Mulan

When I think of Disney Princesses, what I usually imagine are ball room gowns and prince charming. And all of the princesses always have a happy ending, but the only (lately added) Disney princess that was far off from any other of the princesses was Mulan. Mulan breaks a lot of gender stereotypes, in the beginning of the movie, Mulan had to go and present herself as a "woman" in China. She wore a kimono and lots of make-up so she could get judged, she was supposed to be seen as perfect, with no flaws. When Mulan found out that her crippled father was getting drafted into the army, she decided that she was going to go in for him, and cut off her hair and wore his suit of armor. When Mulan starts training, she gets criticized on everything she does, until her army see The Huns coming down a mountain. When her army tried to attack, they launched missles, but they were not doing any damage to the other army. The Mulan had a bright idea to launch a missle upwards on fire and break the side of the mountain causing an avalanche.

I see a lot of stereotypes breaking just in the first half of the movie, Mulan was supposed to be percieved as the "girly girl" type and be perfect and beautiful. She broke this stereotype by cutting off all of her hair and going into the army just for the love of her dad. When she gets into training, Mulan is the reason why the majority of the Huns died, there is another stereotype that broke. Women are percieved to be more quiet, reserved, and are known to keep their opinions to themselves. Men are "supposed" to be the one's that are smart, creative, and quick on their feet. The fact that Mulan was the only one out of a group of men to come up with the idea on how to kill the Huns is definitely a breaking of her gender stereotype.

Later on the army finds out that Mulan is a female when she has to get seen by a doctor, abd she gets kicked out of the army. Later on, The Huns come back to kill the emperor, and Mulan herself goes after the the leader. Eventually the leader dies and the emperor gives Mulan his sword and a medallion so she could bring honor back to her family, and he ends up bowing to her.

Mulan breaks her gender "roles" throughout the whole movie, she was definitely not like every other Disney Princess, she never seeked a prince charming or went to balls or anything of that sort, she fought hard for her family with other men and broke every stereotype in the book while doing it. While Mulan does have a happy ending in the end, and ends up with the man she desired, she worked hard for his love and it was not the typical "love at first sight" things like all of the other princesses.

Compelling Works

After listening to my class mates present their novels, the majority of the books I did want to read. I don't think I had read any of the books that were presented, excluding a few that I know about, but there was one book that stood out to me in particular and that was Amber's presentation of Orlando by Virginia Woolfe. Even before we read The Hours in class I have always wanted to read any of Virginia Woolfe's writing. I've heard a lot about her and her writing and I did initially feel compelled to read at least one of her novels knowing that she was not only a fantastic writer, but a feminist writer as well. Feminism is something that interests me, excluding the fact that women's studies is one of my majors, but I have always loved feminists just because me as a person, I can appreciate women and love women for the hardship they over came and are still dealing with today. Women really have dealt with a lot of hard ship throughout the years and it's sad that some women are still living in the "traditional" way where they live to serve their husband. It may seem like a lot of things have changed, but in reality, a lot hasn't. Women's rights is still a big issue to me, women don't seem as important to our society, especially when it comes down to important issues and roles such as politics and jobs. There are still some companies today that will pay men more than they pay men, and it is just not right. Women's rights is still a huge on-going issue and it makes me appreciate women and also people who write about women, including feminist writers. I don't look at myself as a feminist, I love anything to do with women, the study of them, and how they made us who we are and where we are at today. But I wouldn't put myself in the "category" of feminists.

I haven't read any of Virginia Woolfe's work, not yet anyways, but I do soon hope too and Amber's presentation made me want to read her novels ten times more than I used to want to. Virginia's writing also came up when we were reading the novel The Hours in class and they talked about her novel Mrs. Dalloway. Reading a book that talks about a character reading a novel by Virginia Woolfe and being compelled by it also made me want to read one of her novels. I know that the way that she writes is something that would pertain to my taste. I know that her novels were not accepted by all when she was alive and writing, but now it seems that she is known as a great author and I cannot wait to read her work. After seeing Amber's presentation, it really showed me that I need to stop procrastinating and read one of her novel's, because she just seems to of an amazing of an author to pass up.

Gender Differences.

