Sex-Selective Abortion on Rise

I recently came across an article in The Washington Post that talks about the rise in sex-selective abortions in India. I found this article especially interesting because of specific discussions we have had in class regarding the different roles men and women play in society depending on the culture they are raised in. Like many other cultures, India emphasizes the importance of a male’s role in their family and in society.

In 1996, India banned the use of medical technology to determine the sex of fetuses in order to selectively abort girls. Even though this procedure is illegal, findings from a recent study suggest that it is actually becoming more common and widespread than in the past. Sex-selective abortion is primarily intended to increase a couple’s chance of having at least on boy. The results of this study give a great depiction of the growth of this practice and provide a better understanding of gender roles in a predominately male dominated culture such as India. Although India’s desire to have at least one boy in the family does not seem to be as severe as certain cultures like China, there is still an evident preference for a male child. It would be interesting to take this study and research the findings further. Some questions I would like to look at specifically:

What are the underlying societal pressures to have a male child in India?

How do these statistics compare to other predominately male cultures?

Why is there such an increase in sex-selective abortions right now rather than in previous years?

Miss Representative

As a part of our final media project, Nikki and I showed a trailer for the documentary Miss Representative that was recently presented at the Sundance Film Festival. Although I have yet to see the entire documentary, I think the message of this documentary encompasses a lot of what we have talked about in class relating to women in the media. It not only focuses on the current image of woman in the media, but it also concentrates on the long-term effects this message sends to young people, especially young girls. The consequences are dire and are directly correlated to common psychological and physical problems of this generation of young individuals, which can range from poor self-esteem to more serious conditions such as bulimia and anorexia.

It is important for young women to see positive role models. By incorporating advice from powerful women we frequently see in the media in this documentary, it leaves the viewer with a sense of hope and gives young women a group of individuals to look up to. I think one of the most important parts of this documentary is that it not only brings to light a serious problem, but also concentrates on the steps needed for change to occur. This documentary is a step in the right direction. It presents a group of women that want to defy the media and the belief that, “You can’t be, what you can’t see.”

To see the full trailer and learn more about Miss Representation visit www.missrepresentation.org. This is also a great source to find the most up to date calendar of upcoming screenings and events. On a side note, following Miss Representative on any of their social media pages is a great source for current events relating women in the media.

Condoleezza Rice and Female Heads of State

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H19sMQgHE7Y&feature=related

While doing research for my final project, I stumbled across this video that depicts Condi Rice defending her beliefs of women in politics.  The interviewer is somewhat degrading towards her about the topic, categorizing her in one role or another.  Dr. Rice's belief is very geared toward individuality and uniqueness and so she did not take kindly to the containment of her achievements to simply being that of a woman or African American.

I find it very interesting that while she is discussing the topic of the empowerment of women, all her interviewer can do is capitalize the struggles she faced in a male-dominated environment (not to mention older and white).  He makes it sound as though she was outside of herself when serving in her position and that she didn't truly fit in where she was - she just persevered through the post.

The assumptions that were taken from other books and sources that Dr. Rice denied were also all examples that would have shown her as "weak" from a patriarchal perspective.  Rice immediately dismisses the "boxing" that the interviewer does with his questions and presents the subject from a more middle-of-the-road perspective.  She emphasizes the collaboration instead of giving the idea that the men did all of the work in government decisions (proportionally).

A Blueprint for Change

A couple of weeks ago I was riding back from the airport and found a piece of newspaper in the supershuttle I happened to be riding in.  I just saw "Women in the Economy" on the top of the page and picked it up, planning on reading it later.  Now having watched "Who's Counting?" this featured section seems more pertinent.

The Wall Street Journal has created a task force for to figure out what barriers are still in place for women to enter the workplace.  The piece of the section that I got my hands on had Gena Davis, actress, discussing the hours of television watched by children and the stereotypes and placements of male and female characters in shows.  She started with films such as "Thelma and Louise" and "A League of Their Own," and soon she had women coming up to her to tell their stories and how they related to these movies. 

After doing these films, she began to realize the disparity in gender roles in the mainstream media.  While watching TV with her daughter, she noticed the gender bias and gender gaps that media is presenting to children.  She began approaching producers and directors about it, who didn't even realize what they were doing.  She, along with others in Hollywood, ended up raising the money to do the largest research study on G-rated movies and television shows for kids 11 and younger.  They found that for every one female character, there are THREE male characters (in group scenes, it was five males to one female).

She has started a movement in Hollywood to change these perceptions and make changes in the gender roles in film.  They will be doing another study in 2015 to show the differences and changes in five years.

I found this article encouraging that people are stepping up and making the difference that it will take to truly turn a 180 on the perception of women, and therefore the success of women.  Below is a link to the article:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704013604576247133240163732.html

How would you feel if you weren’t allowed to drive a car?

Manal al-Sherif, Saudi Woman, Detained For Defying Driving Ban

This article really stuck out in my mind because of how much I enjoy the freedom to jump in my car anytime I want and go for a ride. Ever since I was sixteen I have treasured the alone time I have in my car....it’s just me, the open road, and the music that puts me at ease. To not even have the option of doing so would be debilitating to me.

