In my topic about Gender is
constructed and thus is always in flux. It talks about men thinking they need
to be in a magazine and looking the best so they can show what they have. It
says in the book from Gauntlett believes that the discourse of masculinity in
these contemporary magazines are distinctive because they recognize that
masculinity is a social construction and culture given. But what I think men
didn’t need lifestyle magazines because it was obvious what man was and what a
man should do. They mostly have been the bread winner ever since they were
born.” He believesthe subject matter of
today’s magazines for mean are all about the social constructionof masculinity (p.170)
•Can
you give me any examples of things of society constructingmasculinity
After reading through the responses for my proposed question (#2) I was able to gain some useful information for our facilitation tomorrow. Each response identified a different set of individuals they believe have been silenced in global feminism. It is interesting to hear everyone's opinions since there is no correct answer. Each group of women had differing effects on feminism and helped shape the movement to be what it has become today. I did connect personally with Courtney's post which touched on more of the race/ethnicity effects on the movement and how one should be sensitive to cultural ideologies.
1. If
working class women had received more attention from the media and made
their struggle known, how do you think this would have impacted the
feminist movement? Do you think this would have allowed women to gain
equality in areas such as household duties and wage?
RESPONSE:
I think it would have greatly impacted the movement. We are constantly surrounding our self with media influences regardless of whether or not we're aware of it. Even if we don't think we're paying attention to advertisements and social issues in the media, most people are influenced by them to some degree. Having a greater knowledge about the movement would've strengthened its current members and perhaps encouraged other members to join. While I would like to assume the best, I don't know if it technically would've "allowed" women to gain equality. It's so hard to imagine that one thing, like media exposure, would've led to an entire revolution, but maybe that's me being too realistic. Just to put into perspective how influential the media is, this little video hadn't even been heard of until it hit the world wide web earlier last week. While the organization has made itself known for awhile, nobody even knew who this "Kony" character was until everyone started talking about it. This is just one example that shows how fast and influential the media can be.
2. What
types of women do you believe were silenced? If these silenced
members’ opinions were voiced what effect do you think they would have
on nations struggling with sexism, sexual exploitation, and oppression?
Would this change the global interactions we see today, or would the
world function similarly?
RESPONSE:
Similarly like the beginning of your post eluded to, I think the minority women in America were silenced. Whether these women were racially, religiously, or sexually different than the white middle-class women, they each had characteristics nontraditional of the dominant group. I think there would be a broader knowledge and understanding of sexism, sexual exploitation, and oppression had these silenced women's opinions been heard. Although it may not have totally ended these issues, we would be more likely to see them as a larger and more globally encompassing problem in our country. With this clearer understanding, I believe there would have been a greater push to change our beliefs and behaviors on the subject. I think it would make global interactions more of a fluid action. I don't think we would see race, religion, and cultural differences as much as we would see a unified cause and movement. Below is a video by Women's Campaign International. It's an international campaign to give opportunities for women to actively participate in public advocacy, market and political processes. Such a campaign seems extremely relevant to hooks' ideas and arguments.
3. Do you think when women stay home and do the household work, do you think they get depressed because they aren’t making any money to help out in the family?
RESPONSE:
I'm sure it honestly depends the woman. I know many stay at home moms who are more active and do more "work" then some people working 9-5. Just because the work doesn't earn a salary for the family, staying at home and raising children helps to maintain strength and unity in the family. Without a caretaker, it wouldn't be as easy to have familial success. On the other hand, I'm sure there are women who stay home with their children, but wish they still had the time and ability to have a career. n these cases, however, I believe there is a determining point. At some point, they decide where their priorities and happiness are and make a decision based on that idea.
