Blog 7

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

As much as I want to be open-minded and accepting of new beliefs and ideas, I just can't agree with bell hooks' opinions on love whatsoever.  I commend her on her efforts to frame a progressive idea concerning feminism and love because I am sure there are many feminists who agree with the logic she presents.  However, in my opinion, her claims that patriarchal relationships are bound for inequality and female subordination are outlandish.  It is without question that there in fact ARE unequal relationships and unhappy marriages in patriarchal pairs, but claiming that patriarchal relationships in general are all bad just seems like a soapbox speech.  I am familiar with multiple families, including my own, who practice patriarchal relationships and are very satisfied with their situation.  While I do agree it is important to maintain a balance, I don't see anything wrong with a husband working outside the home as the primary wage earner and the wife staying home and raising a family.  Additionally, bell hooks doesn't do much to support her case.  She mentions her father as being a dominant man, which angered her as a rebellious teen, but considering most teenagers find their parents to be a bit overbearing every once in awhile, this argument seems like a normal stage of life.  My goal is not to bash bell hooks and her beliefs; however, I think it is very important that just like my argument above, her writing in this chapter seems to be merely an opinion, not a reliable and strong argument. 

I'm sure bell hooks would about have a fit if she knew people were living like this, but thanks to the Duggars and their 19 children, I'd say this is a pretty darn patriarchal family:

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?

There are definite patriarchal views seen in Patti's advice.  The basic premise of the show is pretty patriarchal in nature-women are typically trying to win the approval of millionaire men with the hopes of settling down and forming a marriage.  While Patti stresses that women need to be financially stable before seeking a millionaire, she doesn't try to hide the fact that these women are seeking men with money for a reason.  Additionally, rules for women to find these men play into the patriarchal role as well.  She encourages them to go to a Steakhouse because real men like steak, and she encourages them to play into the traditional role of handing the man their business card and asking the man to call them instead of the reverse.  I doubt bell hooks would appreciate Patti's ideas since they are all pretty patriarchal in nature.  They seem to be on opposite ends of the spectrum.  As for the third question, I mean, it's television so everything is dramatized and spiced up to make people want to watch it.  Personally, I don't know too many women who are seriously seeking out millionaires by going to steakhouses and giving out their business cards, but the idea of women seeking a financially stable man isn't uncommon.  I think a lot of women want to have at least the option to stay at home and raise a family and finding a financially sound man to marry helps achieve their goals.  

Can you think of instances/parables/specific scriptures that shows male dominance or a patriarchal ideology? 

As a Catholic, I have strong Christian beliefs with which I identify.  I know from experience that the bible is filled with patriarchal ideology, and while some may completely disagree with what is being said, I find it important to focus on the bigger picture.  For example, in 1 Corinthians 11:7-8 it says: 

 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels.  Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God.   

While the passage focuses a lot on a woman's dependence on a man, I think the last bit is the most important.  It identifies that woman was made from a man, but man is born from a woman.  It is necessary for both of them to depend on the other in order to maintain existence.  

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 guess I don't really see a connection.  I know she's saying "Papa don't preach", but I don't necessarily see it as a Christian reference?  Maybe I'm not looking into it enough...

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? 

Yes, I do agree that this is typically true, and when my group did our media presentation we kind of hit on this as well.  Perhaps incorporating children's books or just basic group discussions about feminism and feminist beliefs into younger school-aged classrooms would help to get the ball rolling.  I think the most important idea behind this is just to talk about it.  Before taking this class, I don't know if I had ever had an actual discussion about feminist beliefs, so if we start incorporating it into younger classrooms, the discussion would have more room to grow and develop.




  

Gender Bender Video: Kash, Ashley, Michele, Sarah & Bret

I couldn't get the video to upload to Blogger so here is the link to find it on YouTube! 

Gender Bender-Natasha, Kari, Steve, Brooke

Gender Bender

Our gender bender video!

Chapter 17-19

Chapter 17: To Love Again - The Heart of Feminism


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

§  After reading bell hook’s take on feminism and love, I think that feminism has taken a very new twist in my mind. I think that this was a very important chapter because it uncovered a lot of misconceptions about feminists and love and explained how the movement has taken this turn towards not associating with romantic love at all, and also how that is changing. “ If women and men want to know love, we have to yearn for feminism. For without feminist thinking and practice we lack the foundation to create loving bonds.” (bell hooks, 2000, pg 100) I commend bell hooks’ boldness in her style of writing. However, I would argue that she is so completely one sided in the way that she presents her information that often times she is far less convincing than she has capability to be. Her statement discounts all loving marriages that are structured through a patriarchal system. Not all patriarchal families and marriages are oppressive and lonely. Feminist values can definitely benefit some relationships, but I think many would argue that it is not the primary component that creates a healthy and loving marriage. I would argue this. After all, people have been getting married for years and years and years. Romance and love has existed far before the feminist movement and people have fallen in love and stayed in love. She completely discounts all forms of patriarchy and marriage based upon it.  I find that to be a very skewed and ignorant take on a practice that has taken place for thousands of years. If she wants to make such a bold statement, I would suggest at least bringing in some empirical data to support her rant. You can’t justify a statement like that just because you came from an unhealthy marriage or because someone you know did. Welcome to the world. It’s not perfect, and neither are relationships.

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?