“Authorities detained a Saudi woman on Saturday after she launched a campaign against the driving ban for women in the ultraconservative kingdom and posted a video of herself behind the wheel on Facebook and YouTube to encourage others to copy her.”

Women must hire live in drivers that cost about $300-$400/month or rely on male family members to drive to work, school, grocery stores, doctor appointments, etc.

This relates to our class discussions because this article just like many of the accounts we’ve heard throughout this term shows us that every aspect of life has multiple lenses it can be viewed from. It is important to be aware of the alternate lenses so we don’t simply look at the people involved in unfamiliar situations as the “other”.

Women Making More Money

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/18/AR2010011803834_2.html?sid=ST2010011900008

I found this article in the Washington Post about how women now are making more money than their male counterparts. It also furthers that idea by saying not just women, but married women are "bring home the big bucks" more than their husbands. Women are now about to make up a majority of the US workforce, are now graduating from college in higher numbers than men, and so now are becoming the better educated, higher-paid of the two.

Petula Dvorak, the author of this article, says that men now have it better off because they can just sit back and relax while women do all the work. Not only are more women now working, but they also have to keep up with the kids and housework. So we're basically doing both jobs. Really, what would they do without us? However, she goes on to say that because of this, more women today are depressed. They do not have the time to relax like their husbands because they are constantly working.

One of the last points that she makes is that our generation is now expected to be both the "house mom" as well as the "working mom." Whew. Seems like this will become a difficult thing for us to juggle.

I would hope that every woman feels that no matter which "job" they choose, that they do not feel belittled or feel as though they are too hardcore because since our generation now has both options, we should therefore be able to choose whichever one we want or both, and not be criticized for our choice.

Bolsa Familia and Oportunidades - Paying poor mothers to care for their children

After class, I thought about the programs in Brazil (Bolsa Familia), Mexico (Oportunidades) and several other developing countries that pay poor women to keep their children in school and get medical care in terms of compensating them for their unpaid labor. These programs have shown success in educating and keeping healthy kids in impoverished families that might not otherwise be able to pay for education and healthcare costs for their kids. Also called "conditional payments," they in some ways monetize, and therefore give value to, the time and effort mothers must spend to support their kids in school and health.

Here's an article about such programs' effectiveness from the NY Times:

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/03/to-beat-back-poverty-pay-the-poor/

Now back to the final project!

" I Choose My Choice! "

I read this article several weeks ago and knew I wanted to write about it, but didn't quite know when it would fit in. After today's class, I can include it because it raises some very interesting points about "women's work" and how they "count."

Essentially, the author of the article is laying out several different arguments and positions made by women from all types of perspectives. Alluding to the work of Betty Friedan, writer of the groundbreaking "Feminine Mystique," who illuminated the dissatisfaction that many "housewives" felt with their lives, not knowing particularly why-- the author of this article offers some theories from others on what this "housewife" mentality can mean.

One of the most interesting ones was made by Linda Hirshman who "considers all stay-at-home mothers fish in her barrel...[she] even tears mercilessly into the sleep-deprived new mothers who’ve made the unfortunate decision to share their rambling thoughts on something called Bloggingbaby.com... But in fact, Hirshman insists, the problem starts well before mother­hood. It begins when young women enter college and violate Hirshman’s No. 1 rule of female emancipation: “Don’t study art.”"

Hirshman gets particularly critical at mothers who have left their Harvard M.B.A degrees and high-powered jobs to"live in the perfect land of a Walgreens’ ad." She gripes at the fact that these women are choosing the "lesser" existence of child-rearing and taking care of the home instead of pursuing "more important" goals. ("Lawyer, along with doctor and judge, is the kind of high-degree, socially relevant job she approves of.")

In contrast, Neil Gilbert makes a very astute observation of Hirshman's argument by saying:

"Linda Hirshman claims that “the family—with its repetitious, socially invisible, physical tasks—is a necessary part of life, but allows fewer opportunities for full human flourishing than public spheres like the market or the government.” Many people would no doubt find unpaid household chores less interesting than Professor Hirshman’s job … But walking up and down the super­market aisle selecting food for a family dinner is a job that has more variety and autonomy than the paid work being done by the supermarket employees who stack the same shelves with the same food day after day, and those who stand in a narrow corner at the checkout counter all day tallying up the costs of purchases, and the workers next to them who pack the purchases into paper or plastic bags. That space in the market is a bit cramped for human flourishing."

I am a little more inclined to see it from Gilbert's point of view, simply because it is more all-encompassing of the various roles that many workers in many sectors must have-- because they have no choice.

The article continues on to describe the way in which women's "work"--whether at home or in the office has become criticized, analyzed and debated. Some point to the "women-at-home-is-oppressive" mentality, arguing that "women at work" is contributing more significantly to the economy, to society, and to the world (to be...general). However, are these situations really the "oppressive" scenarios that some feminists might describe? One paragraph in the article articulates that in reality, men probably don't have the time or energy to "continually oppress their wives."

Is the choice for a woman to "stay home" one that is backhanding all the important work of Betty Friedan and other feminists of her time? Is choosing this path setting women's movements back by not showing how "equal" women can be to men in the workplace?