For the response to my question
they are all great answer to my question about women at work. Indeed much of
the class power elite groups of women hold in our society, particularly those
who are rich is gained at the expense of the freedom of other women. Already
there are small groups of women with class power working to build brides
through economic programs which provide
aid and support to less privileged women. So the question that you guys
responded to was great advice on people who did stay at home and people didn’t
stay home I got a lot my knowledge from what you guys were talking about. When
person talk about if the women is staying home and the husband is making the
money that isn’t a bad thing at all because he is making plenty of money to
support the whole family and she doesn’t have to do anything beside to take care of
the children and the house hold stuff. To round it all up early on feminist
movement did not make economic self sufficiency for women its primary goal. Yet addressing the
economic plight of women may ultimately be the feminist platform that draws collective
response. It may well become the place of collective e organizing the common
ground the use that unites all women
The responses to the first part of question one were divided on how working class women having more media attention would have affected the feminist movement. Some said that it would have affected the movement positively by gaining awareness. If the struggles of the working class women were known to the public, something might have been done. Unfortunately, it was mostly the upper class women who received the most attention. As some pointed out, the working class women and upper class women were fighting for different things in the feminist movement. Upper class women were fighting for the right to work outside of the home and earn equal wages to the men in their class. Lower class women would have loved to be able to stay home like upper class women. Instead they were overworked and underpaid. Others thought that more working class women in the media would have affected the feminist movement negatively. Adding class into the feminist movement could have resulted in demanding too many changes for society to handle. One student said that people tend to listen more when socially respected people speak. The working class women speaking might not have caught the public’s attention as well as the upper class women did. As for the second part of the question, the class was also divided. Some said that household duties and wages were two different issues. Household duties should be decided on a more personal basis and wage is more of a public issue. One student said that it would take the government to implement change. Some said that raising awareness of feminist issues in the workplace would also raise awareness of household issues.
1. I think more attention for the working class women and their issues would have prevented the divide that was created between upper-class women involved in feminism and working-class women. This seemed to create an association between feminism and upper-classism. This could explain why many women do not claim the title feminist and want no part of the movement, because of these negative connotations. In some ways it made being part of the feminist movement a luxury - something for women who had the time because they did not have "day jobs" and maybe also had childcare help such as nannies and maids.
Also, I think there were working class women fighting for equality in the workplace outside of feminism. They just didn't know they were fighting for the same things because they saw it as survival. In a way these women were working for more purely feminist values because they were working for workers' rights in the workplace and not always specifically women's rights. This makes me think of the award-winning film Norma Rae, based on a true story of a woman in a textile mill fighting for union rights. This is the pivotal scene in which she takes a stand (literally) and the other workers follow her lead.
This topic of working women and feminism also makes me think of one of my all-time favorite shows Roseanne. Over the years I have watched this show, researched the making of the show and also learned as much as I can about Roseanne Barr. This show purposely portrayed a lower class family with two parents with no college and how they support a family with three kids. Roseanne is famous for coining the term "domestic goddess" in a satirical effort to title the chores of a woman at home on a daily basis. This show also illustrates the concept of "second shift" that we learned about in the last chapter. Many of the scenes focus on the dialogue between the characters but if you notice there is almost always an activity in progress simultaneously. Much of the time it includes Roseanne cooking a meal, ironing and putting away groceries. Many aspects of this show that may seem like they just did the same thing over (like these activities) because they ran out of ideas were actually very purposeful in their nature. This helped show the sameness, the repetitiveness and the lackluster aspect of such a lifestyle for these families.
For the second part of the question, I'm not sure if including working women in the feminist movement would have resulted in equality in household and wages. I still see two different groups of women fighting for different reasons. An upper-class woman may have a degree (or several degrees) and has a five or six figure job that includes benefits, maternity leave, vacation, and other amenities. When she fights for feminist rights she wants her salary to match that of her male colleagues. A working-class woman with a high school diploma or GED works at a factory where she has access to benefits she cannot afford, has little to no maternity leave, has little to no vacation time and risks her job when she has to call in sick or for a childcare emergency. When this women fights for feminist rights, such as longer breaks or reduced overtime, she is fighting for survival. When I worked at a factory I knew a woman who was a mother of four kids all under 13. She worked second shift and saw her kids 20 minutes a day on weekdays. Her family was everything to her and so weekends were completely family time. But we got mandatory overtime on weekends often. That means she would go for weeks and only seeing her kids for little bits of time. It was heartbreaking and she is one of many. But here is the thing: both women are right. They both are fighting for just causes of equality, just on totally different levels. The hard part is trying to merge the two together because the worlds of the two women are so different from each other.
