Curious- Patrick Campbell- April 28th

Patrick Campbell

Cynthia Enloe’s piece “Being Curious about Our Lack of Feminist Curiosity,” displays her rationale for the reasoning of why women have shown little feminist curiosity. Enloe goes on to inform the reader that such explanatory variables regarding this lack of curiosity, include laziness, lack of motivation, distractions involving other focuses in life, etc. She also explains how cultural and “traditional” practices deter women from engaging in this curiosity. I personally believe her piece which displays her own experiences of laziness makes her argument much stronger. This enables the female readers to relate or kind of believe that her theory is sound. She offers up to the reader some possible solutions to this laziness, which I believe many of the past authors we have read did not propose enough of. Following her argument she attempts to shed light on the way women should try to explore all forms of patriarchy and seek change.

In our other reading from Enloe “The Surprised Feminist,” she begins her chapter stating that, “Predicting nevr had been my professional vocation,” which I perceive as a weak way to start a novel. However, when I continued reading I began to see how she strongly presents her book. As always, I have a few objections, but they are not large enough to be discussed in this post. Her take on the “Nike Indonesian women sneaker-factory workers,” brought me back to the lessons of a month ago in class. However, showing these hard working women in-a-way takes away the power and legitiamacy of her other chapter, “Being Curious about Our Lack of Feminist Curiosity.” Enloe argument moves in the direction which depicts her biased opinion on the matter as well.

Instigating social change

All three readings for today celebrates women's activism in the world and presents only a small portion of the women's role in instigating social change.  I felt the three authors joined hands together in activism, be it political, social or religious. I got a sense that their desire to become social activist was mainly sparked by a sort of almost life changing incident during their lives - a friend's comment, their upbringing, or the classes they took in college.

Atenello's "Leading Outside of One's Community" presented some of the more striking ideas to me, mainly because I grew up Honduras and was in touch with the realities of Latina women, like the ones Atenello organized and led. I empathized the internal conflicts she experienced at some point during her activist role in Unidad de New Brunswick. Her interactions with the Latino women reminded me of my first semester at Colgate when I decided to volunteer for the Mohawk Valley Latino Association, an organization that celebrates hispanic heritage. Their mission is to educate community members and immigrate, and to improve their lives conditions. I signed up for this program mainly because I closely identified myself with the community in terms of race and language. Would I have done it otherwise if I didn't speak Spanish or grew up in Honduras? I would like to believe I would have done so, despite the differences I would encounter. I loath the fact that Atenello suggested that she couldn't play a leadership among these women because she did not identify herself with them at any level: race, language, ethnicity, class status or education. She said, "I have no shared experiences to connect me to those needs, I was unfit to serve as a leader." To support her argument she explained, "I was reproducing exploitative power structures by acting as a white, educated authority speaking for a minority group." For some reason, I get the feeling that she wouldn't have said the same thing had she been presented with the actual agenda she thought she was going to get:  Be the leader of Unidad de New Brunswick in order to combat rape and address Latina women's lack of resources...food for thought indeed. 