What about the simple fact that it is a very PARTICULAR type of woman who actually HAS the choice to make? This type of critique cannot even be applied to well, a majority of women in the world who are forced to work in order to survive. "Staying at home" is not an option for them, so how can they be included in this type of analysis of "achieving the feminist dream"?

The article moves between many points, and the author herself indicates that she has the luxury of staying at home as a writer at times, spending time with her children, etc. How might her particular perspective influence her writer and the people she chooses to portray?

From a "big picture" standpoint, who really has the appropriate "position" from which to judge any of these women and the types of women that are not portrayed? Do we really know what goes on FULLY in a "mom's world"? Perhaps it is those women who have more time to participate meaningfully in the community and be activists for social change.... are the "working moms" doing this kind of work? It's hard to know. Regardless, this article shows many sides of the discussion...and even if it is a long read, it's definitely worth it.

Facebook COO Addresses The Domination Of Men In The Business World

Facebook COO: Men run the world
Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook COO, gave the commencement speech at Barnard College, an all female university, this past weekend. In her speech she focused on the importance of women in our generation overcoming patriarchal tendencies that have saturated and continue to saturate the business world today. She goes on to discuss the gender gap that societies are experiencing in the workforce and our need to do something to bridge this gap. Emphasis is placed on the notion that women are capable to make an impact in our world just as long as they have the drive to do so. She believes this is the main factor in the gender gap. The most powerful quote from Sandberg in my opinion was "Men are more ambitious. We will never close the achievement gap if we don't close the ambition gap," she went on to say "Women underestimate their performance." Sandberg is a trailblazer in the movement for women to attain positions of power. She has secured top positions in two of the most influential companies we've ever seen, Google and Facebook. She is also an activist for women in the workforce. If interested, you can check out her TED talk entitled "Why We Have Too Few Women Leaders." AMAZING TED talk!

HIllary edited out of historic photo

This is too good/bad not to share - timely, too. A Hasidic paper based in Brooklyn edited Sec. of State Clinton out a photo where she was sitting in the situation room with Pres. Obama and others, watching the live feed of the mission to kill bin Laden; the only other female in that picture, a counterterrorism analyst, Audrey Thomason, was similarly removed by the magic of Photoshop.

Read the full story here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20110509/ts_yblog_thecutline/wheres-hillary-hasidic-paper-breaks-the-rules-by-editing-her-out-of-white-house-photo

Islamophobia continued

While we covered Islamophobia several weeks ago, this story from the past weekend is a fitting reminder that Osama bin Laden's recent killing may engender more such discrimination. The oh-so-ironic story is below and here is a summary: Two imams bound for a conference on Islamophobia in Charlotte, NC, were kicked off their flight from Memphis to Charlotte by the pilot, after having passed through extensive airport security. They were able to take a later flight, but their lawyer is investigating the pilot's motives and vows to sue if it seems to have been racially motivated.

One of the imams, Masudur Rahman, made an interesting comparison to Rosa Parks:

"If the reason was security, the security was done, the security people were satisfied with us," Rahman said. "It reminded me when the black lady was kicked from the bus because of racism. That history I found today in that plane."

Read the full story, with an accompanying video, here. There are some interesting comments as well and I admit to being impressed by the reasonable and non-discriminatory tenor of *some* of them.

"there's a spark in you"

Just wanted to throw something positive and fun up on the blog on this Sunday night. While it may sound silly, we talk about empowerment, and while I was listening to a different song on YouTube, the Katy Perry song, Firework, showed up as a recommended song. If you watch the video, and listen to the lyrics, it's not just a poppy, catchy song, it has real meaning behind it. Watching it was watching media that spoke to males and females, and told them it's Ok to be you, because you, no matter who you are, you have a spark in you. One of the characters in the video was male, at a party, and seemed alone, but got up, and found his spark, and felt comfortable to go kiss another male. Another character, a female, was at a pool party (which I can say as a female was/is always a stress filled thing, even though it's supposed to be fun) and while her friend was calling her to come in the pool, she shook her head - then, she stripped to her underwear, jumped in the pool and fireworks burst out of her chest when she came up for air. I know this is so much different than what we typically talk about and discuss in class, but one of my other professors at Korbel always says that while our studies focus on the serious things, the difficult and hard things to learn about, we have to continue to laugh, find humor and keep smiling. So - check the video out, and hope it makes you smile, and maybe even dance a little :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGJuMBdaqIw

Globalization: True or False?

The case against globaloney

This article from The Economist reviews the book "World 3.0" by author Pankaj Ghemawat. In in, Ghemawat argues that the world is a lot less globalized than most people believe or want to believe. He uses a number of statistics, most of them from the economic sphere, to demonstrate that "global integration is surprisingly low." Immigration trends and the affects of the September 11th are also used to illustrate the idea that "globalisation [sic] is reversible." Having not read the book, it is difficult to assess Ghemawat's position; however, I think that it is a position worth considering. Would "reversing globalization" be a good thing? In class, we mostly focused on the negative effects of globalization; yet, I don't think that being "de-globalized" is possible, especially in terms of foreign policy and communication. I did find Ghemawat's argument that, by adapting to local cultures, McDonald's and MTV also prove that the world is less globalized to be a little shaky. In my opinion, accommodating local consumers is an adept marketing move and actually proves that these companies have taken the time to understand how people in other countries will spend their money. The fact that McDonald's and MTV can exist in cultures whose values seem directly opposed to what these companies offer seems to be an argument for globalization, not against. What do you think of Ghemawat's argument? Is the world less globalized than we think? Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Discrepancies of Women in the Workplace

As a senior entering my last two weeks of college, the real world and jobs has been at the forefront of my mind. The combination of applying to jobs and taking this class, which has opened my eyes to the many inequalities women face in day –to – day life, has got me thinking about the discrepancies between women and men in the workplace.