Females and males are brought up differently. Males are more prone to more "manly" toys such as G.I. Joes and Tonka trucks while females are more prone to barbie dolls and fake earrings. I didn't agree with Restak's essay. He talked about how statistics have shown that females appear to be more intelligent that males do as they are growing up. I really don't think it is a sex thing, it must be more of how girls are raised to be and what they are exposed too. He also said "Usually such differences are explained on a cultural basis. Boys are expected to be more aggressive and play rough games, while girls are presumably encouraged to be gentle, nonassertive and passive. After several years of exposure to such expectations, the theory goes, both men and women wind up with widely varying behavioral and intellectual repertoires."

I don't really agree with this stereotype, I don't think all girls are "expected" so seen to be gentle or nonassertive. While I was growing up, I was a tomboy, my whole family thought I was going to turn out as a tomboy when throughout adolescence as well because they could never see me being a "girl." I played with the boys and played like boys are expected to be, and my family and friends accepted me like that. While I got older, I did turn out to be more feminine but the pressure of being feminine was never put on me. Girls all over the world are or were tomboys growing up, and it is accepted by society, so I don't really believe that girls are expected to be nurturing and passive.

Another thing that I did not agree with was when he stated, "Girls can also sing in tune at an earlier age." I'm not sure if this is statistically proven, but in my opinion I don't think it's correct. I think that being to do things like sing, play the guitar, paint, or write are all hereditary. They may not be, but the chances are that if two parents have to talent to sing well, then the chance that their child will be able to sing good are very high. Same goes with painting, playing instruments, etc. Of course it's not always like that, some times children are born with talents that their parents never had, or vice versa, but I believe parents' being able to sing plays more into whether or not there child can sing than their gender.

Overall I did not agree with a lot of what Restak wrote about, whether it be scientifically proven or not. I don't think that females are born with a better voice or muscles in their throat than males and I don't think all girls are "expected" to be girly girls when their younger. It all could be just stereotypes that we have in America, and while some may be true, to me, a lot of it is false in my opinion, but that's just me.

Role Models

The media has recently started to get more graphic, sexually and/or non sexually, than it used to. With better technology, now things such as video games, music, and movies are progressing, but in a negative way to kids. Now there a lot of video games that we have that include shooting, killing, zombies, stabbing, blood, and all in all violence, and sometimes sexual material. But, is it really the game designer’s job to make their games appropriate for children? Every video game has an age range on it, having players know what they have in store for them. if it is graphic with violence and usually sexually explicit, it is usually 17 and up. With little violence and usually not sexually explicit, it is usually 14 and up. Anything else with no violence or graphics will be all ages. So the games are in categories for what age would be appropriate for children, the same goes for music as well, even though music may not be rated like video games are, some cd's that have extreme cursing will have a caution label on it. So really, I believe that it is the parent’s responsibility to control what their kids see and hear.

Why would it be the video game designer’s responsibility to make their games appropriate for children? They're just doing their job, and the product that their trying to sell isn't even for kids, it's for adults. Same goes to artists and music videos, not everything can be kid friendly, and then it would be a kid’s world and nothing for adult or teenagers. It is the parent's responsibility to watch what their kids see and play, if they think a video game is too violent then they do not have to buy it, as simple and as easy as that. But what is crossing the line? Even though some games are in the 17+ category, are those video games portraying positivity to young adults? For example, the game “Call of Duty” is a video game for the console “X-box” and is one of the best selling games in the world. The purpose of the game is to shoot people, and people think this game is fun. A game with no purpose other than to shoot people is not putting out a good influence on people.
The games that kids have which would be rated all ages aren’t all appropriate either, for example the racing games. The racing games are usually for kids and portray competiveness which children should not be learning at a small age. Yet, the majority of them require logic and creativity, which is a plus for kids to be learning at their age. All in all, it is the parents responsibility to watch what their kids watch and play. If they have their kids watch appropriate music videos and video games then there is not a problem, the other games that show violence can be played at a later age, when it is more appropriate.

You get what you want, you want what you get.