2. Global feminism is an even further extension to me of what I was talking about at the end of question one. The upper-class woman, the working-class woman...and now the global woman. It reminds me of something someone said to me when I was a kid "there will always be someone who will look at your life like it is a bed of roses." This had a strong impact on me because although I going through struggles, it helped me put into perspective the challenges that I did not face. I still try to maintain this outlook today. Global feminism makes me think of microloans, a concept I first heard about a few years ago. It was in an article about a woman in a third world country who did a weaving craft with her children. They needed to make and sell enough for 22 cents a day in order to eat that day, which consisted of a very minimum amount and type of food (I think it was rice and beans). If they did not make the money they did not eat. And they would never make enough money to eat, buy weaving supplies and have a profit. Never. Until microloans. Somebody somewhere was awesome enough to realize that giving a woman in this situation less than a dollar could literally, LITERALLY, change her life and the lives of her children. This is now a huge endeavor with millions of dollars in microloans usually through global nonprofit initiatives. Here are a couple of videos to illustrate this concept.
It amazes me that amounts of money so small that it is almost meaningless to me (less than a dollar) can have this much impact on somebody. It really puts it all into perspective.
3. No I do not think that women who work at home get depressed because they are not making money for
the family. A pile of money is nothing if you don't know how to use it well and that is what many women do. Many women are experts at efficiency in the home with all of the household duties but especially the grocery and household shopping. She goes to the store knowing exactly which brands of food to buy, which cleaner is best for the price and knows all of the ins and outs of coupons, buy-one-get-one and other sales.
Send her husband, who "makes" the money, to the store with a list AND a budget and see how well he does. There is so much more that goes on AFTER someone gets a paycheck that is just as important to the entire family as the time and effort put into getting the paycheck.
Question 1:
According to hooks (2000), "Yet the fact that the privileged gained in class power while masses of women still do not receive wage equity with men is an indication of the way in which class interests superceded feminist efforts to change the workforce so that women would receive equal pay for equal work" (p. 39). I think that if working class women had received more attention from the media and made their struggle known, the issue could have been more about feminism and less about class. I think that women would have made more strides towards equality in wages and household work, but don't think it would still be equal. The masses have more power and voice than ever before, but women still do not receive equal pay for equal work compared to men.
Question 2:
Many women have been silenced in the feminist movement. "Initially when feminist leaders in the United States proclaimed the need for gender equality here they did not seek to find out if corresponding movements were taking place among women around the world. Instead they declared themselves liberated and therefore in the position to liberate their less fortunate sisters, especially those in the 'third world'" (hooks, 2000, p. 45). I think women in positions of less power, especially in third-world countries have been silenced. If these opinions were voiced, sexism, sexual exploitation, and oppression would decrease because these women would be given a voice to stand up for themselves and their rights. It seems that even now, the feminist voices in third world countries come from the elite few who do not represent the majority of the population. The following video is an interesting video talking about if feminism is failing women in non-western countries:
Are Feminists Failing non-Western Women?
(nonameisacat, 2010)
Question 3:
I think that whether women who stay at home get depressed because they aren't making money to help the family depends on the woman. Some women may be fine with it and feel that it's their role to stay at home while the male is the breadwinner. Others may feel uneasy with it and the responsibility of then having to take care of the home. I know my mom, who works full time but works a 40 hour shift on the weekend, sometimes probably feels like she has to justify being at home all week even though she does work. The women may feel like she both needs to take care of the home and make money for the family, but I can't say that I've ever heard a man get depressed because they aren't helping out around the home! :)
Question 1: hooks states, “…as feminist movement progressed and privileged groups of well-educated white women began to achieve equal access to class power with their male counterparts, feminist class struggle was no longer deemed important” (hooks, 2000, p. 37) and “From the onset of the movement women from privileged classes were able to make their concerns “the” issues that should be focused on in part because they were the group of women who received public attention” (hooks, 2000, p.37). If working class women had received more attention from the media and made their struggle known, how do you think this would have impacted the feminist movement? Do you think this would have allowed women to gain equality in areas such as household duties and wage?