Why is it that workplace earnings still gap between women and men today? According to the General Accountability Office, “the weekly earnings of full – time working women were about three fourths of men’s weekly earnings” (About.com). Women earn 80 cents for every dollar earned by their male counterparts (About.com). Reasons for this gap in earnings between women and men suggest that it is a result of women balancing work and family life. Women often work less full –time jobs than men to care for their children. On the other hand, men with children tend to receive a boost in their earnings… why is this?

Clearly, sexism is still very prevalent in the workplace. There are not enough reasons or evidence to suggest why men still typically get paid more than women. This needs to change and perhaps change can occur through activism and electing political candidates who stress women’s rights.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/censusstatistic/a/womenspay.htm

Gender Identity Anti-Discrimination Act and Chrissy Lee Polis

Gender Identity Anti-Discrimination Act and Chrissy Lee Polis

We spoke about Chrissy Lee Polis and her violent beating in a Maryland McDonald’s in class on Wednesday. Chrissy is a transgender woman and when she used the women’s restroom at a McDonald’s restaurant other restaurant patrons brutally attacked her while employees stood by to video tape and mock the situation. Advocacy groups and Chrissy are using this horrifying attack as a call to action to advance legislation surrounding these types of incidences. Merely weeks before Chrissy’s beating the Maryland legislation found the Gender Identity Ant-Discrimination Act to be not worthy of pursuing. “The bill as written would have banned discrimination on the basis of gender identity in employment, housing and credit. A provision to ban discrimination in public accommodations (which would cover restaurants) was removed by the bill’s sponsor, Del. Joseline Pena-Melnyk, who cited difficulty in passing the inclusive legislation because of legislators’ fear of addressing the issue of bathrooms at public accommodations.” The Anti-Transgender organizations continue to use restroom usage as the foundation for their anti-transgender arguments.

This article recognizes the silver lining of the beating as the, “outpouring of support and solidarity from people across the country with the individual who was targeted simply because of her identity, and because of her bravery to live her life authentically.” This support has refocused some attention on the Anti-Discrimination Act and people are now demanding this bill is passed. Do you think a law such as the Gender Identity Anti-Discrimination Act will be successful in making our society more safe and welcoming for all? Do you know of any other states with similar legislation and has it been successful?


http://www.standingonthesideoflove.org/blog/a-call-to-action-alleged-hate-crime-against-maryland-trans-woman-garners-national-attention/

More Media and Body Image

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charlotte-hilton-andersen/karl-lagerfield-rachel-bilson-ad_b_853616.html

Sorry for the double post, both on the same subject, but I came across this article and thought it was too relevant to our discussions about the role of the media and body image not to add. [Disclaimer: I do like the brand of ice cream that is being advertised in these commercials, which is how I stumbled upon this article in the first place. It was often a treat while I lived in Spain and I was excited to recently see it in the United States.] The author of the article, Charlotte Hilton Andersen, does a great job in the intro of listing the many different ways women might react to a campaign like this one and none of them are positive. Indeed the whole article is a fantastic analysis of the dichotomy of advertising: pretty, skinny people eating foods they can't possibly eat on a regular basis and stay skinny. How is the general public supposed to interpret this? And how much more shame and guilt does it cause women to feel about their bodies because they can’t eat certain foods and maintain a certain weight?

Life-Size Barbie

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/living/2011/04/25/drew.barbie.intv.hln.html

(I don't know how to actually embed the video, sorry!)

I think most of us have probably come across the “Barbie statistics” that Galia Slayen mentions in this clip but the visual of what those statistics actually mean is pretty powerful. Clearly, this is not a woman who could actually exist, except under extreme and unhealthy circumstances. Other blog entries as well as our discussions in class have pointed out the obvious negative effects that unrealistic and/or unnecessary body image characteristics have on kids, especially girls. It is interesting that, even though many people may have seen the “Barbie statistics” or even just know that her size is improbable, people were still shocked when seeing Slayen’s life size Barbie made in proportion to the toy. This suggests the power of a visual image over written words (which can still be and are very powerful!) and again implies that people often take in what is “normal” from visual images they don’t find shocking. I think Slayen’s assessment that there is a “deeper image” to Barbie, versus her superficial one as a toy for girls, is accurate and her call to be a “critical viewer” of the media is spot on.

Also, here is the "Get Real Barbie" Fact Sheet, as developed by the South Shore Eating Disorders Collaborative (SSEDC).