I really do not watch too much of the media, I am aware of what is going on in the world, but I don't watch the news or anything of that sort. Sometimes I feel like the news exposes events that are happening that are not really of that much interest to me. I watched the news one morning and for the first 15 minutes I was watching it, all I got out of it was how Kim Kardashian came out with a new work out video and Lindsay Lohan is going back to rehab for the 100th time. Yeah, not too interested in that. I feel as if the media has a huge negative impact on society, mostly due to the fact that the news only portrays negative information. I feel as if, the reason why the news puts out negative information is because it makes people feel better about themselves. When people are watching negative information, such as kidnapping, drugs, or rape, it makes them feel better because it’s not happening to them. I feel like that’s where the saying “I never thought this would happen to me” comes in. If the news only put out positive information, like winning the lottery, cancer survivors, or the people in Chili surviving being underground for 90 days (true story). Then it would make them feel worse about themselves, “why couldn’t that happen to me?” or “how did they get so lucky?” I think that’s the main reason why negative information is put out.
During the elections a few weeks ago, “negative campaigning” was happening. Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown were not focusing on themselves and the positivity they could bring to their country, but more of the bad things that they could show about each other. At a women’s convention, Matt Laure asked Whitman and Brown if they could stop bashing each other and focus more on themselves. Brown stated that he would be up to stop if Whitman did, but Meg Whitman stated that “she would not stop because she needs to expose what a bad man Jerry Brown was.” The media and news are all negativity, and if that is all that we’re exposed to, then that’s going to have a toll on how we live OUR lives and affect the decisions that we make.
There are three main news channels that go on at night. The three people that host the shows are Katie Couric, Brian Williams, and Diane Sawyer. Statistics have shown that out of the three shows, the show that consistently gets t he most positive ratings is the one that Brian Williams hosts. Is there a coincidence that the show that gets the most ratings is hosted by a male? I don’t think it’s a coincidence, I feel that men get taken more seriously in the media than women do, and there are statistics to prove it. I think it has to do something with sexism, I’m not sure, one day I’ll do more research and find the facts, in the mean time, it will just be all my opinion.

Female or Male?

While reading Written on The Body, I was wondering what gender the narrator was throughout the whole novel. Initially, before reading the novel I already had my mind set on a female, the reason being because the class is about Gender, Image, and Rhetoric and we have been discussing a lot about homosexuality as well as intersexuality. So of course, going into the book I already have my mind set on that the narrator is a female just based off the class. Actually reading the novel, I wasn't exactly sure. The narrator has love affairs with plenty of females who are married, which I know happens a lot these days. Yet, like I discussed in my last blog, how many females would actually cheat on their husbands with other man...and then end up going back to their husband? I'm sure the main reason why females would even cheat on their spouse is due to their marriage is boring, they do the same rituals every day and they stop having sex. So most females cheat on their husbands with another male who can give them the satisfaction that they're husband can not. Now, I am not an expert in a situation like this because I have not been exposed to or had a first hand experience with something like this, but that is just based off my instincts. If a females will cheat on their husband with another man, they will most likely leave their husband for this man (if things get serious) based on the fact that they are no longer happy in their relationship, but like i said, I am not expert.

Now a married woman cheating on their husband with another females is a completely different story. I believe if a woman is going to cheat on their husband with another man (being previously bi sexual or not) they are more likely to do it just for the experience. Obviously the woman likes males, since they married one but the thrill of a different experience may cause them to cheat, especially if they meet another female that they are attracted to physically or non-physically. Yet in the end, of course, they go back to their married life for the experience they had was just an experience.

While reading the novel I was thinking about this just to try to figure out what gender the narrator actually was, I was leaning more towards the female throughout the first few pages but my thoughts were fully set on the narrator being a female when I reached about page 70. There is a part in the book when the narrator is talking about an ex-girlfriend and how insane she was. The narrator was stating that she was only able to see the girl during certain times of the day and that she bred rubber plants. She then stated the girl locked her out of the greenhouse and left the narrator in he/she's "mickey mouse one piece" at that point, i had my mind set. The narrator was a female...was she intended to be a female? I don't really know.

Gender&Identity.