Personally, because society is extremely slow with and leery of change, I think that including class struggle during the beginning of the feminist movement would have been too much for the population to handle. Including class may have quite possibly killed the movement all together. I think it was the right decision, ethical or not, to progress change slowly. If things move to quickly for society, there will be backlash. Progression is key.
Question 2: Even though the global feminist movement has traditionally been headed by white, privileged women, it is important to note that women of the United States have helped lower rates of sexism and sexual exploitations in some nations. Through enforcing “white supremacist capitalist patriarchy” many women in the feminist movement were silenced. What types of women do you believe were silenced? If these silenced members’ opinions were voiced what effect do you think they would have on nations struggling with sexism, sexual exploitation, and oppression? Would this change the global interactions we see today, or would the world function similarly?
During the feminist movement, there were women that were silenced. I think that the women that were silenced then are the types of women that are still silenced today. These women would include: the lower class, racial minorities, the uneducated, the disabled, the non-heterosexual, and children. Hearing the voices of the muted would have a huge impact on nations struggling with these issues. I don't necessarily think this would change the social interactions that occur globally. Attempting to influence other nations would still be an extremely difficult and seemingly impossible task.
Question 3: In bell hooks book she says “in many college classrooms today students both female and male will argue that feminist movement is no longer relevant since women now have equality.”
Do you think when women stay home and do the household work, do you think they get depressed because they aren’t making any money to help out in the family?
I think that depression connected to women staying at home is not as relevant as defensiveness. Generally when women do stay at home, their family is in a situation in which they can afford to do so. Therefore, I don't believe they need to worry about contributing financially to the family. These women are able to see the product of the work they produce, and generally, I assume they are proud of it. Because outsiders don't always know how they keep busy during their days, they often feel that they need to defend their job. I don't think the depression would be linked to the finances, but rather loneliness and lack of adult connection. In these situations, there are many groups and activities that these women can join to allow for that needed contact.
- I think the idea of having all classes of women actively able & involved in the feminist movement would have definitely impacted the feminist movement as we know it. In another part of the chapter, hooks explains that while those from the upper crust of social classes were looking for social equality in the ways that would put them into the workplace with men, there were women from lower socioeconomic statuses that were already working who would've loved to have the ability to stay at home (hooks, p. 38). If those who were already in the workforce were given media attention, I think that the idea of feminism as being "man-hating, women-lovers who are looking to just place themselves in men's work" would not have even come into anyone's ideas. Those women who were in the process of working already had the type of "equality" that women of higher social classes were looking for, and thus would have, I think, opened up people's minds in regards to what the femininst movement was actually about. - I think by placing media attention on all women, in general, that there would have been more recognition of those women already working who were earning significantly less than the men they were working alongside. That recognition, I think, would have lead to a realization that women need equal pay raises - but would have also gained recognition for those who were working in the house, keeping up things while they're husbands were at an 8-5 job outside of the home.
Question 2:
- I think those women who were from, had familial ties within, or decended from the societies/cultures that were among those in which the rates of sexual discrimination and exploitations were the ones who were silenced by "white supremacist capitalist patriarchy". I think that if those women who were tied to the society or culture had been taken into consideration when the privileged women who were responsible for creating changes were in the process of changing the societies/cultures, they would have been able to (in a way) coach the changing-women in how to implement the changes without creating any societal repercussions or issues. If there had been a consideration for the society/culture in which the "white supremacist capitalist patriarchy" changes were being inforced, I think a more socially acceptable solution would have been able to be found to implement the changes. - Furthermore, I really do think that taking the "other" into consideration would have lead to better connections and global interactions between other countries and the U.S. today. Instead of doing things the "American way", and enforcing our ideas and values without any second thought about how our society and culture are different from other areas of the world, there would be a more friendly vibe between the United States and the rest of the world - instead of the domineering, we-will-rule-all mentality that is, unfortunately, what the United States is known for.