• There are two Barbie dolls sold every second in the world.
• The target market for Barbie doll sales is young girls ages 3 – 12 years of age.
• A girl usually has her first Barbie by age 3, and collects a total of seven dolls during her childhood.
• Over a billion dollars worth of Barbie dolls and accessories were sold in 1993, making this doll big business and one of the top 10 toys sold.
• If Barbie were an actual women, she would be 5’9” tall, have a 39” bust, an 18” waist, 33” hips and a size 3 shoe!
• Barbie calls this a “full figure” and likes her weight at 110 lbs.
• At 5’9” tall and weighing 110 lbs, Barbie would have a BMI of 16.24 and fit the weight criteria for anorexia. She likely would not menstruate.
• If Barbie was a real woman, she’d have to walk on all fours due to her proportions.
• Slumber Party Barbie was introduced in 1965 and came with a bathroom scale permanently set at 110 lbs with a book entitled “How to Lose Weight” with directions inside stating simply “Don’t eat.”

(that last bullet point is pretty horrific!)

What About American Girls Sold on the Streets?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/24/opinion/24kristof.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha212

This weekend Nicholas Kristof wrote an op-ed piece about human trafficking in the US and how Americans react differently to the teenage prostitutes that they hear about abroad and the ones that they see on their own streets. A new book is out talking about the horrors of human trafficking and child prostitution in the US and how the system is failing the girls. The article talks about the American view in which the young girls on the streets are seen as miscreants and are there willingly, not because they are forced into abusive relationships with pimps or come from troubled homes. It is interesting to contrast that opinion with many American’s views of human trafficking abroad, where girls are seen as victims, not criminals.

In class last week we briefly touched on human trafficking and learned more about Comfort women and women being used in a time of war. This article also shows that it is not just in war that these young girls are being used and manipulated. Many of them are caught and put in detention centers while their pimps do not receive any punishment. The new book, Girls like Us by Rachel Lloyd is about her experience as a child prostitute and how she escaped from London to New York and eventually started a non-profit to help girls in the US, who are experiencing the same fate that she did.

This video addresses the extremely controversial practice of female genital mutilation. In this video, two Kenyan girls are featured who are resisting this practice. It shows their parents' reactions to their resistance and how embedded FGM is in their culture. The parents worry that if their daughters aren't cut, then they will not be able to marry and thus, the parents will not receive a dowry for marrying their daughters off. The daughters argue that they do not want to be cut and that they want to be able to go off and pursue an education.

A growing resistance to FGM is now present in Kenya, primarily led by a self-help group known as Abandon the Knife. This group is trying to talk with men and women about FGM and the negative effects associated with it. They meet with the parents of these two Kenyan girls in an attempt to persuade their parents that allowing their daughters to pursue an education will result in far greater benefits than receiving a dowry. They have also began a new rite of passage ceremony for girls who are resisting FGM in which they provide education to these young girls about FGM and what all it entails and then they have a ceremony that marks these girls passage into womanhood, but without having to undergo the cutting.

I found this to be a very interesting video on FGM and would recommend it to anyone interested in this issue. From my Western mindset, I have always viewed this practice with a lot of disgust. However, I have also tried to understand it in its cultural-specific context and realize that it is such an ingrained cultural practice signifying a woman's readiness to get married. It's a very difficult issue for me to not bring in my Western bias that this practice is fundamentally wrong. I know that for many women it is part of their culture and they want to have it done because it prepares them for marriage, but it is difficult for me to accept this and to not bring in my own cultural values and belief in basic human rights, which I believe this practice violates. Thus, the fact that the younger generation is beginning to resist this practice and gain support for this resistance is a step in the right direction. I think this video does a really good job of showing the growing resistance, particularly among teenage girls, against FGM and the ways in which long held cultural beliefs are starting to be changed.

Anthony Robles

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2011-03-21-anthony-robles-retires_N.htm

This particular piece of journalism is important because only once does the author actually mention the fact that Anthony Robles is a wrestler who has one leg. If you were to read the entire article minus that sentence, you would have almost no idea that there was anything unique about Anthony at all. As we learned in our recent class session focusing on "disabilities", often any type of journalism focusing on people with some type of mental or physical disability either seeks to call to attention how miraculous it is that someone with a disability could have had such an accomplishment or it seeks to glorify the disability as the reason why this person has succeeded.

The author of this article remarks only a few times about anything physical at all when mentioning Robles, and aims to focus more on the tangible accomplishments this young man has achieved rather than note that the reason why these achievements are noteworthy are because he deviates from the "norm". Robles' story is uplifting, inspirational and motivational to people of all walks of life and is made to appear no more or less significant because Robles lacks one of his legs. If this article had chosen to focus on how Robles' achievements were more significant because he has only one leg, projected Robles as a wounded warrior and spoke more on the potential struggles Robles faced growing up with his disability, reading the article would elicit an entirely different reaction. If journalists chose to approach all matters of gender, race, culture, etc., with this type of neutrality, I believe that the media would be a much less opinionated and biased part of culture.

"When Did Girls Start Wearing Pink?"

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/When-Did-Girls-Start-Wearing-Pink.html#

Somewhat in relation to the J Crew ad that is sparking controversy, this article addresses the social roots of what created the "regulation" that boys and girls need to adhere to certain societal standards such as wearing blue and pink, respectively. It is interesting how the article starts by saying that couples "have" to know the sex of their baby at first glance because is is very true that our society must know the sex of a baby before they know how to treat and talk to it. For example, when people see a boy baby for the first time, they usually use words like "handsome," "strong," "curious," and "prince," while girl babies are called "angelic," "sweet," "cuddly," "cute." Studies have also demonstrated that boy babies are treated a lot differently than girl babies in the ways in which they are held, talked to, etc. If people do not know the sex of a baby they don't really know what to do or how to treat it. Our gender roles for even babies is so structured that many people can only react based on the societal notions of what each gender is supposed to be.

