fMartin has 12 post(s)

In The Caliban and the Witch, Frederici explained that the degradation of women began with the change in economy, from a feudal system to a capitalism. With this shift in economy, the value of work changed as well, leaving women at the bottom in regards with their economic, social and political status. Women were seen as inferior to men in regards to labor, and as such, women were expected to work from home, doing domestic work and taking care of the family. For the women that tried to venture for work outside of the home, they were met with disadvantages such as lower wages than men, unsafe working conditions, and misogynistic treatment by men. This made women dependent on their husbands for income, creating a system where the husbands were the only providers of the household. Instead of being seen as productive members of society, they were viewed as only useful for their reproductive abilities.
The degradation of women contributed to the accumulation of wealth in the capitalist economy as society tried to control women’s reproductive systems. The capitalist system relied on workers for labor, and the women were seen as the means of creating more workers. Society considered this to be the “responsibility” of women, leaving them with few options for autonomy. The government passed several laws that considered using a contraceptive, having an abortion, or any other means of not having a child as a criminal act for women, forcing them to have a child even if they did not want to. Witch hunts also began as a means to further oppress women, intimidating women from seeking independence outside of the household in fear of their lives. Through these methods, society had created a new economic system that relied on a foundation based on women’s oppression and degradation.

In the essay, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving,” Abu-Lughod discussed that Western thinking perceived the Middle Eastern women needed saving from their “oppressive” Muslim religion and culture. She presents many points in this work that critique the “Western Feminist” assumptions concerning Muslim women. One of these assumptions was that these women are oppressed because they are “forced” to wear a veil. Abu-Lughod pointed out that the veil, one clothing being known as a burqa, was commonly misconceived as a symbol of oppression: symbolizing abuse, forced marriages, and a deprivation of women’s rights. However, the veil, in the Muslim community, represented modesty for women. It represented a separation between men and women. The veil created a “portable seclusion,” in Abu-Lughod’s words, which allows women to feel safe from men. It was also a symbol of respect, wearing it as an appropriate garment in respect to their culture. The Taliban “forced” women to wear it, but this clothing was worn before they risen into power. Even after the Taliban was taken out of power, women still wore some form of veil as a liberation, allowing them to feel safe in the same area as men were.
Another critique Abu-Lughod was the Western “vocations of saving others.” This construction makes the assumption that the Muslim women needs saving from something, in which case, the Western feminists believe to be Christianity and their ideals. This creates a sense of superiority in these feminists as they believe that Muslim women are “restricted” within their culture, when in reality, they are not. Muslim women have a different culture and express themselves in a different manner. Abu-Lughod argued that instead of trying to change those around us to be more like us, it would be more beneficial to try to make the world a better place as a whole. To respect ideals different from ours, to shift the world to a more peaceful place.

According to Cabezas, sexual citizenship is a type of relationship within sex tourism in which the person, offering the sexual acts, are in complete control of their sexual rights. To explain further, Cabezas differentiates the “sex worker” and individuals that fall outside of this category, saying how the sex worker is viewed by society as being compelled to offer sex to others as they are sexual “deviants”, often stigmatized by their socioeconomic class or color of their skin or gender, imposing a derogatory and sexist label when identifying these individuals. However, for those that do not identify as a sex worker, society view their acts as being influenced by friendship or romance and are in complete control of their sexuality in a sense. Motivated by earning more than their wages to support themselves or for better opportunities, these men and women engage in sexually open relations with tourists.
Those expressing their sexual citizenship, in particular for the women who occupy positions outside “heteronormativity,” the promises that comes from being in these types of relationships, as previously mentioned, are either economic support or a means to an end for better opportunities. Cabezas brings in many examples in her work, various interviews in which some women were being supported by their significant other. One example of Cabezas’ interview is the case of Yolanda. She was a single mother who had three children and no financial support. After working in the tourist areas as an activities instructor, she began dating tourists and fostered meaningful relations with them, and in return, they helped support her and her family. These relationships being as a means for locals who do not have jobs or if their jobs were not enough to support them and their families. From there, these relationship can lead to marriage and migration for locals to a better life.

According to Ferguson, the relationship between property, capital and prostitution stems from racialization and heteropatriarchy. Using Marxist concepts in his discussion, Ferguson criticizes capitalism for normalizing heterosexuality and whiteness in society, which exploits those outside the norm as property. The hierarchy of property ownership is compared to a tribe, with the owner being the “chief” of the tribe and the extension of the tribe ending with the slaves being the lowest. The division of labor in this hierarchy is influenced by the heterosexual and patriarchal family structure. Ferguson brings up the concept of property ownership not only referring to people owning people as slaves, but also using it as an analogy of the capital state “owning” the people working in this system. The “slaves” of the capital tribe are the unskilled workers, which essentially are the immigrants. The state exploits these groups of people as cheap labor that benefits the capital, with the surplus immigrant populations providing more than enough labor for the state. Prostitution is related to property and capital as it is the intersection between these two factors. This occupation dehumanizes a person, forcing the person to sell their body to survive, essentially turning that individual into a piece of property working for the capital. As for prostitution and capital, the connection between the two is that prostitution allows the capital to step out of heteronormative ideology, disrupting the heteropatriarchy and exploiting the man’s lust for profits.
When taking into account of the “queer of color” analysis, it breaks the silence of the racialization and heteropatriarchy that stems in society. Using Ferguson’s example of the black drag queen prostitute, this individual breaks all the stereotypes associated with society’s standards, going against the natural roles that have been instilled into the citizens of the state. The “queer of color” perspective promotes an ideology that goes outside of the “box” of capital, showing the contrasting side of race, gender, and class.