In our culture there is a lot of confusion on gender and identity. In reference to the difference of a writer and writing, I belive that is something that can be mixed up often, even though I am now currently writing it does not make me a writer. Even though, I am a journalism major and would consider myself a writer, many people who are not pursuing writing careers would not be considered writers. Now the quote that Winterson said, "I am a writer who happens to love women. I am not a lesbian who happens to write." I loved this quote. I love anything to do with women, I love the study of women throughout history and the impacts they have made on society. I love the long way women have traveled from where we used to be, but i'm interested in women non-sexually, and people like me who love the study of women in general can be confused for lesbians or bi-sexual/curious, which is defiently not the case.

Women writers, like Winterson i'm sure would be confused as lesbians as well. It's human nature to read books like Written on the body and have you're own thoughts on what gender the narrator is. Me personally, I believe the narrator is a woman. I'm not trying to stereotype males at all, but from personal experience and being an outsider looking in on some situations, if a male has many sexual partners, he is not going to fall in love and have heartbreak like the narrator did. The narrator was not a believer in love, the first few pages could tell you that. He/she fell in
"love" with almost every female he/she had sex with (before Louise) and was heartbroken due to the fact that they always left the narrator for their husband. Females are more of seen as the "clingy" type, who fall for men who are just looking for a one night stand, just like the narrator. Yet I also thought, how many married women are really looking for affairs with other women? Does this go back to the whole lesbian or just loving women discussion? Say if the narrator really was female and the sexual partners she had were married to males, the women always returned to their husband. It could be that the wives were not lesbians, they just appreciated women and had an affair, but always returned back to their sex of choice, males.

If the narrator was a male, it would be different. I believe that if a married woman was to have an affair with another man, it would be because they see something in this man that they don't in their own husband, and they are more prone to leave their husband to their new lover. Yet for a married woman to have an affair with another woman, it would be more towards to experience something different, but in the end, they would go back to their regular lifestlye. It's something to think about when reading books like Winterson's. I do belive though that appreciating women and actually being a lesbian and/or gay are two completely different things, and maybe that's what Winterson what trying to prove in her novel without really knowing it...

The Hours

The Hours I believe is a celebration of life, suicide is mentioned a few times throughout the novel which is a very touchy subject, especially in our society. I think of it as a celebration of life because Laura Brown does not kill herself even though it is very clear that she is not happy with her life. Laura felt like she wasn’t an individual anymore, she was now known as her husband’s wife, something that she did not want to be known as. She feels irritated by her husband and her son, she feels irritated that she must have sex with him and make him breakfast in the morning. One of the reasons that she stays with him, is mostly due to the war. Her husband was in the war and when he came out of it, he chose Laura as the woman that he wanted to be with. I'm sure many people are struggling from thoughts of suicide, and to over-come it is a very good and relieving thing. In the end, Laura did not commit suicide; she had her books as an escape, and she ends up leaving her husband and her son, to escape away from the life that she so hated. Unfortunately, Virginia Woolf did commit suicide but clearly, dying was the only thing that could make her truly happy. Throughout her story, it was clear that Virginia was a little bit strange, she avoids things such as looking in the mirror to avoid her shadow, or to avoid speaking to people who will put her in a bad mood, as well as eating, all she wanted to do was write.

Though Virginia committed suicide, she stopped Laura Brown from committing suicide. With the end of one life, saves another. Her writing was so wonderful and beautiful that Laura used her writings to get away from the world that she hated and into another that she loved. Without Virginia’s book, I’m sure that Laura Brown would of committed suicide as well. Yet Laura had a small breaking point in which she realized that she did not want to be crazy like Virginia Woolf. Clarissa Vaughan didn’t have thoughts of suicide, but she witnessed suicide from her best friend, Richard. Throughout the novel Clarissa would see things that would remind her of her and Richard when they were young and lovers. Sadly, Richard is dying from AIDS and she is now living a life with another woman. She contemplates whether or not she chose the right life and wonders what her life would have been like if she was to be with Richard instead of Sally. Overall the book is fantastic and a great way to show how that sometimes life can be difficult and will get you down, but there’s always a way to bring your life back up, whether it be from a book written by a person who feels the same way or not, there is always a way to save a life.