The article states that separate gendered colors did not come about until just before World War 2 "and even then, it took time for popular culture to sort things out" pointing out what we know all too well, that pop culture is a huge determinant in deciding how girls and boys are supposed to act and dress. With mass communications what they are today, pop culture is spread around the world in a matter of seconds.

The article attributes prenatal testing to the rapid change in keeping boys and girls clothes separate. As soon as parents could learn the sex of the child they could go shopping for merchandise that was perfectly suited to their boy or girl. Of course merchandise companies are providing these necessities and encouraging the behavior with commercials and marketing geared directly at such parents and eventually for children as they become impressionable and easily marketed to with television commercials and children's show characters.

Crossing Arizona - Watch this film!

Movie Review: Crossing Arizona

Crossing Arizona is a political documentary that demonstrates how the current immigration laws in America affect people on both sides of the border and it presents opinions from all sides of the issue. The film explains how the changed border strategy has sealed off border cities, and allowed for funneling though the unforgiving terrain of the Arizona desert. The laws and regulations have pushed immigrants further and further into the desert to cross the border and many people die each year in an attempt to cross through the isolated desert. Many people living on the border feel that no one deserves to die in the desert and they have worked tirelessly to supply water and humanitarian aid to those trying to cross. Throughout the film you will see perspectives from everyone affected by the border laws including, border patrol, immigrants on both sides of the border, humanitarian aid workers, guides, vigilante groups, farmers and ranchers. The film makers did an excellent job presenting all perspectives involved.

Some of the more memorable and upsetting moments in the film was the footage anti-immigration rallies in Arizona. A man in Tombstone started the “ Minuteman project – Veterans for a secure border” in which American citizens gathered from around the country to “protect” the border saying it is their duty and every American should be out there helping the government to do their job. This rally seemed to stir hatred and anger more than protect anything. Their goal was to create a deterrence for the immigrants trying to cross, but if I were someone attempting to cross the border and I had paid my life savings to make it into another country I probably wouldn’t allow a knitting grandmother from California in a camping chair be much of a deterrence. It was easy to see how the Minuteman project could escalate into a recruitment fair for white supremacy groups.
Water is one of the biggest problems for the people crossing the desert and it is not possible for someone to carry all the water necessary for the journey. In an attempt to stop the deaths in the desert, many people and organizations have provided water stations and started search and rescue groups to help. One man maintains a cache of water jugs he refills daily to help those in need. In one scene he returns to his jugs and sees them strewn about and many of them are slashed or have been intentionally burst. He says to deny someone water is “a crime against humanity.”

If you are interested in an in depth follow-up to Jennifer Piper’s lecture this is the film for you!

Sweatshops and Women

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kn8LnEkKfIU&feature=related

A terrible result of economic globalization is sweatshops. Multinational corporations have been moving production facilities to developing countries in order to take advantage of cheap labor. As you can see in the video, most sweatshop workers are women. Most of the women are young and uneducated and consequently lack the knowledge and resources to stand up for themselves. Workers wages range from 5 to 20 cents per hour. They are often forced to work over time and not allowed bathroom breaks. The living conditions for sweatshop workers are crowded and dirty, and worst of all, women are often sexually harassed. Employers are known to falsely promise women better jobs in return for sexual favors. In a sweatshop in Saipan, pregnant women were forced to have abortions in order to keep their jobs. The treatment of women in sweatshops in truly horrific and I urge you all to be cognizant of where you shop.

This video is very powerful, as are the comments listed below the video. Clearly the video is made by college students, which is great and shows activism. However, others cannot handle the activism and are extremely ignorant with their comments. One comment says “yay sweatshops!!” and another says “I love retarded liberal college students pretending like they know everything when they know nothing... lets just shut down all the sweatshops don’t worry the children/mothers wont turn to worse things like prostitution.” It is shocking that people can actually be so ignorant. People need to become educated and aware of sweatshop conditions before change can actually occur.

Pink Toenails and Masculinity

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/ct-talk-pink-toenails-0414-20110413,0,4817384.story

If you google J. Crew and Pink toenail polish, you will find multiple media channels - big news stations, blogs, comment boards... - all commenting on the fact that a woman representing J. Crew and modeling new clothes was pictured with her young son who had his toenails painted pink. This caused a massive uproar all over television and the web.

Tonight, Jon Stewart put together a piece on all the rants, which I can't find yet, but am sure by tomorrow will be on YouTube. One of the men he found, a supposed specialist, stated that such an action goes against masculinity, not verbatim, but that is what he meant. Society is so set in the established gender roles, and when a young boy gets his toenails painted by his mother, instead of it being a bonding moment, a sweet gesture by his mom to show affection, it is taken as an assault on what it means to be a man. Someone said she should be saving funds for later when he needs psychotherapy. Really? This goes back to what exactly it means to be a 'man.' Clearly in the western world, wearing pink nail polish signifies homosexuality, and being feminine, because pink is a 'girl' color. First of all, there are plenty of 'manly,' straight, men who wear the color pink, and secondly, why do so many people care? Why is the media all over this topic?