News Flash: New Definition of Rape

One of the most disturbing experiences that any human being could encounter is rape. According to Dictionary.com, rape is defined as the unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse. Essentially this means the act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person. What is interesting about this definition is that it implies that women are always the victims and cannot rape men. Most people in society agree with the general definition and that rape is unacceptable but problems arise when the woman becomes pregnant as a rape victim. Many would think that out of all cases, the only acceptable time to have an abortion would be when it comes to rape or if the mother’s health was in jeopardy. Without a question, the mother should be able to have a choice in these situations if she would like to have her baby. In most instances this has been the case, but recently Republicans are looking to make this change in order to save a few bucks. The government has been able to manipulate the definition of rape so that the only rape that Medicaid would cover would be “forcible rape” indicating that statutory rape or “date rape” would not count. Due to the new definition of rape one can argue that this new law will prevent many women from being able to have an abortion.
A newspaper article in “The BG News” titled New Definition of rape to limit women’s access to abortion by columnist Kate Noftsinger that was written this past February does a good job explaining the new definition of rape that the government is trying to implicate. Essentially, the government is basically re-defining the words of something that was originally self-explanatory. According to data collected in 2007, nearly 12.6 million women (approx 61.6 percent) of adult female Medicaid enrolees were of the childbearing age. Looking at this number, none of these women have legal rights to have an abortion unless they are able to pay for the procedure out of their own pocket. This means that Medicaid does not pay for any sort of abortion. The legislative branch believed that this was too harsh and that Medicaid can still be used for abortion when it comes to rape, incest or to save the mother’s life. To any civilized person, this would seem more than reasonable. The article argues though that if you are a woman that is dependent on the government, you do not have the right to choose unless you are a victim of a crime or if the baby is causing harm to your own health. The bigger issue here is the fact that statutory rape would not be covered and that for incest victims, coverage would only be provided to those who were under the age of 18 years old. What does this imply? That since the victim is over 18 it is not considered bad because they might get pleasure out of it? This sounds ridiculous because incest is incest. Why is age a factor here? But then you begin to realize their main motive. Money. People who are over the age of 18 years old have a greater chance of earning enough money to pay for an abortion on their own if needed. Thus, less need to spend taxpayers money on abortion. Due to these changes, many women that are on government help may not be able to have an abortion.
The wording of the new definition of rape is tricky to evaluate because there is no set in stone way of determining if a certain rape instance applies or meets the new criteria. How is “forcible rape” determined? If you asked a person on the street what rape was, probability suggests most would agree with the dictionary definition that rape is the act of having sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person. Others would agree that statutory rape is definitely considered rape and should be a part of the abortion act. This is very disturbing and many people that are pro-abortion and pro-choice are not impressed with statutory rape being removed from Medicaid. Personally, removing this type of rape from the abortion act boggles my mind because the victim is not even fully conscious of the event. The victim has been drugged with some illegal substance and has been taken advantage of, and in the end if she becomes pregnant it’s her responsibility to either pay for the abortion, have and raise the baby, or put it up for adoption. The article argues that since the definition is so problematic and if this term is allowed to impact legislation, than only a fourth of these rape crimes would qualify to receive proper legal and medical attention. Noftsinger argues that this is unjust and that every victim deserves to be handled with care.
An interesting statistic found by the National Center for Victims of Crime, suggests that 77% of all rapes are acquaintance rapes indicating that women are mostly being raped by people that they know. Also, the article further indicates that these rapes are hardly ever reported to the police. This idea is very scary and makes women always alert. Susan Brownmiller in Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape states that women are trained to be rape victims and that unless we watch our steps it might become our destiny (EFR, 313). Ironically, Brownmiller argues that there is no such thing as forcible rape. She believes that due to the notion that men rape in the name of their masculinity, they believe that women also want rape done in the name of their femininity (EFR, 314). This idea suggests that no women can be raped against her will implying that there is no such thing as forcible rape. Thus, if there is no such thing as forcible rape then the new definition of rape would not be valid. In the end, in order for women to be able to make changes they have to stand up for their own rights. In 1971, a group of 343 French women announced publicly that they all have had an abortion and that they demand the right to free abortions for every woman (EFR, 357). In order for the new definition to be changed, women need to protest like those in 1971 so that those in power do not take away anymore of our rights.


The BG News Article:

http://bgnews.com/wire/new-definition-of-rape-to-limit-womens-access-to-abortion/

Hatred & Stereotypes after 9/11

After reading the articles and readings for today’s class it really made me wonder how I would feel if I was an Arab, South Asian, or Muslim American and experience the increase of hatred that has risen since 9/11 towards this race. I feel that a lot of white Americans take their freedom for granted and do not understand or realize some of the social and cultural pains that some immigrants face. It blew my mind when Ibrahim wanted to interview five young Iraqis and believed that this process was not going to be an issue. She soon found out that because she is now an American most people viewed her as an outsider and not an “authentic” Iraqi. The reason why these candidates were hesitant to participate was because they did not understand Ibrahim’s motivation for conducting these interviews and they felt that their safety could be jeopardized. Being an international student myself, even though I am only from Canada, I could not even image how it would feel to go back to your homeland and be rejected by people of your own kind and nationality let alone how it would feel to be rejected by people of other nationalities. It frustrates me that after 9/11 there has become this norm and racial stereotype towards Arabs. It is outrageous how Ibrahim was held in customs for six hours and asked questions about things such as her thoughts or view of the Iraq war. What does this have to do with customs? Personally, this is disturbing especially because she considers herself an American, and that her home is in New Jersey not in a foreign country.

Women and military

The article depicts the peculiar hardships women have to go through at war. Having read the report, it seems to me like women couldn’t spend a day on base without being propositioned by some men or provoked with sexual remarks, causing endless distress. All complaints were useless because they fell on deaf ears. Is this the inevitable consequence of training young men and women to be as aggressive as possible and putting them together in close quarters under stressful circumstances? Does this mean the military is a reflection of our society, where the best and worst is brought out in men? I dare not assume that this is the case. However, I do agree with one particular comment in the article: Women serving in the military isn't the problem (and neither are homosexuals who serve). The problem is adults who can't take responsibility for their poor behavior. To a certain degree, the military is a reflection of society. Afterall, the military is a gathering a civilians, people that come from a civilian life and are as apt to sexually assault or harass someone. Yet, for some reason I am not willing to buy this story entirely. It is hard for me to think that this military command, an institution of high integrity, would tolerate sexual assault or sexual harassment. Are we unfairly besmirching the military? Of particular interest is the case of CPT White. She is a Captain who reported being harassed by a Warrant Officer. Although I have no doubt that women like her can  be a subject of sexual assault in the military, there is also a possibility that women recognize and use their sexuality to move to higher ranks.  Yet, this side of the story is not frequently heard of either.