Biblical References to Homosexuality

Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a male as he would a woman, both of them have created an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."
In the bible, it states that man and woman are to be together and it forbids homosexuality for the reason that God put man and woman on the earth together for a purpose, the purpose being to create life. Many people now a day’s still believe in this theory that man and woman are to be together. Churches still preach it and kids are still brought up to learn it. The majority of our society is Christians, if Christians are still preaching that homosexuality is wrong, and then the idea of homosexuality is still going to be thought of as wrong to the majority of the people in the world. In the bible it also states that god created sex for reproduction as well as pleasure, the pleasure was mostly for the man, it couldn't of really of done anything for a woman.

In my opinion, I think it's kind of ridiculous that the majority of our country is living by what a book says. I don't believe that there is someone out there that can tell a person what is right or what is wrong, or a book nevertheless. I think it's wrong that the bible states in writing that if you are a homosexual then you have created an abomination and will be punished of it. In Romans 24:27 it states that if you are a homosexual then you will never be let into heaven unless you beg God to forgive you of your sins, not doing so means you have to much pride, which is the deadliest of the seven deadly sins.

I don't think that Christianity itself is wrong, I think some of the thing that they preach may be wrong, but I have nothing against the religion. Though Christianity is the largest religion practiced in the United States, statistics show that soon Muslim will be the largest religion practiced, besides that, many new religions are developing as we speak. Including Atheism, Agnostic, as well as Scientology which big movies stars as starting to practice including Tom Cruise and Kirstie Alley. New religions bring new practices and new things to preach, so the same stories or ideas won’t be taught across the country, now parents have a choice on how they would want to bring their children up. They can either have them not believe in God, which would be Atheism, or be neutral on the religion debate, which would consider them Agnostic. Either way, my stand on Christianity stays, I believe it’s wrong to teach people not to be homosexual and threaten that if you are a homosexual that there is a chance that you will go to hell. I am very glad that new religions are starting to form, giving people a chance to actually practice a religion in which they think is right, instead of a religion that tells them what is right.

Gender Roles are Still Stricted..

I feel like the role of women can go different ways. Some people think the role to be the role of the housewife. To cook, clean, do laundry, and take care of the kids. These women are usually not outspoken, more timid and shy. These women listen and tend to their husband. Yet other roles of women (lately) are that women are loud and obnoxious. They like to argue and complain. They stand up for themselves and don't take disrespect. So in a way, gender roles for women have changed, but not in a good way.

I can see some restrictions for women, but not really too much. Women are now allowed to work, to buy homes, cars, or go to school. Women these days, (i've heard) are actually now making more than men do. Women can do anything a man can do, non-physically. Since the drawing, everything has changed for women. Like in my first paragraph, women are not in the little bubble like they used to be. The drawing was trying to say what would happen to women if they behaved outside of that bubble. That they would become poor and have to sell their bodies to make money. Now I feel like women don't really have a "role." Sure the media plays on the housewife making food for her kids and greeting her husband as he comes home from work but that's just TV, that's just the media trying to sell products..that's not real life. Excluding older people who have lived in the era in which women WERE to be the housewife, it really doesn't seem like anyone expects women to play that role. The role is now shared...with men.

The idea of women doing everything for men, and taking care of the house, and kids is an idea that is from an older era. The older people who now live in this generation still believe in this because they've grown up to live like that. Now in this generation, men are now sharing the responsibilities with their wife and teaching their children how to do laundry or do the dishes, regardless whether the child be male or female. Especially due to the fact that children learn from what they observe, seeing their father do the dishes would depict to the child that it is okay for males to do dishes, therefore that child grows up not thinking that women have "roles".

The only thing that can even possibly have males still think of these "roles" is of course, other males. Not all kids are brought up in the way that I just described and still thinks of boys that can play women's roles as "gay" or any word of that sort, and it is still extremely hurtful to see words like that thrown around or for kids to be taunted, but the upside is that we are progressing slowly but surely and hopefully one day all kids will grow up to be open-minded and these "gender roles" will no longer be a topic up for discussion.

