First Steps Toward Equality

by Jamin Shih

Throughout studying gender and gender inequalities, a question always arises that seems gargantuan and unsolvable. How can gender inequality be rectified? The truth is, it is difficult if not impossible to achieve and even harder to conceptualize the process that would be needed. However, after researching throughout the semester about the plights of various minority groups, it seems that there is a preliminary step that many people miss before attempting to fight oppressive patriarchy. Before we can turn on the system, it is important not to turn on each other.

It seems like an interesting if implausible occurrence but I firmly believe that the way American society is set up, it is significantly easier to turn on individuals or other groups than it is to fix the overarching problem, and that is just what people have done. In this article about male issues with body image, it should become apparent that everyone is in the struggle together, but a comment says it all:

I give absolutely zero shits if guys are struggling with their body image due to media et al. You know why? Because women get it 50x worse. And it will never change.

I do not want anyone to ever feel bad about their bodies-- that is a hell I know very personally and everyday is a struggle. However, until we get a real response to what women go through, I am not throwing my support behind the other gender's problems anytime soon.

It took me a few reads to fully process both the hypocrisy and the ridiculousness of this statement. Here, this woman completely understood and could potentially sympathize with male body image issues, but vehemently did not support the cause- NOT because it was not a valid issue, but because she felt that her plights needed to be serviced first.

This is a kind of fallacious thinking. When searching for gender equality, we cannot simply focus on the parts of patriarchy that harm ourselves. As our readings have shown, privilege does not exist in a vacuum. It is an intersection of many labels. A person can have the disadvantages of being female, but still have the privileges of being white or well-off. A more conventionally attractive person holds privilege over those that are too dark or too pale or even too scrawny or large. If gender equality is to be achieved, it is necessary to pursue equality in all of these areas and stop focusing simply on our own problems.

When various groups fight amongst themselves, the larger problem remains unsolved. This is why it is important to show men how they are harmed by gender inequality as well. It is important to make this issue a human one, not simply a women's issue. Only through the collective power of all individuals can actual change be created. Otherwise, we will stay firmly divided groups that waste time and energy blaming each other for our plights.

Rape Culture and Stand-Up Comedy

by Jamin Shih

As we have discussed in our class recently, the media plays a role in the attitudes and perceptions of people in society. It also reflects the ideas present. This one-two punch makes media especially powerful because not only does it continue to air opinions and attitudes that are prevalent in society [and may be problematic], it also influences our thinking in the process. One aspect of American society that is of major concern nowadays is rape culture. Rape culture is the idea that attitudes about rape and rape victims are in part responsible for the relatively common occurrence of rape. A 2010 survey reports that rape is more common than smoking in women. This is a huge problem and it is time to examine what parts of the media are partially responsible and what we as a society can do to rectify the situation.

Stand-up comedy is a collection of jokes generally with an overarching theme told by a comedian to a live audience. In addition to jokes about spouses, pets, and sex, rape and sexual assault are relatively common topics. Rape jokes are inherently controversial, as are jokes about many crimes, but it is interesting to see how different comedians approach the subject (if at all) and how consumers respond to it.

Recently, Daniel Tosh [a comedian and star of the show Tosh.0] came under fire for this account of telling a rape joke. The audience member was reportedly heckled for disapproving of rape jokes and left the theatre humiliated after being the victim of another rape joke from Tosh. Almost instantly, the blog post received countless reblogs and comments. The owner of the comedy club later responded with this alternative account of the story where Tosh is portrayed in a slightly more sympathetic light. Tosh also apologized on twitter and linked directly to this post.

An interesting tangent to Tosh's predicament are the claims from some of those offended that rape jokes are not inherently offensive; they are offensive only if they make light of rape and contribute to rape culture. One user linked to a stand-up act from Wanda Sykes about detachable genitalia where she briefly mentions rape. Her joke was received significantly better, possibly because [as the user said], the joke was not making fun not of rape victims but of the ridiculousness of rapists. While this point does seem to have some merit, it should be noted that later on in the act, Sykes makes a gang rape joke that may be similar to the portrayal that Tosh made.

It is very difficult to say for sure where the line is for comedy. What is offensive and unacceptable and what is simply toeing the line in an effort to make social commentary?