I find so many things wrong with this whole thing and I was instantly angered. The attention paid to this action is ridiculous when you look at the state of the world, but it speaks volumes to what people care about, and are thinking about. We are all so interconnected with one another that such an instance makes national media - it is sickening to me. Just wanted to share and rant a little.

Sterilization in the Czech Republic

Government Admits Forced Sterilization

After talking about sterilization in class today, it made me think of several conversations that I had with Roma women in the Czech Republic. The Roma population, also known as gypsies (which is a derogatory term), is the minority population in the Czech Republic and throughout Central and Eastern Europe. I checked out Wikipedia's definition of Roma and it referenced a 2003 article in The Guardian about Roma in the Czech Republic. 75% of Roma children are educated at schools for children with special needs and learning disabilities and the majority of Roma adults are unemployed. In 2003 the percentage was 70%, compared to the national average of 6%.

Another difficulty that Roma women faced and may still be facing today is sterilization without consent. In 2009 the government finally admitted and apologized for sterilizing Roma women. Czech doctors were sterilizing women when they were giving birth. The women would be given the consent forms right before they gave birth and were pressured to sign papers that they did not understand. Many were threatened that if they weren't sterilized they would lose their children. Doctors were sterilizing the women to curb the traditionally high fertility rate of Roma women. The practice started during Communism to prevent "undesirables" from reproducing and supposedly ended in 1989, but the last recorded case was in 2003 and many activists still believe that this is occurring. Another article in Womensenews.org, Sterilized Roma Say They Did Not Consent, discusses the widespread discrimination that Roma women face in general and reiterates women getting sterilized without knowing what was happening.

The Roma, like people with disabilities, are pressured to be sterilized without fully understanding the process or what they are consenting to. Perpetuating the idea of undesirables and the image of a perfect, ideal body will not create a more understanding and accepting society, but potentially continue or increase sterilizations and abortions. It will continue to hinder the progress that many minority groups have made. By sterilizing the women, the Czech government and state-run hospitals re-enforced the idea that they were not as good as other women and they did not deserve to have more children.

Disabled People's Rights

Reading about the history of how Western countries have dealt with the disabled populations makes me think about a job I had during my undergrad studies at CU Boulder. I took a job with the Center for People with Disabilities because it was relatively high-paying. I worked with people who had disabilities running the gamut from very high-functioning adults who worked at jobs like bagging groceries or cleaning offices to those who were unable to speak or care for themselves. I would take them on outings using public transportation, changed more than a few diapers and learned to teach clients life skills such as street safety or kitchen proficiency.

What the concise history of Western perception of disable people reminds me in particular about the Center for People with Disabilities is their focus on moving disabled people from being sequestered in institutions and generally out of sight from the general population to joining it by living in supported group homes, working and traveling on public transportation. Literally just seeing disabled people on the street, in stores or on public transportation is a form of activism to combat the lingering effects and practices from the decades of eugenics dominating the debate about and decision making for disabled people.

At first, I felt uncomfortable working with these disabled adults, but then I grew accustomed to our differences and it became more normal for me; this is an important, beneficial side effect when disabled people are allowed and supported to live with the general population and not in institutions from childhood.

A Female Image, Piety & Power

* Note: I just now noticed the post before me after writing this... sorry for the double up on the topic!

In response to this week's readings:

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/04/11/france.burqa.ban/#

"2 arrested as France's ban on burqas, niqabs take effect."

After a law was passed back in October, placed into effect Monday, it is now illegal to wear a burqa or a niqab in public in France. Violators, including visitors, will face fines and "French citizenship courses." Also, "Forcing a woman to wear a niqab or a burqa is punishable by a year in prison and a 30,000-euro fine (about $43,300). Forcing a minor to do the same thing is punishable by two years in prison and a fine of 60,000 euros."

The ban has caused a range of issues to surface, from religious freedom to female oppression to modesty rules to tenets of the Islamic faith.

Supporters of the ban, most notably the French government, have cited its implementation for security purposes, stating it's of utmost importance to be able to "see people's faces" to maintain a secure nation. Additionally, it has been noted as a way to maintain French identity, a nation of "bare-headed fashion."

Moreover, supporters of the ban claim that seeing the burqa is a tangible sign of an oppressive faith that ultimately strips women of their agency and dignity. The supporters claim that the ban will enable women to relieve themselves of this painful restraint on their identities.

On the flip side, many Muslim women are offended by the ban which treats them like criminals for a practice they have voluntarily chosen to follow. Some Muslim women feel like the burqa or niqab grant them more agency, as they do not have to feel judged by others on their bodies or appearance. However, some Muslim women agree with the ban because they believe the burqa is imprisoning women who think they are practicing piety, but are truly maintaining an oppressive practice. (A "false consciousness," if you will.)