§  There are quite a few patriarchal views about dating in this clip. For example, her discussion on how to go about catching your man. “Go to a steakhouse” and the suggestion to go alone so as to appear autonomous. Also, her suggestion to have him call you rather than you take his card because you’re “traditional” is another example on how to land a date with a guy that is rolling in the money.  These are all rather patriarchal views on dating, relationships, and love. She kind of contradicts herself a few times when she states how it’s important to be financially self sufficient before seeking out your rich husband. She also describes that in times like this, economic turmoil, it’s important that we are marrying rich if we can. In this suggestion she is insinuating that we need men to take care of us, support, and provide for us. However, in order to have that need met, we need to go out and find these men for ourselves. I don’t think that Patti’s view aligns with bell hooks because she is clearly stating that you need a man to take care of you and provide for you even after you’ve earned all of your money and are self-sufficient. This battle cry to marry isn’t about finding your soulmate, it’s about finding financial security. I think that bell hooks would argue that you need to find a feministic loving relationship rather than focusing all of your energy on finding a sugar daddy. 

  

In Chapter 18: Feminist Spirituality

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 one of the most basic forms of this without bringing in various specific examples would be the use of the word ‘men’ as describing humankind, which addresses both men and women. There are many instances in the bible that human kind is depicted and addressed through this jargon.  However, in the Bible’s defense, women are addressed separately from men many times as well.

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"?

§  To be honest, after watching the clip and viewing the lyrics afterwards, I really don’t see any biblical reference in this video. Yes, it is about getting her father’s “blessing” but I don’t think that the significance of that has anything to do with the christian religion. The way that I took this video is that she is daddy’s little girl, who has fallen in love with a bad boy at a young age, she knows her dad is protective of her and would probably not want her fooling around with this guy, so she wants his advice on the matter and also his approval if she continues to be with him. That was my own take on the song. Maybe there was something that I missed?

CH 19: Visionary Feminism

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 definitely agree with this statement. It’s very hard to teach someone something different than what they’ve grown up with and known for years and years. If feminism is something that is to be spread to everyone, it has to be planted and taught at a young age in order that is grows and becomes part of the human mind early in life. This allows for the individual to look at everything differently in terms of young relationships and possibly relationships in the future. This would affect the way that children interact with the opposite sex and feminism would slowly be introduced to daily life. In order for a feminist curriculum to be taught, it must first be broken down so that it is easy to understand and easy to apply to the real world. Books like bell hooks, for example, are a good basis for the reasons behind the feminist movement. However, within the text there are not a lot of ways to specifically apply this ideology to the real world.

Innteresting Video....

Gender Bender Team Video: Alex, Anna, Seth, Philipe

Videoness!

Gender Bender Project - Sara Weeldreyer, Kyle Bailey & Nicole Lopez

For our gender bender project we...well, you guys know what we did...

Here's a video of our reactions - kind of like a Real World confessional!

The class concept we looked at, based off what our group did, is the Theory of Linguistic Relativity - and it is from DeFrancisco & Palczewski, page 109.

ENJOY! :)

bell hooks Discussion: Ch. 17-19

Chapter 17: To Love Again - The Heart of Feminism


In Chapter 17, bell hooks discusses that to be involved in the feminist movement, many women had to forgo romantic love because of patriarchal values such as domination, control and coercion. bell hooks states, "Early on the feminist critique of love was not complex enough. Rather than specifically challenging patriarchal misguided assumptions of love, it just presented love as the problem. We were to do away with love and put in its place a concern with gaining rights and power. Then, no one talked about the reality that women would risk hardening our hearts and end up bing just as emotionally closed as the patriarchal men or butch females we were rejecting in the name of feminist rebellion. And for the most part this is exactly what happened. Rather than rethinking lot and insisting on its importance and value, feminist discourse on love simply stopped" (p.102).


hooks explains that love can only truly exist through feminist thinking: no existing domination, mutual respect, and equal rights amongst partners. This is true love. "To choose feminist politics, then, is a choice to love" (p. 104).


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


Now, watch the following video interviewing Patti Stanger, the Millionaire Matchmaker.

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?

  

In Chapter 18, Feminist Spirituality, bell hooks talks about spirituality and religion, specifically in terms of Christianity. She explains that women have long used their religious beliefs to escape the male domination they experience - but then makes that religious escape null and void by saying that religion itself if male-dominated.

"...Western metaphysical dualism was the ideological foundation of all forms of group oppression, sexism, racism, etc., and that such thinking formed the basis of Judeo-Christian belife systems" (p. 105-106).
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 :)

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"?

CH 19: Visionary Feminism

This chapter discusses the vision of a better future in which feminist thinkers have been trying to achieve since the beginning of feminism. The main goal being, to change women’s lives by breaking off from male dominance and increasing their personal power. The chapter also mentions reasons why this message is not being heard, one of the reasons being lack of effective communication to the public. According to hooks, feminist/anti-sexist education is needed in the communities as well as elementary education.

Question: hooks states that, “Today in academic circles much of the most celebrated feminist theory is written in a sophisticated jargon that only the well-educated can read. Most people in our society do not have a basic understanding of feminism; they cannot acquire that understanding form a wealth of diverse material, grade school-level primers, and so on, because this material does not exist. We must create it if we are to rebuild feminist movement that is truly for everyone” (hooks 2000, pg. 112)

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?

Since my question was not related to a video, I thought I would put one up just for fun, hope you enjoy!