Blog 4 response

Chapter 13:


1. On page 72, bell hooks states "Even in households where no adult male caregiver is present, women taught and teach children sexist thinking." What kind of sexist thinking do you think is being taught to children and how would feminist go about changing that? Also, why do you think a woman would teach her children sexist thinking? Or is it even intentional?

Some sexist thinking women might teach to their children is gender role norms. She might teacher her daughter to dress in feminine ways and play with feminine toys and teach her son to do the opposite. She might comfort her daughter when she cries but not do the same when her son does, since "boys don't cry". She might discourage them from breaking the norm. In households with male and female parents, the chores each one does can teach sexist thinking to their observant children. In chapter 7 of Communicating Gender Diversity, it says that "...children tend to learn the gendered lesson they observe, not what they are told" (DeFrancisco & Palczewski, 2007, p. 161). If children always see their mother cleaning while their father works outside the household, they can internalize these gender norms. I don't think sexist thinking is necessarily taught to children on purpose. I don't think a lot of people even question the norms. It's how they grew up and how they've lived their lives, so they pass that on to their children. If it is taught on purpose, I think it would be so that others don't judge their children for being different. To change this would take a conscious effort and questioning one's own parenting style.

       This question reminded me of the movie Pleasantville. In the movie, two present day teenagers are brought into a television show in which everything is "perfect". Perfect means a traditional nuclear family, the mother cooks, cleans, and takes care of the children while the father works outside the home. The children know only this type of living because it's what their parents teach and show them. I don't know if the trailer really shows this, but I couldn't find a good clip. 

2. Hooks notes that no one wants to call attention to women abusing children. After viewing the video below, why do you think people have done so little to calling attention to this abuse by mothers? What was your reaction to this video? Do you think it was abuse?

I really have no idea what people have not called as much attention to abusive mothers as they do fathers. It doesn't make sense to me. Abusive is abusive. Maybe it's because males tend to be viewed as  stronger and more dominant so people might think they are hurting the children while the mother is just disciplining? I couldn't believe how angry the parents got in the video. It made me scared for the children. I definitely think the mother screaming was abuse. Emotional and verbal abuse is just as harmful as physical. The father who was about to shake the baby was borderline abusive. That situation could have gone in a very bad direction had he not put the baby down. The topic of women abusing children reminded me of a book I read a long time ago: A Child Called It by Dave Pelzer. It's a true story. His mother abuses him in unthinkable ways. 

Chapter 14

1. Bell hooks states “Women having the freedom to be non-monogamous, whether we

exercise that freedom or not, continues to disrupt and challenge the notion
that the female body belongs to men” (hooks, 2000, pg 80-81). Watch the video
below and respond to the following questions: Her decision to forego her
modeling career to reserve her body solely for her husband was a bold choice.
What are your opinions on this? Is this an example of the suppression of a
woman’s sexual freedom and expression? How does this video correspond with the
ideas presented in chapter 14?

I think it was her personal choice. I don't think that giving up her lingerie modeling career was an example of suppression of a woman's sexual freedom and expression. It really bothered me how hooks made it seem as though a woman who chooses to be in a monogamous relationship is somehow property to her male counterpart. As if he has a divine right to her body. To me, choosing to be monogamous is more a gift you give each other. You are faithful to one another. It is a choice. Therefore, I think the woman in that video was making that choice. 

2. Bell hooks states, “Marriages built on a sexist foundation are likely to be deeply

troubled and rarely last” (hooks, 2000, pg 83). It’s clear that hooks believes
that traditional gender roles in marriage make for an unequal and dissatisfying
union, clarifying that her definition of sexism is equal or comparable to
patriarchy. It could be argued that hooks would disagree with a traditional
marriage. To bring to life an example of this let us take for instance a
stereotypical traditional marriage. The Catholic Church is known for this ‘sacred union’ between a husband and wife. Today, 50% of marriages end in divorce. We question what you suggest is the solution to a fulfilling marriage? Describe what you think this looks like and why it would be successful. Also, if you are able, describe a marriage that youwould consider ‘loving’ and ‘flourishing.’

I believe a fulfilling marriage is one in which both parties give and take equally. There is giving without expecting anything in return. There is respect, communication, equality, and understanding. Most importantly there is love. Chores, bills, and work in general need to be split equally. The chores can be split according to personal interests, not on sexist stereotypes. The man does not need to be the only one working and providing the income. That's not even ideal in today's economy. 

The first example of a loving and flourishing marriage that came to mind was a StoryCorps video that I first saw a couple of years ago. I haven't been able to get it out of my head ever since and it touches me each time I watch it.