Jane Eyre

In the book Jane Eyre there are lots of situations in which gender roles are challenged. Back when the book was written, Men were the superiority and women did as they were told. One of the most significant scenes that challenged gender roles in Jane Eyre is in the beginning when Jane stood up for herself against her cousin John. John was always abusing Jane, and it was a normal thing back then, and Jane, being a woman, was to not of done anything about it. One day though when John was taunting her again, Jane fought back for once, and of course John ran to his aunt to tell on her. Jane was then sentenced to the "red room" and while she was getting carried into the room, she resisted the whole way. Once Jane was in the red room she realized she was in the room in which her uncle died. She then imagined she saw the ghost of her uncle, causing her to make a temper tantrum. Jane having the temper tantrum i believe would of challenged gender roles back then, but not today. In our current generation, most people believe that women have "temper tantrums" all the time, yet back then, I believe that women were just to do as they were told with no resistance.

Before Jane left to go to Lowood school, she told her aunt what she really thought of her, she told her how wicked and evil it was of her to lock her in the red room and of how she knew that John was abusing her yet she never did anything about it. Already in the first few chapters, Jane was challenging her gender role. It gave the reader a sense of what kind of person Jane was, which I believe carries on throughout the novel. It was known back then that it was okay for men to hit women, women usually knew their place and knew that they could not do anything about it. Jane pushing John Reed was a very brave and courageous thing to do, especially for a 10 year old girl. When Jane told her aunt what she truly thought about her, it was also very brave as well. Even now in the generation that we currently are living in, it is still very hard for some people to stand up for themselves and tell someone how they feel, or to tell them about how wrong they have treated them (more relevant to kids and parents).

So knowing how difficult it would be to be place into situations in which Jane experienced and actually doing something about it, Jane most definitely challenged her gender roles against males and authority. This book is a good insight into how women were treated back then and hopefully made an impact for women to know their rights and to stand up for themselves and what they believe in for situations that happened in the book, i'm sure is still happening today.

Intersexuality

Does an intersexuality need treatment? Based off of the video, Multiple Genders: Mind and Body in Conflict, some people do think that it does. Personally, I don't think that it does, people should not be forced to be placed into a category. In the video, one male liked to dress up as a female, but he stated he was married and did not want to have the sex change surgery. When people have their mind set on something, especially something as huge as dressing up as a female or vice versa, or even going as far as actually changing sexes, there would be no treatment in the world that would change their mind. Why would we want to change their mind anyways? Like I stated in my last blog, why are we so concerned with everyone else's life, and care so much about what other people do, when really, why? I think we should just all mind our own business and worry about what we do.

But really, what kind of treatment would be given to someone who is struggling with intersexuality? Really the only treatment that I can think of is brainwashing. To tell someone that something is wrong with them because they feel misplaced in their own body, or how wrong it is to be with someone of the same sex, and that man and woman are meant to be together. It's all brainwashing and so untrue. No it's not wrong to feel misplaced in your own body, you really can't help what you feel inside and no matter how hard you try you can never change the way you feel. Also it is not wrong to be with someone of the same sex, it's really like, who are we to tell someone who they can and cannot love? It's not our place to tell people what is morally correct and incorrect. The whole "man and woman should be together" is usually stated after "the bible says" Personally, i wouldn't live my life based off what a book tells me to, but most people are different.

In the video the arguments were usually just about what is morally correct, and that it is better for your children for you to stay your actual sex. My perspective on children with gay parents, is that if children truly love their parents, then their love should be unconditional. It doesn't matter what society thinks of you, that shouldn't have an effect on how you love someone. Heterosexual parents are no different that inter-sex parents or homosexual parents or anything else. Love isn't intertwined with gender, love is something completely different, and if people are looked down upon for truly loving somebody (significant other, kids, etc)...it is just wrong on so many different levels.

The only thing that I see that could be a problem with inter-sex couples is reproducing, biologically, man and woman are supposed to be together (just based off of reproducing) but other than that I don't see a problem whatsoever. Inter-sex couples have found their way of truly finding love and making a family (adoption etc) and for that we should support and be happy about that.

