapter, in which we discussed treating men and women equally based on their humanness. From Kittay I understood that when a woman needs to be cared for, her husband or another man will do it rather than let her suffer, even though in most cases a woman is the caretaker. This is really important because it shows that men are capable of caring and that it is our society that holds them back from caring except in very limited circumstances.

I think sometimes the idea that maternal tendencies can prevent violence gets carried too far. For example, there is a discussion about Algerian women attacking the French, even when children were in the bombing locations as well. Suggesting that the reason men are on the battlefield is because they do not see their enemy as someone’s children and that women do not fight because they do perceive them this way seems to me to be a broad generalization. It undermines the deep love many men have for their children and forgets the violent roles women play in many conflicts, as suicide bombers and the like, precisely because many people make these same assumptions.

Tong: Ch 1

Chapter one in Tong’s book gives a fairly comprehensive look at liberal feminism and includes the history of the movement and the various sects within it. Tong covers a lot of very interesting and different perspectives. For example, she discusses Harriet Taylor Mill’s idea that society imposes ethical double standards on women. This means that the very qualities women are expected to have also prevent them from reaching their true potential. We talk a lot about society’s unreasonable expectations for women, but this is a different and very frank way to discuss how those expectations are holding us back. It is also very interesting because she notes how these apply to traits that are perceived as both negative and positive. As women, it is important that we allow ourselves to grow into our true natural traits and to develop from there into our full potentials.

Tong also discusses how the liberation of women can liberate men. For women to have the capacity to develop their career and other activities outside the home, men inherently also get the chance to develop their personal and family relationships and to spend time outside of the office, at home relaxing or enjoying hobbies. I think this is a really important point of women’s rights that isn’t often acknowledged. – It creates a more egalitarian society, which also expands the scope of which behaviors are acceptable for men. Already today, more men take part in childcare, cooking and housework than in the past.

The Conservative Legacy

This reading talked about how conservatism, both sociobiological and moral, opposes feminism and its objectives. This reading actually made me kind of angry. Although I was glad that the author provided criticism of the viewpoints at the end of the chapter, I found the arguments from moral and sociobiological conservatives to be frustratingly simplistic and naïve. The idea that men should be dominant over women because it has made them historically more successful seems to me like a fear of change and progression. The statement that feminism “weakens” society and makes a healthy masculinity more difficult (and unlikely) for men to achieve seems like an excuse for patriarchy. It saddens me to think that some people truly believe the most beneficial role a woman can play in society is staying in the home, thereby “controlling” men, and it upsets me even more that some conservatives would even term this the most “rewarding” role to have, so women are lucky. If the role is so rewarding, why don’t women reap material benefits and status for what they do? Is healthy masculinity really so unstable that giving some recognition or respect to women will topple it?

I probably sound a little fired up. I hope I wasn’t the only one.

Feminist

This piece discusses multiple perspectives on how gender relates to war. While I appreciate that Goldstein certainly provides a wide range of viewpoints, I have to admit that I found some of them too radical and feel like he really focused on the extremists from each school of belief. He related to a claim that the “feminization of world politics” over the past 100 years has created a “democratic zone of peace.” I found this ironic because I had learned in the past that the reason for peace between democratic nations has nothing to do with women in politics (especially since so few women hold elected positions), but has to do with the obligation leaders in democracies have to their constituents – so it is more difficult to enter into war, since you need the support of the people. While women technically have more rights in democracies, this does not mean that a “feminization of politics” has occurred. Further, when women do hold elected office, one might surmise that they will overcompensate for their feminine tendencies towards nonviolent methods by still engaging in violent conflict, in order to keep popular support, especially of other (mostly male) politicians and male citizens who will be waiting for her to look “weak” or put the nation in danger.

Towards a Gendered Understanding of Conflict

This article discusses how gender is an issue in both conflict and development and how recognizing and dealing with the effects of gender in either arena can make the situation in developing countries better. I found this article very interesting because I am really interested in issues with development and foreign aid by NGOs. Since I will be focusing on war for my literature review, I was also interested in the differences between fighting in conflict for men and women. I thought a really important point the authors made was how it is not necessarily that men want to fight in wars, but that they feel obligated to do so and know they will be punished if they do not “prove” their masculinity. They are also made to feel guilty if they do not protect their community and their family. Women, on the other hand, are usually defeminized when they take part in battle, and often have to worry about being raped or taunted. It turns out that going through all of this in the name of serving alongside men and making equal sacrifices for one’s society does not pan out with the benefits women may hope for. In other words, women are not “rewarded” for taking part in armed conflict. Once the battle is over, there is often no change in day-to-day gender norms. I thought this was really interesting and just shows how constrained we are in our gender roles and how set in stone our societies and ideals really are.