So, is France stepping on the religious freedom of Muslim women? Are they trying to liberate women from an oppressive practice? Are they falling to stereotypes of the media in order to preserve their "French identity"? Are French Muslim women not a part of this "national identity"... and why? This law makes me think of the article by Lila Abu-Lughod, "Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?" Is France attempting to "save" Muslim women who in fact share their devoutness through modest wear? Is it even the place of a national government to insist that they know "what is best" for all Muslim women in the whole country? Are the "security" reasons for this law truly legitimate or are they just a cover-up for a greater agenda to be served?

I think this is a challenging issue, but it points out something very important: here is an example of how one nation is attempting to deal with the cultural "Other," a concept that has been discussed by many prominent feminist scholars. How can an individual, a government, or even factions of a religion find a unifying agreement of what this type of symbolic dress may mean? Can we wade through the "cultural relativist" argument that tries to help us understand and tolerate instead of judge and disrespect? Or, is this the type of issue that needs to be seen through a human rights perspective that trumps relativism in order to move toward women's rights? Are we even in the position to say what the answers to these questions are....are our Western minds able to grasp the meanings behind symbols that are unfamiliar to us?

A challenge, indeed.

---------------------

Just a second little thing to add:

This article: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/01/21/femen.topless.protest/index.html?iref=obinsite

"Topless feminist protesters show what they're made of"

The article explains the women of Femen, Ukraine's topless female protest movement. Femen's leader, 26-year-old Anna Gutsol, explains: "Our goal is active Ukrainian women who want to be involved in society and politics.

Here is an an alternative method that women have taken in order to act as agents of change in an entirely different setting. How does this article compare to the banning of the burqa in France? In one case, we have Muslim women arguing that they command respect through the wearing of the burqa, and the other, wearing nothing at all is a symbol of power. Is the response the same? Is the "topless" feminist movement in the Ukraine a sign of oppression and patriarchy? Some might say that using sex and lust to sell a feminist image is contradictory, but those people might also say that using a veil to cover one's self is also contradictory to the notion of empowerment. Can "outsiders" truly understand what the intention or purpose is of either of these actions? The article claims that after a "nude protest" of a woman being stoned to death in Iran for committing adultery, the group received praise and thanks from Iran for their action. So, why does this group receive praise for their "nontraditional" forms of empowerment while the Muslim women receive criticism for remaining fully covered? Is nude activism more or less respectable than a Muslim woman wearing a burqa to show her dedication to her faith?

What roles of the media and the media's portrayal of the two groups are playing into people's perception of the two issues? Is the stereotyped "Other," the Muslim woman, the target of the burqa ban because of the international perception of oppression tied to her? If so, how is she to shed this label if she truly believes she is doing something good, on her own will? What is the media's perception of the topless feminists, and how does this portrayal affect their message? Who are we to believe/respect/understand/tolerate?

France's new legislation on the Burqa

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/10/french-police-arrest-burqa-ban-protesters/?hpt=C2

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1375781/Burka-ban-New-French-law-forbids-Islamic-women-wearing-face-veils-public-real-protest-London.html

These two articles discuss the new legislation in France that bans Muslim women from wearing Burqas. Proponents of this legislation claim that veils that cover the face are in opposition to French ideals of women's equality or the secular tradition of French society. Muslim women who were protesting France's new legislation were arrested on Monday. Women who break the new legislation by wearing burqas could face a $215 fine. As discussed by Abu-Lughod, the burqa is "central to contemporary concerns about Muslim women" (p.785). The burqa has been described as portable seclusion, in which the burqa is viewed as a "liberating invention because it enabled women to move out of segregated living spaces while still observing the basic moral requirements of separating and protecting women from unrelated men" (p.785). Therefore, the burqa is viewed very positively as well as empowering by Muslim women, but in Western society it is viewed as a means of oppression.

Does this new legislation seem fair? Should Muslim women living in France be subjected to these laws? Does secularity allow for legislation to dictate what Muslim women are allowed to wear? Where do we draw the line on secularism?

Multi-media production resources

Hello all -

Here are some resources I've been finding for different aspects of producing a multi-media production for the final project. Hope they are helpful - I would be grateful to know what you all are finding, too, as well as advice/wisdom from any of you who have created similar works before.

General Digital Media Storytelling
The Center for Digital Storytelling has excellent resources (and is the service used by our speaker last week to tell different immigrants' stories. In particular, the resources section has a treasure trove of other related sites and I noticed that there will be a storytelling workshop in Denver 21 - 23 April:
http://www.storycenter.org

The Knight Digital Media Center has a cornucopia of tutorials and general digital media goodness:
http://multimedia.journalism.berkeley.edu/

Interviewing Resources
Have you ever heard the Story Corps oral histories on NPR? The stories often leave me in tears. The organization that does this, Story Corps, has an excellent website with a question generator that may help you brainstorm, especially if your subject is a family member:
http://storycorps.org/record-your-story/question-generator/

Phone Recordings
Here are some ideas for how to record a phone interview, if you need to do so:
http://transom.org/?p=1165 – general how to for a variety of phones
http://transom.org/?p=8681 – recording using iPhone apps

Production Software
I currently plan to use iMovie on Mac and I understand that for PC's, the free Windows Moviemaker is useful. Curious what others plan to use...

Finally, a random resource I find intriguing – online tools to create maps to weave into your story, particularly if you plan to create a project intended for the internet:
http://www.storymapping.org/resources.html