Multiple Genders

I decided to do my blog on the debate at the end of the Multiple Genders video. David Holloway was a pastor, and a strong believer in God. His response for everything was "well the bible states this" or "the bible states that." I'm sorry but the bible does not need to control our lives. It's a great thing to be religious, I don't have anything against that, but when you live your whole life by the way that the bible tells you to, then I see a problem. I don't think there is anything wrong whatsoever with multiple genders. Though I have not experienced anything near that, I can understand that some people just don't feel like their placed in the right body. People can't help that they feel that way, just like I can't help, as a female, that I am physically attracted to males. I was just born that way. I think David Holloway was very very closed-minded and extremely ignorant. I was shocked on his comment on "making healthy bodies deformed," who would say something like that? Especially when that couple (who was thinking about making a baby), was sitting right in front of him! They were probably feeling extremely hurt and offended. I mean, why does it even matter what OTHER people do with their lives? If you don't agree with how someone is or what they do then you don't agree. I don't see why we are so concerned with what other people do. Shouldn't we focus more on more important issues like starving kids in Africa? Or the war going on in Iraq? That's what really matters, isn't it?

I liked the comment when (I believe it was Stephen Wittle) he talked about how plastic surgery is accepted but multiple genders is not. It's funny because it's so true! People can go out and have plastic surgery and change the way the look, because they DON'T LIKE THE WAY THE LOOK, and it is accepted by society. The reason why a multiple gendered person wants to change sexes is for the same reason, they don't like the way they look. So they get plastic surgery, just like heterosexuals, to change the way they look. But of course, even though it is the same procedure, the person who is changing sexes is looked down upon by society while the person who is getting nose jobs and breast implants is accepted.

It makes me sad that people can't be who they truly are and who they want to be. Like I stated before, I've never experienced anything near feeling misplaced in my body but I can sympathize for those who do. Hopefully one day though we will accept people for whom they are and focus on more important issues. With our progression, hopefully it won’t be much longer. The people who are multiple gendered or homosexual just need to keep staying strong, like they’ve been doing their whole life and just wait for our world to change.

Social Construction of Gender

Like Lorber stated in her essay, I have always known that sex and gender were not the same thing. Our whole life we are put into one category in whether we are a "man" or a "woman." What exactly does it mean to be a man anyways? Besides genitalia, men are perceived to be strong and hard working. Yet when a woman decides to convert to a man, and displays the same characteristics of a strong, hard working man...she is looked down upon by society. Lorber was on the subway and she saw a man with a baby that "looked" like a boy, and then realized that it was a girl when she saw the earrings and the flower sneakers. How is it that she knew it was a girl when she saw the earrings, are boys not allowed to wear earrings? Or is that too feminine for them.

She also spoke on how people “applaud men silently” when they see them taking care of their child. Like we should be so proud of the man for doing something he’s supposed to be doing. Why is the hard work and care all in a woman’s hands? When we see women walking down the street with a baby stroller, it’s just like another person walking down the street. Oh but when a man walks down the street with his child, we should all applaud him silently. It’s hard to believe we’re in 2010 and it’s still a shock to people that men are actually taking care of THEIR child. In a perfect world all parents would raise their kids androgynous, yet judging by our society and the media; it wouldn't take too long for that kid to convert right into their category of being feminine or masculine. Lorber was talking about her son attending a nonsexist school where they had unisex bathrooms. Yet when she went to her sons play, the boys were not wearing make-up while the girls were. Little did she know that it was her son who influenced the other boys not to wear make-up.

I loved the part about the berdaches, hijras, and xaniths. The “manly-hearted woman” and “male woman.” We are known to be the most desirable country in the world yet we can’t even accept a man wanting to be a woman or vice versa. We have progressed so much throughout the years from women’s rights to equality and unity. Yet we would rather have people be something they are not just because it’s “normal” than to accept them for who they truly are and who they want to be. In Chinese societies, they used to bound their daughters feet so their feet would stop growing. It “attracted males” or the women in Africa did female circumcision so they would be more desirable to men and ensure their marriageability. It’s funny how the man is the ultimate prize and women have to go through pain and alter the way we look just to be desirable to men. Although in our society we may not go to that extent, some are still victims of it (i.e. plastic surgery). I do agree with what Lorber said and I do expect that coming out of this class to be more knowledgeable about gender and identity and I would hope that it would alter and change a lot of the oblivion to our society and gender that we are so unaware of everyday.