According to Cohen, the heteronormativity of society inhibited the development of queer activism. Queers found motivation behind their activism from living of a life of struggle. They wanted to be represented not only in the political sense, but also in American culture. Cohen references Michael Warner who notes that the real push for rights from queers was the lack of acknowledgement from society. Their concerns were not recognized by the dominant group of society, those being white heterosexuals, and are therefore either forced to pretend to be straight or be stigmatized for their sexual orientation. This difference in power between the heterosexuals and “other sexes” demonstrates the disparity between the two, which influences what is considered the norm in society. Queers not only wanted to fight for the right to do what they pleased within their own homes, but more importantly, for the right of freedom for all; including sexuality, marriage, identity, etc. This is how the foundation of queer politics started, as a response towards the freedoms that were not given to them by the dominant heterosexual group.

Another reason behind the inhibition of queer politics is that individuals in the group suffer from multiple oppressions due to different identities they hold. These identities come from an individual’s; race, socioeconomic class, and gender. In the case of Cohen, she was a black lesbian feminist, which meant that she suffered oppressions from being African American, a woman, and a lesbian. By having multiple sufferings, it can create inconsistency to which identity to prioritize for an individual. However, this multi-struggle can lead to a combination of efforts to solve issues throughout many dimensions of the world. This becomes beneficial because recognizing multiple struggles creates a joint force to take down a greater power. Essentially, the multiple systems of oppressions unite the people to fight against the institutionalized categories created by the dominant group.

According to Collins, the “outsider within” status of Black women allowed for a unique perspective in society, as they were considered outsiders by the white families they worked for, but had an “insider” perspective as well from working this domestic occupation. This stems from discrimination based on race and gender, with Black women being on the low ends of both, in which these women were not seen as family even though they provided services such as taking care of the children and doing household work. They would even be outright ignored when they were in the room. This allowed them to see oppression on both sides, from the standpoint of the oppressors and as being the victims, revealing the truth about the discrimination.

Collins discussed three aspects concerning the significance of the “outsiders” within perspective that contributed to Black feminist thought. The first theme was that Black women had to create their own definition and validate themselves to strengthen their standing in society. This approach is a response to societal stereotypes that control, dehumanize and exploit the Black woman. By creating a self-definition and self-validation of themselves, it will create a sense of unity and help them reject the internalized oppression from society. The second theme Collins discussed was the understanding and acknowledgement of the oppression stemmed from race, gender and class. The unique experience of oppression face from Black women are different than those from Black men and white women because they face simultaneous discrimination from race and gender, as well as class if they are of the low socioeconomic status, which was typical for Black women. This multitude of oppression allowed them to recognize the struggles from all aspects and realize the importance of fighting against it. The final theme Collins discussed was the importance of Black women’s culture. In order to overcome the oppression, Black women have to know the history of their unique experience. By using this as a foundation, they can teach future generations about their experiences and help strengthen the conceptual ideas of black feminism.

Peterson and Parisi believed that heterosexism is a more precise way of analyzing the relationship of gender difference and human rights as it recognizes the exclusion and oppression of women in the discussions of human rights. Under heterosexist thinking, human rights are actually men’s rights as it stems from historical ideology of the heterosexual male being the universal standard, while women and other sexual minorities being subordinate to them and excluded in the rights. This creates a gender inequality that is institutionalized in society’s thinking, with males being associated with dominance and females being subordinate in comparison. This inequality can be observed throughout society such as in the family/household and in the state system. In the household, the gender differences are apparent as the males were considered the breadwinners of the family, while the females were considered subservient, creating a gender hierarchy. In the state system, the gender hierarchy is also influential concerning the status of women in relation to the state, as the state favors the men’s interest over the women’s.

Peterson and Parisi explain the exclusion of women’s rights in three categories. In the first category, women are excluded from civil and political rights, essentially their human rights. By denying women these rights, the state has made them vulnerable to the actions of males such as rape, abuse, and murder. In the second category, the exclusion of these rights concern women’s economic, social and cultural rights. The work that women do were considered “reproductive” rather than “productive,” which made their work invisible in society’s eyes, allowing for exploitation and harassment. The devaluation of women continues to support the subordination of women and the denial of their rights. In the last category, Peterson and Parisi explains the influence of the gender hierarchy in regards to group/collective rights. The subordination of women creates an environment that stunts the self-determination of women, which discourages women from expressing their concerns and interests. Heterosexism, in regard to women’s rights, establishes that there are gender differences between men and women, and that these differences influence what rights you are able to have in society.