Question 3:
- This example kinda hits close to home because even though my mom didn't stay home, and my dad was only stay-at-home until I was in 6th grade, my mom still gives him crap for not working those earlier years of me and my sister's lives. I know that this really gets at him - hence, probably why he decided to go back to school, and has been working himself ragged like her since I was in 9th grade. However, I don't think that she should give him crap for staying at home when she didn't, and I don't think that he should feel bad about being a stay-at-home parent. - But, to go along with the question, I know that my dad did feel bad for not making money to "help out" the family - yet, I think that he did make an economic contribution. By him staying at home to take care of my sister and I while we were not in school, he was able to help our family keep the money we normally would have spent on all-day day care. Also by watching us at home, we were able to cut down on the money that would have gone into gas for driving not only to another job, but back-and-forth to the day care. So, even though he wasn't adding to the income - he was most defintely keeping possible savings in the bank. Loophole! :)
Question 1: hooks states, “…as feminist movement progressed and privileged groups of well-educated white women began to achieve equal access to class power with their male counterparts, feminist class struggle was no longer deemed important” (hooks, 2000, p. 37) and “From the onset of the movement women from privileged classes were able to make their concerns “the” issues that should be focused on in part because they were the group of women who received public attention” (hooks, 2000, p.37).
If working class women had received more attention from the media and made their struggle known, how do you think this would have impacted the feminist movement? Do you think this would have allowed women to gain equality in areas such as household duties and wage?
I think this would have had a positive effect on the feminist movement. The media is capable of bringing to light many issues that never would have been thought of or acknowledged otherwise. It’s almost frightening, the extent to which the media is able to influence society. However, in this case, the media’s heavy influence could have been a good thing.
The only issue is that there will always be people who will chose to believe whatever they want to, regardless of what is placed right in front of them.
As far as household duties and wage go, I think they are two different issues. Household duties are a much more personal and micro-level topic that should be left up to the individual. I don’t think it’s sexist for women to do the dishes and men to mow the lawn, as long as both are okay with those chores. I have no problem doing dishes or other typically “female” house roles, but I respect that some women wouldn’t want to be limited to only these tasks. Work wages should be equal for women and men who hold the same positions. I think more attention needs to be given to this issue, because I think many people are still in the dark that this is a situation at all.
Question 2: Even though the global feminist movement has traditionally been headed by white, privileged women, it is important to note that women of the United States have helped lower rates of sexism and sexual exploitations in some nations. Through enforcing “white supremacist capitalist patriarchy” many women in the feminist movement were silenced. What types of women do you believe were silenced? If these silenced members’ opinions were voiced what effect do you think they would have on nations struggling with sexism, sexual exploitation, and oppression? Would this change the global interactions we see today, or would the world function similarly?
I think that the women who were silenced were any women who weren’t members of white upper-class society. I think those voices are especially important, because members of privileged society can’t possibly have the same empathy or understanding of underprivileged ways of living as those who have experienced such situations. I think it’s extremely important for everyone to have a say, and I’m not suggesting that those of upper-class white society can’t have a positive influence, but it shouldn’t simply stop there with those voices. Regardless of race, class, or any other demographic, every voice should be speaking out for those who can’t speak for themselves.
Question 3: In bell hooks book she says “in many college classrooms today students both female andmale will argue that feminist movement is no longer relevant since women now haveequality.”
Do you think when women stay home and do the household work, do you think they getdepressed because they aren’t making any money to help out in the family?
I don’t think it’s generally the case that women get depressed because they aren’t going out and getting jobs. I think that if women are able to stay at home while their husbands go out and earn the money, they should be thankful that they have that opportunity. There’s a difference between choosing to have a job just for the fun of it and actually being forced to go out and get a job because of economic needs.
Question 1 First of all, it would have made the working class the "public" demographic of women instead of the upper class. This would have maybe been more detrimental to the feminist movement. In a time where etiquette and aristocracy were respected traits, showing the working women could have given a public image that would not gain support from the masses. People always seem to listen more when socially respected people speak out - as seen with movie stars today who voice their opinion and support for various global causes. It seems that people really don't want their figurehead to be an "everyman", but instead a figurehead that everyone should strive to be like. If the working class women were the most represented in media instead of the upper class, it could have turned the public away from the feminist movement, thereby harming the cause and possibly stopping the movement before it had any legs. I think this would have allowed women to gain some equality in areas such as household duties and wage. This was a time when society was extremely patriarchal, with men dominating the workforce, social scene, and politics. Men were still the main breadwinners, and if this working class became the public group of feminist women they would first voice their opinions in the home. So, women could have been trying to make the men take a more active family role in the working class home, but with a majority of jobs needing men it would still be very difficult to get them to be more domestic due to the fact that they were the ones working a majority of the time.