Men In Militias, Women as Victims

In Chapter 8 of “The Curious Feminist” we see that soldier’s sexuality is determined by their uncontrollable drives and that ultimately if their sex drives are not met their fighting effectiveness becomes jeopardized. One can argue that this idea supports why the commander of Borislav Herak unit ordered his soldiers to rape and murder women. At first It really amazed me how this semi normal person who basically just had an interest in looking at pornography and no passion towards politics or his country end up in the militia. The dialogue of Borislav Herak in chapter 7 along with the statistic that during the 1991-93 war in Yugoslavia between three thousand and thirty thousand women were raped by male combatants blew my mind away. In the interview Borislav reveals that he committed 16 cases of sexual abuse on other women. He argued throughout the interview that he did feel guilty for completing these crimes but that he was ordered to do so and in the end it was for the best interest for the soldiers to gain a scene of morale. Raping these women gave these men a sense of power and masculinity that they used on the battlefields. In the end, it is ironic because Borislav argued that he completed the crimes because he felt like he did not have a choice. He was forced to abuse these women with the threat of being sent to the worst front line or even possibly jail. Ironically, this was not good for Borislav’s morale because at the end of the day he was still sent to the front lines. He further argued that the best boost for his morale or felt the most connected to the other soldiers was when they all ate and drank together.

Patrick Campbell: Main Post: April 14

Something Has Got To Give

It is not “our youth” or “our teens, it’s our sons,” are you kidding me Gloria Steinem? Although I cannot truly think of a school shooting or bombing that involves our daughters, would she like a tour of a women’s prison? I am sure she will come across plenty of mixes of daughters and youths, that instead of being obedient to the laws of our country decided to shoot, stab, bomb, etc. biased-biased-biased! This article is another example of a feminist activist who instead of utilizing proper rhetoric and passing a strong message without providing information which includes biased opinion and slanders the male gender, in this world we have racism and reverse-racism, in this case instead of sexism we have reverse sexism.

Personal concerns that I have regarding the activists who wrote these past two articles (last rape article/Supremacy Crime) involve their committing of the same discriminatory injustices on men which they preach immediate diminishment for against women, is it wrong to suggest hypocrisy? If Gloria Steinem believes that all these crimes are committed because heterosexual men want to show that, “I am superior because I can kill.” Perhaps she should consult a psychotherapist who focuses on the criminal mind. Her examples regarding murder are disgusting men who committed horrible unlawful acts against women, but the common theme derived here is a slandering of an entire gender and I will not stand for it. Although, Steinem goes on to ‘cover her back,’ if you will, by stating that “men of color and women,” can also commit these crimes, the fact that her onset of this piece involves the entire male gender does not escape my attention.

I feel like the reason I get so worked up over this whole situation is because when I was in the military I learned a very particular skill, if you will, that I will carry with me for a very long time in my life. That being said, this ‘skill’ is being able to tell someone “i have a problem with you,” for lack of a more slanderous term involving two words that are not appropriate for writing a blog post, the two words have four letters in the first words and three in the second (I think we see where I am going here), in a very educated or respectful rhetoric. Therefore, if these female activists can pass their message on with statistics involving the majority of murders, which consequently provide a stronger background to the stories in their articles (more than four), than perhaps I would consider their case or argument as scholarly and true. In other words, do a little more research. Steinem’s piece has way to many suppose for me to handle, therefore, Gloria “suppose” you attempted to pass your message with facts backed by actual statistics of your case, here is one answer for you, yes there have been dozens of cases simply through my research following this read. Below I have provided a few cases involving these threats made by women on schools.

Following my research of about an hour at most I was able to find these cases….

“Fla. Woman arrested for threatening schools- Some 300 Broward County schools, with about 275,000 students, were placed on lockdown when an email said “something big” would happen at a government building in Broward County, maybe a school”

http://www.policeone.com/news/2975545-Fla-woman-arrested-for-threatening-schools/

“Cops: Upper Darby woman leaves threatening message to high school:”

http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2011/03/29/news/doc4d9136f430920895582878.txt

“Parent admits to threatening to kill coach:”

http://www.norwalkreflector.com/content/sc-parent-admits-threatening-coach-chaffee-says-case-closed-hcso-investigating

“Mom arrested after confronting school bus driver:”

http://www.cfnews13.com/article/news/2011/april/231716/Mom-arrested-accused-of-threatening-school-bus-driver?cid=rss

Final Note:

I understand I might seem a bit dramatic about my response to Steinem. However, after reading these past two articles for today and Tuesday, one can only take so much….