The Future of Inequality

Our last unit for class is a lot about the future of inequality. After all of the readings and discussions we have had, I truly feel that is almost no hope for TOTAL equality for men and women. I do feel that there will definitely be progress, but I don't truly think that, at least in my lifetime, there will be real equality. I know that progress has been made, actually quite a bit of it, which gives me hope. I found a blog dedicated to the idea of the progress of equality for women. It talks a lot about Hilary Clinton and her beliefs on the issue. She explained that a lot of progress has been made, which actually gave me a lot of hope. In the blog it said,

She pointed to several other signs of progress:

• Women are the majority of students in law schools
• Women are the majority of students in college
• Women were the majority of voters in 2004
• The U.S. House of Representatives has a woman speaker (Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.)
• Harvard University has a female president

I think that all of those things are a very big deal, but when compared to many other countries in the world, it is almost nothing. Other places have had female presidents, women have been able to vote for much longer, and women have more control over their bodies. Again, I think all of these things show progress, but we are still far behind and I think we will be for a long time. In the long run, I think all of these things are somewhat insignificant compared to what they could be. I'm  not saying the points aren't important, but at this time in history, it should be much more than just small statistics. 

The day we have a woman elected president, women are allowed total control over their bodies, and are paid equally for the same job as men, they will be equal. I believe that until then, nothing that happens really matters, it is just progress, but progress does not mean equality.  This class really opened my eyes and made really want equality, but also made me a little more negative than I had been. It feels like there is almost nothing that can be done because the equality is so deeply rooted that only time can change it. I feel that with as much time that has already gone by with so little changes, it will take even longer to see real equality. Like I said, I don't expect to see any real changes within my life. 

http://outofmymindblog.wordpress.com/2008/04/10/on-hillary-clinton-gender-equality-and-the-future-of-politics/

Elizabeth Kramer

Gender Equality throuhgout the U.S.

by Jeff Cline

Gender equality is a huge issue within the United States and is constantly making the news.  There are tons of law suits and court cases all involving gender equality in the workplace.  I have attached an article that i read about cities throughout the United States that are top 10 in gender equality.  You will be able to look them up if you decide to read this article.  As I was reading i found it interesting to read why some cities have a greater equality and why some are lower.  Overall though, the idea of gender equality is becoming a real thing.  Just the ability for women to get higher education and the same education as a male has helped to significantly increase women's impact in the workplace. Michele Leber, Chair of the National Committee on Pay Equity stated that the fact that women are receiving this higher education will eventually help the workplace to have gender equal workforces.  However, it will take time for women to reach the level that men are on now.  Men have been getting the highest level of education for the longest time and women are just now becoming expected to get the same education as a man.  The article also talks about how working in the public sector has allowed for more equal pay.  The reason is most likely because of the ability to see each person’s income.  This would explain why Washington D.C. is among the top in gender equality in the United States.  I think this article was cool because it showed the top cities for equality and for inequality.  So hopefully you will all be able to take a look.

This is the website:
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/05/13/the-10-cities-with-the-greatest-and-least-sex-equality

Mass Media Influence: What Influences Us?

Many articles and blogs I found about the media were pretty much the same. They talked about the media indoctrinating us and making us want to buy things, act certain ways, and look certain ways. The thing I found the most interesting was a post I found about how the media affected people of different ages and genders. 

It is obvious that we are all affected by the media. I know I am. If I see a commercial for food, I usually want it. For makeup, I always want to look like the girl who wears it. The media is good at what it does. This article explains what certain people are looking for, or basically, how the media influences people. The part I found most interesting was when it explained each part.

It explains, "While men usually find it difficult to hold themselves back in the face of the allure of sexuality. Other subjects which also appeal to men are financial security and a luxurious hassle-free lifestyle. Women on the other hand are more tempted towards products which guarantee immunity from aging altogether and not just what the previous generation called 'aging gracefully". 

Basically, this article is saying that in order to get men to do things, we need to shove sex in their faces. If that doesn't work, they like money and no hassle, which makes complete sense. The media takes what men want and like, or aspire to have, and let them think they can have it. Women like things that make them think they are immune to growing old, or, in other words, looking old and less beautiful.

I think in order for the media to have the effect it does on society, it is important to realize these things. It also talked about the influence it has on children, who are much more likely to be affected by the media. "There is a burgeoning need amongst the youth to be accepted as a part of a group, to be popular, to have friends and relationships with people of the opposite sex etc." This explains that younger people feel the need to be accepted by everyone else, so the media will portray that in its commercials and TV shows. The children who are not the same as everyone else are shown to be ostracized. This makes kids think that in order to be popular, they need to look or act a certain way. I think this article gave really good insight into the mind of the media and shows how well they know society. It also shows why we, as a society, are so easily affected by the media. They know us too well!