Question 2 I think the types of women that were silenced were the minority female demographic of every global culture. An example would be that the white supremacist capitalist patriarchy is suppressing black and Latino women and their voices because the white women are the visible figureheads of the movement. So, the image of a white women and her struggles overshadow those of minorities. If these silenced members' opinions were voiced, I think that it could really progressively confront problems with sexist, sexual exploitation, and oppression in nations. The oppressed minority would actually be represented on a national level , but it needs to be represented by a female of that group, not a white woman. This could help us understand, by first hand account, what is really happening with these other types of women instead of just taking someone's word for it. This would definitely change the global interactions we see today - it would make people more conscious with what is happening elsewhere and how we need to recognize their struggle. Even though it could shed light on the situation, the world could still end up functioning the same way if people choose to hear the message but not act on it.
Question 3
Do you think when women stay home and do the household work, do you think they get depressed because they aren’t making any money to help out in the family? I do not think that it really is a state of depression that they would feel if they are not contributing to the family. Maybe they would feel feelings of incompetence or less important to the overall family structure if they are not bringing in money. But, on the other hand they could have a high level of self satisfaction knowing that they are the backbone of the family providing structure and overall helping everything run smoothly at home. So, it depends on the point of view the woman has. Either way, it needs to be realized that she is helping out the family in any situation., If ours was not a capitalist culture so obsessed with the idea of obtaining money, maybe the position of homemaker would become a little more respected and valued.
I think that this definitely would have been the case. So much of raising awareness and getting your voice heard is through the media. Often times unless enough awareness is raised and you are able to get people’s attention nothing is done! Enough people have to show that they take this issue seriously and care for a prominent change to be made. I think that if many more women would have received more media attention then these issues would have been taken much more seriously. Why? Because people would know that women really took seriously and cared about this discrimination. And more than knowing that they cared about this discrimination, people would no longer be ignorant to the understanding that this is ‘normal’, but would be challenged to question their own perception of equality in household duties and wages. I just watched a video clip recently about a movement to raise awareness of one of the most terrible warm criminals in the world, Joseph Kony. The goal of the video was to bring to light how he is affecting Uganda and other nearby countries with his inhumane tactics to sustain his power. This question made me think of this clip because it drives home the point that often the greatest problem is that it’s difficult for people to recognize and acknowledge that there IS a problem. Publicity and media coverage helps to highlight the importance of an issue and ban the fellow supporters together. Most importantly, it allows you to no longer choose ignorance as a justification to do nothing. Below is the video clip.
RESPONSE QUESTION 2:
This is a very interesting point. I think that there is definitely a distinct separation in the feminist movement in regards to race. I think that people often overlook this separation solely because they figure that any step taken in the feminist movement is better than no step at all. I definitely think that there have been women silenced due to the ‘white supremacist capitalist patriarchy’ take on feminism. Some of the women that I would argue have been silenced are those of a Hispanic, Latina, or African American identity. I think that if the movement consisted of women of all race, color, and ethnicity banning together to fight for the feminist movement the oppression of women in foreign countries would be taken a lot more seriously. The United States especially is such a melting pot, to raise awareness and include ALL WOMEN in this movement would touch on so many different women, with so many varying nationalities. I think it would definitely change the global interactions that we see today because women especially would feel more united with one another. They would see another woman as someone who they can relate to who are fighting for the same things as themselves. Race and Ethnicity shouldn’t separate us, but should help us to look deeper into what defines a woman and her inherent dignity that she possesses. These are the things that should link us together to make us stronger as a united force.
