Brooke's Gender Identity Project

Sara's Creative Project

Here is my creative project. Enjoy!

concept all blog

Anna Mullen Concept Application Blog:

I am looking at gender as socially constructed, meaning that who we are and how we define ourselves in terms of gender exists on a higher level than just on an individual level. A specific concept from the text that can be considered with this idea is gender identity at the interpersonal communication level. I mentioned this concept in my introduction blog for this project becuase I believe this concept fits perfectly with my gender identity of interest. Interpersonal communication refers to how persons influence each other's gender identites through their interactions with each other (DeFrancisco and Palczewski 2007). This concept basically defines what I will be studying in a person's gender identity. I will look at a few peoples' gender identities, specifically how they describe themselves in terms of gender performance, how they perform their gender identity around their family or household, and how they perform gender around friends, co-workers, etc. I will look at similarities and differences between how a person acts and even how they veiw themselves in different interpersonal groups.

Blog #7 - Fin.

First, my apologies for posting after midnight. UNL Air was being ridiculous!

I appreciated all of the input on Chapter 17! Everyone had unique and interesting concepts to add to the conversation, and it allowed me to see the chapter from more angles.

The first question for Chapter 17 had two very different opinions, but these opinions seemed to occur because of the angles people were reading the chapter from. People generally agreed or completely disagreed with bell hooks' view on love. Those that looked at her view as seeing a relationship with equality and mutual respect seemed to agree completely. Those who thought that you had to have the exact view of feminism as bell hooks did not agree at all with her viewpoints. There were only a few people that both agreed and disagreed.

Everybody seemed to have the same opinion of the Patti Stanger video and patriarchy. Everyone found several examples existing within the interview. There was only one person that thought that Patti was encouraging women to be independent, but I do see where that individual was coming from.

I am so excited for the discussion tomorrow and to hear more about all of your thoughts and ideas! :)

Blog #Last - Feminist Spirituality

I really liked what all of you had to say about both male dominance in the Bible, as well as the Madonna video. There were a few commonalities between people and a few very interesting parts of certain blogs that I really liked! However, those will be in the discussion tomorrow, so be on the lookout!

Aside from that, I'll go ahead and answer the questions as I think I would have to bring what (little) I know for y'all to know about before the discussion :)

1. I really have no solid idea about what the Bible says in the way of male dominance, but there are some narratives that I remember that are based from the Bible. However, these stories have all male "protagonists," which made me side with hooks' thought that the Bible is male-dominated. The stories were of Moses parting the sea, Noah and the whale, Jesus' life, Daniel & Goliath, and Adam. Those contrasted (in terms of numbers) with the "stories" I knew of women, which were limited to Mary (who, I just knew about birthing Jesus) and Eve (who was made from Adam). I think the numbers speak for themselves - but that is from my surface view of scripture. Maybe there's in-depth things that I didn't mention here, but for someone who hasn't studied Christianity, it seems very male-dominated to me.

2. To preface what I'm about to say about the Madonna music video, I'll just say that this summer I did a project on her, so I'm a little biased/too in-depth with information about her. Anyways, I know that she was raised in a Catholic family, which she was not a fan of, but it is prevalent in her music lyrics and titles. Anyways, I think the biggest connection to religion I heard in the song was the line "he says that he's going to marry me, and we can raise a little family." I'm not too sure if this is any kind of real religious rule, but I know that my family has taught me that when you get pregnant, out of wedlock, you need to get married to make things "legitimate" - and marriage I always equate with a religious ceremony.

Well, those are my two cents! They'll be in the discussion tomorrow, but just as a first glance, here's my side. Enjoy!

Final Blog Response

Ch 17: First of all, I was surprised to have a concept such as "love" brought into such an academic, philosophical and political discussion of feminism by hooks. This is not only an abstract concept but one that has no one definition and is experienced in a multitude of different ways. Love can also be a very personal phenomenon for each individual and the ability to study it empirically is a challenge to the research community. But having said that, I think I understand what hooks is getting at. She is talking about equality in its purest form is love. And equality in its purest form is also feminist rights. So they equal each other (if a=b and b=c then a=c).

          The part that I get hung up on is how to we define this? How will we see this played out in the world in such a way that we say, "Aha, there it is. That couple exudes what hooks was talking about with feminism and love." I agree with hooks in the idea and what she is saying, but I do not think there is a way we can ever truly critique whether it is truly happening on a social level. The relationship of a couple is complex, private and fluctuating in a way that it could never be measured. Plus, all observers would have their own biases based on their own experiences. But maybe I'm looking at this too much with the "science-y research" part of my thinking. Yes I agree with what hooks is saying but it is quite idealistic and how will we ever know if we have reached that goal. I would also like to point out that hooks only talks about the romantic aspect of love. There are many other forms of love that are often lost in our society and should be brought to light more often. 