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/mass-media-influence.html

Elizabeth Kramer

Wage differences between men and women - sexist or functional?

As we were reading and discussing the job market and the differences in wages between men and women, I really wondered what exactly it was. It seems like after this long, there HAS to be a good reason women get paid so much less than men for the same job. While doing some research, I came across an article that was in Forbes magazine, with the same title as this blog entry. It asked the question about whether or not the wage difference was functional. In the article it explained something called "firm specific skills", which basically means skills that an employee could only get from working at a specific firm. It is more likely for men to be hired, according to this, because they have more of a chance to get firm specific skills. It takes someone a long time to be trained to do specific things. You can't just find someone off the street and show them how to work somewhere. It takes time to be good at a job, which is also getting those firm skills. It explains that women have these skills less because they need to take more time off due to child birth and taking care of children. The article explains that according to that theory, women should get paid less because they have less firm-specific skills. In order to see if that was true though, there had to be research done. Just because women couldn't, in some cases, work as long as men straight through, doesn't mean they don't have the same skills, so there was a study done at temp agencies, where firm specific skill wouldn't matter because all jobs were temporary. Men still make $29.66 on average to a woman's $25.08. This shows that for the same exact job, men still got paid more for no actual reason. So, the article concludes that "firm specific skills" is a good idea to explain the wage gap in theory, but in reality it really doesn't matter. No matter what, women still get paid less than men for the same exact job and there is no reason behind, besides the ones we have discussed in class. I think this article did a really good job of explaining the theory behind it, and the whole idea of the the firm specific made sense. I could understand women getting paid less in certain places because they really are less permanent. If I knew an employee was going to be gone for a year, I would definitely not be as likely to hire them and pay them equally because it would be obvious that the job would not be priority number one. But in every other reason, I think this article is correct.

The article can be found here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/freekvermeulen/2011/02/28/wage-differences-between-men-and-women-sexist-or-functional/

Elizabeth Kramer

Defensive Othering in the LGBT Community

by Jamin Shih

An interesting mechanism that is discussed in one of the readings is defensive othering. In the article, which describes how female rugby players manage their gender identities in a stigmatized field, the author describes how stigmatized minorities will often perpetuate their own negative stereotypes by exempting themselves from them but inadvertently confirming the stereotypes. This is remarkably true for the homosexual community. Homosexual males and females are generally treated in different ways by American society; male homosexuals tend to be significantly more controversial due to a male-dominated mindset where males being "unmasculine" is more offensive than females being "unfeminine". However, on the flip side lesbians are often ignored and invisible as straight girls "going through a phase" or being gay for the purpose of male enjoyment.

Because of this difference, male homosexuals have a much larger discrepancy between those considered "masculine" and those considered "feminine" and both sides have some animosity towards the other. Male homosexuals that identify as more feminine often accuse more masculine homosexuals as pretending to be masculine or putting on a front. This reinforces the idea that there is an essential nature to homosexuals- that all male homosexuals essentially act the same and those that do not fit in with the stereotype are pretending. More masculine homosexuals, on the other hand, often engage in a form of defensive othering where they claim that not all homosexuals fit the effeminate stereotype but then distance themselves from the stereotype and reinforce the notion that those who are effeminate are somehow inferior.

Just as in the case of the female rugby players, this ultimate hurts both sides as it reinforces notions of hegemonic masculinity which involves compulsive heterosexuality.

This discrepancy is most easily seen through online discussions of LGBT issues. On an article about straight-acting homosexuals [which fits into the argument that more masculine homosexual men are simply pretending due to internalized homophobia]. While this is not the best article about the topic, some of the comments do demonstrate this divide.

"If you really are do have an inner bitch, queen or princess, great. Let her rip…be yourself, we may even become fast friends but don’t call me names because I’m not attracted to you because of your inner bitch, queen or princess."

"I agree with you. Straight-acting is just that: ACTING."

"I feel so disillusioned in the gay community. We preach tolerance and acceptance, yet we’re not willing to accept a gay man who’s a little too effeminate for our standards, or we cant accept a gay man being naturally masculine without accusing him of putting on an act."