RESPONSE QUESTION 3:
In response to your statement above I would say that this varies depending on the context. My mom is a stay at home mom and absolutely loves it. She is a mother of six and fortunate that she has the privilege to be at home. However, it must be understood that my dad provides enough to support our family so that she doesn’t have to work a full time job to support us. Women who do want to work but are forced to stay at home to take care of the children, while their true desire is to be successful in a career, could definitely become depressed. Children can be a very stressful part of one’s life, especially if taking care of children wasn’t something that a woman planned for. Depending on the atmosphere of the home and the relationship with a partner determines how a woman views her work at home. If they feel fulfilled in taking care of their children and being able to sustain a household that is comfortable and don’t feel guilty by way of their partner, then they will feel fulfilled. On the other hand, if they don’t feel that they are being successful in the home and their partner isn’t supportive and affirming, then it would be easy to become depressed and feel as though one is failing. The following clip is a trailer of the move Cheaper by the Dozen. The stay at home mother misses being at home after she goes on a book tour to promote her new book.
1. I think that this would have had a positive influence on the movement. I think it is silly to only focus on one group of women, especially women who are already well to do, even though these women are oppressed, they are still considered "privileged" due to there class status. Personally I don't want to listen to the privileged complain about anything being "unfair". I think the movement would have benefited from the voices of the working class much more than it did from the upper class. I would sympathize much more with a working woman who is treated unfair in the home and work place/society, than non working upper class women complaining about inequality, who wants to hear the rich complain about anything? Not me.
Personally I am not sure whether this would change anything at home or in the work force. The public might hear their cries and notice that an injustice is being done, but there are still husbands/employers who are stuck in their ways and aren't going to change the routine because their wives/employees received some attention from the media. Unless their was some kind of government interaction forcing employers to raise wages and husbands to switch up the routine at home.
2. The working class and the colored were the women who were silenced. Honestly I don't think we would see much international/global changes. I am not a fan of interfering with other countries issues, we have enough issues here to be dealt with and I see it as wasting effort and resources that could be spent fixing things on our own soil, maybe the movement would have worked better here if we didn't spend time worrying about other countries problems.
3. I don't think that women who stay home and take care of the household chores get depressed, unless they are being forced to do it. Maintaining a household can be one of the toughest, most time consuming jobs out there, especially if there are children involved. This job requires women to be the chef, housekeeper, disciplinarian, and if the kids are below school age or home schooled she is also the teacher and caretaker. If you took all of these jobs being preformed, and put a job title on it along with a wage, these women should be getting paid more than most men. This might be depressing for them if they do all of the work and the husband shows no appreciation, but I do believe that women who choose to do this, take pride in it and hopefully it is rewarding for them.
In regards to the issue of men and women's pay, I'm pretty sure that the issue isn't that women get paid less then a man doing the same job, but women tend to work in jobs that aren't as high paying as jobs that men typically have. To me this isn't an issue of unequal pay, but maybe an issue of men dominating certain career fields that women could be involved in, but instead are somewhat "forced" into jobs that pay less. The issue of lower wages for women might have been prevalent in the past but I don't think that is the problem now.
1. If the media had been more involved in the working class women's lives, I think the feminist movement would have taken advantage of this resource. They would have used the media to do more to gain awareness of what they were struggling for. As far as impacting the movement, more women would have jumped on the band wagon with it. They would have been able to get across more ways for women to get involved. I am not sure what duties women would have been able to gain by using the media, but I think they would have been able to get more of the messages across they were trying to, not just the messages they got across by word of mouth. I am curious to see not only how it affected the women during this time, but more of how it affected the men and how they thought of it. I also think it might have been over played to where when people see that commercial they change the channel because they've seen it so much they've memorized it.
2. Women that could have been silenced could have been women who didn't push the envelope enough to get their own message out. I know some people who will so persistent to the point of annoyance, but in the end I remembered them. I think women in the feminist movement who were that persistent saw results they wanted to. I think if the voices of those women who were silenced were heard, more awareness could have been made. not necessarily changes made but more ideas put into more peoples heads and if in the right minds, thoughts could have been put forth to make changes. I think as far as communication goes, women around the world would be able to relate and put forth the same message and possibly work together to make a change. Maybe women's rights wouldn't be as strict in places or as lax in others. There might be more of a mix of rights, but for some countries that plays into religion as well.