Women and Peace: The Meaning of Peace for Women

This chapter focuses on the specific questions we need to ask when thinking about both positive and negative, organized and unorganized peace for women. It encourages thought about how and why peace is a different concept for women than it is for men. The author talks about the difference between personal and structural violence in negative peace, in the difference between one women being beat by her husband versus a million women being beat by their husbands. This reminded me of the “personal as political” idea we discussed in class on Tuesday, and how feminism can help women to realize that their personal struggles are shared by others and give them the unity and conviction to work towards change. I think that one important, if tricky, part in giving women this feeling is not undermining their own personal struggle in a way that makes them accept it or feel that it is acceptable because it is “normal.”

The author also discusses the differences between direct and structural violence, giving the example of women being kept in ignorance versus not having enough to eat (even when men do), and says that direct violence such as starvation is of course more deadly. I think it would be interesting to discuss in class how direct and structural violence interact to reinforce one another. For example, are woman who are kept ignorant more likely to starve to death? Are starving women more ignorant? Do they accept direct violence because of structural factors, or is it the structural factors that create or worsen the direct violence?

Hooks: Feminism is For Everybody

In this piece, Hook discusses the need to return to a clearly and simply defined feminism, based on ending “sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression.” My favorite part of this chapter is that he says what many others forget: women can be sexist too! Sadly, its true that many women, in fact, most of us in some way or another, support the sexist behaviors and structures that make up our society. Even women who are supportive of feminism often forget the underlying ideal of feminism, which is, of course, equality. I was shocked to read about the various instances in history where women have selfishly perpetuated inequality by doing to other disadvantaged groups (racial and ethnic minorities, those of a low socioeconomic status), the same disfavors that sexist men and women have subjected us to in the past. I found it really sad that to some degree, equality for women was achieved at the price of, for example, racial equality. This caused me to wonder how we might have achieved both simultaneously and whether our social structures could even handle such change all at once. I think another very good topic to consider that goes hand in hand with Hook’s ideas is how sexism affects men, whether it be through stereotypes or disadvantages in certain situations.

Hatty: Bodily Harm

In this chapter, Hatty discusses what is defined as violent by society and under what circumstances violence is viewed as appropriate. She especially discusses how societal ideas about gender roles can influence our perceptions about the appropriateness of violence or the need for legal intervention in violent situations. One concept that I found particularly insightful is that naming actions as violent is a political process. To me, this means that our societal stereotypes and norms are also institutionalized into the legal framework for dealing with violence. This is dangerous because whether something is labeled as “violent” determines what the “appropriate” reactions to and feelings about that behavior should be. For example, if our legal system, either in actuality or de facto, does not take domestic violence seriously, this could eventually mean that physical harm inflicted by a romantic partner is no longer viewed as a violent act and reinforces the common notion that it is normal, “not a big deal,” or something that should be dealt with in the home.

Another concept I found interesting is that there are significant gender differences in the perception of aggression and violence. While for men violence is seen as necessary for maintaining control, for women violence feels like a loss of control (over themselves). These fundamentally opposite viewpoints lead to a lot of misunderstandings between the sexes and may point to a need for education between men and women that explains the differing perceptions and helps us to communicate better and work together more productively, whether it be in personal or professional relationships.

Making Gendered People

The author discusses how gender influences our daily lives, bodies, identities, and sexualities. Throughout the discussion, the author tries to define what exactly gender is and to introduce different theories about how gender relates to each topic. One of my favorite things about this piece is that culture is also taken into account. This is very important because the author acknowledges gender as a socially constructed concept. Therefore, seeing the differences in gender expectations and gender roles between societies is a good way of proving this point.

One topic discussed was homosexuality, including “another pattern of male-to-male sexuality” and “development of gay sexuality on the North American model.” While this discussion intrigued me, I was unsure whether I misunderstood the author’s intent. Was he really saying that the way homosexuality is acted out is cultural, versus biological? I think that in many ways this is sensible and goes along with the idea that heterosexuality is acted out according to societal “rules.” Still, it would be interesting to discuss how others in the class feel about this idea, especially about what we should take away from the reality of different sexual customs in other countries and the fact that developing nations especially model their behaviors after Western norms. This was a theme seen more than once, as when the author discussed general changes in sexuality (and, I would argue, also in gender roles and identities), as countries experience capitalist development.