In “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence,” Rich describes heterosexuality as being institutionalized due to the oppression of women through their sexuality. This oppression stems from what Rich calls compulsory heterosexuality, which denies women the choice of choosing their significant other, only giving them the default option of being with a man. In Barry’s theory, this concept is rooted from the social norm that accepts the “uncontrollable” male sex drive during adolescence, which gives the excuse that males cannot control their sexual urges and that both men and women should just accept it as human nature. However, in the woman’s case, they are apparently dependent on the man, which gave way to the misconception of lesbianism being nonexistent is society’s perspective. The acceptance of compulsory heterosexuality evolved into male assertion of their heterosexuality onto women or denying them their own sexuality, which was expressed in a number of ways such as through rape, incest, prostitution, etc.

By imposing their sexuality and denying women their freedom of sexuality, the men are creating a society that controls and exploits women, which institutionalizes the concept of female sexual slavery. This concept connects the relationship between situations that victimizes women and making them feel responsible for being in that situation, trapping them in this endless cycle of being oppressed by men. An example of this institutionalization is in the work environment, where women are sexualized and sexually discriminated in the work force. First, they are given low wage positions such as being someone’s secretary or waitress, this being an example of being sexually discriminated. Second, they are prone to be victims of sexual harassment by those in higher positions such as a customer or their boss, and they surrender to it as they fear to lose their job, which further reinforces the idea of compulsory heterosexuality in society.

The institutionalization of this heterosexuality limits the potential of feminist thought as it subjugates women to a male egocentric society. It places them in a society in which they believe that heterosexuality with a male is the only acceptable relations a woman could have, which has limited  thoughts such as lesbian relations and the lesbian experience as Rich has  discusses in this work.

In Rubin’s work, she discussed six distinct thoughts of sex that were perceived by western culture. One of the most significant assumptions was the concept of sexual essentialism. The idea behind this concept was that sex was believed to be unchanging, primarily biological in a sense that it was just a natural urge. It denounces the belief that sexual behavior can be influenced by outside forces, such as social influences, other than sex being used to procreate. This led to the rise of sexual negativity, which viewed sex as a harmful and sinful behavior if done outside of marriage or done for the pleasure of it. Another significant assumption that Rubin presented was the idea of a hierarchical system of sexual values. This system ranked sexual acts based on the normalcy of the act in society’s standards. At the highest of the system, being labeled as the most normal kind of sexual act, is the monogamous heterosexual couple. Other sexual behaviors, such as masturbation and monogamous gay/lesbian relationships were at the lower part of the system. At the bottom of this hierarchy, behaviors deemed as out of the norm and were looked down upon were transsexuals, prostitutes, fetishists, etc.

The various assumptions in this work represented how closeminded society is in regards to the topic of sex. Any type of sexual behavior, besides from being in a monogamous heterosexual relationship, is deemed as sinful and therefore creates a stigma for any behaviors other than the “normal” kind. This becomes more of an issue when the stigma is then turned into acts of hate and violence within society, which had been afflicted toward the gay community during the mid-1900s, in which they were attacked and arrested for their sexual behavior. The lack of understanding for the different sexual behaviors creates an imagined fear within society that people feel that they need to “correct” simply because they do not understand.

According to Kessler’s essay, the factors that impact the medical condition of intersex are; the advancements in medicinal analysis and technology (physical factors) and the concept of gender identity (societal factors). These factors are rooted in the concept of being that there are only two possible genders, either male or female. The intersex gender is considered not “natural” in the eyes of society, so therefore when a child is determined to be intersex, the “real” sex of the baby has to discover/reconstructed to fit into one of the two “natural” genders.

The advancements in the medical field allow doctors to control the gender of the baby if he/she has an unclear gender/ambiguous genitalia. Various methods can be applied to determine the sex of the child on the chromosomal level, allowing for guidance in shaping the gender of the child. Further procedures are applied such as genital surgery and growth hormone treatments which are used to directly change the gender of the child. An example of this is if a child has a micropenis, in which a doctor would recommend to the parents to change the gender of the child to a female by having genital surgery, changing the micropenis into a uterus.

As for the concept of gender identity, there is a bias of how gender is defined. As previously mentioned, there are only two options that is “acceptable”, either being male or female. This way of thinking influences the perception of viewing intersex as a condition that needs to be corrected immediately, so that the child may live a “normal” life. When a case involving an intersex child occurs, doctors and parents might have a hard time dealing with it as it is out of the norm in society, which might lead to negative opinions about the situation. An example of this in Kessler’s work is a situation in which parents have an intersex child, they would tell others that they had twins when the gender of the child was not determined, and when it was assigned, the parents would say that one of the twins died. Rather than saying they had an intersex child, the parents lied which shows the stigma associated with intersex children.

To conclude, Kessler’s work involved various situations and issues that involved the theory of gender identity and how it affects parents and doctors alike. As technology advances, so does the method of determining and assigning gender, which reinforces the concept of intersex being a condition that needs to be “fixed.”