3. I do not think women get depressed because they are not helping out the family. Without them doing their job at home, the family wouldn't be able to function. I feel that, not just in domestic work, that mothers are the glue to a family. I do not know if it is a biological or societal thing, but mothers in every experience I have been close to, the mother's have been the glue making sure the family runs smoothly. Not that fathers don't care because they do, but mothers have gained the instinct, no matter how much the father helps out, to do everything in their power to perfect her family in her own eyes.
Any person that partakes in any form
of society knows that women are paid less and promoted less often than men in
the workforce. Because this is so well known, I decided that it wasn’t the most
interesting concept to cover for my media illustration from my section of
chapter 9. Instead, I thought the most significant concept to cover would be
the idea that the workplace is not gender neutral, and in fact, masculine.
As stated in the chapter, scholars
started to see that how organizations are structured produced gender
differences instead of individual features of men and women. The following
quotes from the book explain this concept exceedingly well. “It is the man’s
body, its sexuality, minimal responsibility in procreation, and conventional
control of emotions that pervades work and organizational processes (Acker,
1990). “Women’s bodies are ruled out of order, or sexualized and objectified,
in work organizations” (Martin, 2003). “Despite the clear evidence of gender and
related inequalities in work organizations a vision of the abstract worker
persists – a bodiless, sexless, emotionless worker who does not procreate. This
sex- and gender-neutral worker is not actually neutral but instead is a man”
(DeFrancisco &Palczewski, 2007). The technique that ender is completed in
organizations resumes the restriction of women as how men and women socially
construct one another at work affects their work experiences. This tends to damage
the identities and confidence of women workers.
Although intersectionality is
extremely important, especially in workplace settings, I’m only going to focus
on the concept of gender for this specific assignment even though the clip I am
going to share shows more than just gender discrimination. Thinking about
gender discrimination and a media example, without a doubt, I knew The Office
would have an example for sure because they have examples of every type of workplace
“no-no.”
*Clip* (The Office - "Basketball" episode - (5:30-8:30)
Discussion
Questions:
-Do
you think gender discrimination still occurs in the workplace? Why or why not?
If so, how do you think it is performed?
-How
do you think these inequalities can be eliminated? What changes would need to
take place?
A few weeks ago I purchased a new television which had several “apps” on it. Shortly after, I found myself signing up for the one month trial to Netflix in order to max out my tv viewing experience. Since then I found several tv series to begin following. 30 Rock became my favorite and it became evident that gender inequalities in the workplace were seen throughout the series. Since chapter 9 is focused on work and the effects of gender/sex in the workplace this seemed a fitting media example to use.
In the series 30 Rock there are numerous example of class, race and gender/sex issues of inequality in the workplace. The text highlights that there are certain perceptions in organizations which lead one to believe that a sex/gender neutral, abstract worker is still envisioned as a male. This can cause issues in organizational structures and policies which tend to focus on advancing the traditional, male worker. The most obvious discrepancy among workers is unequal pay. Women and minorities are seen to earn less than white males in almost all industries. It is not argued this finding is incorrect, but there is not one method which has been able to successfully rid of these pay discrepancies.
Joan Acker presents 5 reasons why gender is given attention in organizations, and in doing so came to the conclusion that they are “intersecting processes that make issues of power, control, and dominance gendered” (p. 208). These qualities are associated with males and it is no surprise that with their strength and power men would objectify sexuality in the workplace. I have found that men are typically portayed in the media as being sexually harassing towards women and this mentality is then reflected in the workplace. Some quotes from the text I found interesting were:
“the way in which gender is done in organizational work settings continues to constrain women insofar as the way in which men and women socially construct each other at work affects their work experiences, and this tends to impair women workers’ identities and confidence” (p. 208)
“multiple masculinities and femininities exist, and people practice, and are held accountable to, specific kinds depending on their bodies (health, attractiveness), class, race/ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, age, nation, and other social statuses” (p. 208)
After reading the Work Constructs (and Constraints) Gender section of chapter 9 it was evident I should use a clip from the 1st season’s 4th episode of the show 30 Rock. In this episode Cerie’s wardrobe choices are questioned by Liz, but the males in the office are okay with her skimpy clothing. They also show their power over Liz in handling the situation through using attractiveness and age as factors which they use to maintain control of the office. This is seen through their negative responses to Liz’s make-over at the end of the episode.