          As for the Patti Stanger clip, that was interesting to say the least. I have seen her show a couple times and found some interesting takeaways - but a lot more opinions and advice I didn't care for. In this clip she unnecessarily promotes old-school beliefs and values under the guise that modern women are empowered to make choices. I am not going to go to a steakhouse alone, keep track of a score of a sports event I am not interested in, and flash smiles to get men's attention. Because none of these things are me. If a woman felt like doing these things were already something she would naturally do, then go for it, I have no criticism for that. My point is that better dating advice would be to be yourself and do things you would normally do. I am not going to attend an electronics or comic event just to meet guys, because then I would be acting like someone I'm not. And also, why is she reversing all of our progress toward equality by telling the guy "I'm old-fashioned, you call me"? Hello, haven't we spent decades trying to equalize the dating scene in terms of initiation? If a guy hands me his card and says call me and I'm interested, why not call him? If a girl can ask out a guy, she can also call him.
          Stanger's view on love does not aline with hooks view because it really is not about equality. Stash cash? Really? Earthquakes? In a true equality both individuals in the couple would have the option for career and the option for staying home. Stanger's view of love is very heteronormative and focuses way more on the woman being a certain way in certain situations. Better advice to men and women: be yourself and pursue activities that you enjoy. In these contexts you will meet people who are also being their authentic selves.

Ch 18: I think the main way that religions become patriarchal is in leadership, which is male-dominated. So for a Biblical reference...all of them since Jesus is male and so are his disciples/apostles. I am not a theologian and do not practice Christianity, but the story that comes to mind is the woman at the well that Jesus admonishes for having been with several men and some of them she was not married to. What if it had been a man who had been with a bunch of women? I know there are other places in the Bible that admonish adultery, pre-marital sex and other forms of sexual behavior that were looked down on, but this one focuses on man criticizing the sexual behavior of a woman.
          As for the Madonna music video...interesting. I have never heard this song, but it has a pretty straightforward storyline. Pretty realistic, but the heart of the issue is a young woman making her own choices about her body and reproductive abilities and wanting to maintain her close relationship with her father despite her choices. I don't see anything in this that is Biblical or Christian, just a societal rule.

Ch 19: I think this is one of the areas that I will leave this class most passionate about: bringing feminist messages into educational curriculum, especially at the elementary level. I really liked hooks' book "happy to be nappy" and have since found out that she has four more children's books. To me these are one of the best mediums to start discussions in both families and schools. They are basically messages of empowerment for children. One of her children's books is called "Grump, Growl and Groan" and it is about acknowledging your emotions and letting yourself feel them. I think messages like this are important, especially for girls who are taught to be polite and cheerful at all times. Showing negative emotions is considered inappropriate. So my point is that "feminist messages" at this level do not even have to be gender oriented, race focused or "heavy" in any way. It can be small messages that teach children to be themselves and to celebrate who they are as individuals. This can lead to a lot of happy adults who are well-adjusted and able to engage in healthy relationships and be productive and progressive members of society.

Blog 7

Chapter 17:


What do you think about bell hooks view on feminism and love? Do you agree or disagree, and why?


I would agree with Bell Hooks' ideology of love and that it requires balance. Mutual respect and equality would make for a much stronger foundation in a relationship than performance norms and purposeful constraint. For feminists to close themselves off to an emotion as necessary as love would make for very unsatisfying personal experience, in my opinion. I would argue that what they were rejecting, critiquing, and conflicting with wasn't love at all. No more than the way the social interaction between members of "Jersey Shore" reflects at true healthy friendship or camaraderie. Just because patriarchal domination has supposedly conditioned the notion of love into what we observe in popular culture, i.e. gender roles, aggression, dominance, etc. (which is then perpetuated in the interpersonal exchange of ideas and communication in the general public), does not make the intangible notion of love these things. 

Do you see any patriarchal views about dating, relationships, marriage or love in the previous clip? If so, what are they? Do you think that Patti Stanger's view on love alines with bell hooks' view? Why or why not? Does the previous clip seem to fit with society's view on love, relationships and/or marriage? Why or why not?


Absolutely, the message was highly contradicting. Encouraging people to marry for money only after they've become financially independent? Whaaaat?? Most people would assume, and display disgust or the fact that she's matching wealthy, gumptionless men with self-assumed trophy wives. Yet she has the luxury of defending herself with the perspective that she's not just hooking up women with wealthy men. Her matchmaking extends to an array of gender identities on both sides of the equation. I would say Ms. Stanger's views do not aline with hooks' at all. I suppose I would just argue that the idea the any individual allowing themselves to become dependent on another for whatever reason, isn't engaging in a critical feminist perspective. I don't think I could accurately project what I viewed in the clip to reflect how society views love and unions. I think people are so different, it just wouldn't work to assume everyone felt the same.   


Chapter 18:


In the chapter, however, hooks never states a specific example of how religion (specifically Christianity) is patriarchal. Can you think of instances/parables/specific scriptures that shows male dominance or a patriarchal ideology? *If not, no one's going to be judged for lack of Bible knowledge - trust me :)

I think going back to the "lesser cut" clip we've viewed in class, I'd probably claim the Christian explanation of the creation of man and woman is extremely patriarchal, even though I identity with the christianity.


The above video is of Madonna's song "Papa Don't Preach". After watching the video and listening to the song, is there anything that could be a biblical reference or refer to religion in general? Do you think this is an accurate representation of the Christian religion - or could it be a societal "rule"?


I don't think this refers to religion at all. I think Madonna's character got pregnant at a young age and is portraying her desire for her father's understanding, help, and forgiveness. 


Chapter 19:


Do you find this to be true? And how do you think these “grade-school level primers” should be presented so that the message is successfully communicated to the younger audience?


I would definitely agree. Efficient communication and the spread of awareness at and introductory and fundamental level, and young age, of the topic at hand is key. I think prefect examples of "primers" are materials like the "Happy to be Nappy" children's book that we read in class. Books like that, or school functions like "feminist fairs" could spread information in a passive, interactive way.