Response to Caren 3/31

Caren’s discussion of Gloria Steinem’s article “Supremacy Crimes” raises some important points about the nature of those who end up committing crimes such as sexual assault. As mentioned in class, sexual assault is more about establishing dominance than about actual sex. In any case, while reading the articles about women in the military, specifically “A Peril in War Zones,” I began to wonder how much the military could be considered an anomaly in terms of how it compares to typical every day life, even with reference to Steinem’s concept of the “drug of superiority” that some white, middle-class males apparently become addicted to. The story of Capt. Margaret White was difficult to digest in that the harassment she experienced was so blatant yet in the context of a war zone, the effect on her as one individual really does seem insignificant when compared to large numbers of people being wounded and dying in war. Regardless, when we spoke about sexual assault in class we briefly touched upon how it is often used as a weapon in warfare, against the enemy. With that taken into consideration it seems absurd that it would occur between people who are teammates. While Capt. White was concerned with the effect that a report of harassment and assault would have on the mission at hand, one would think that the people who do the assaulting would have the same worries, for they quite possibly could be compromising the abilities of the victim though either psychological or physical harm – the statement that a woman in the military is more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed in combat is incredibly disheartening and scary. Even given the supposed revisions to the complaint reporting process, cases like those of Helen Benedict and Sgt. Tracy R. Phillips seem ridiculous. I was outraged at how the case of Helen Benedict was treated, where instead of prosecuting her offender, administrators instead criticized her for leaving her post. To acknowledge Caren’s discussion of Steinem’s article about power and supremacy crimes, I wonder if the idea of male power extends to a soldier’s decision to assault one of his comrades. My instincts would say yes, it probably is, but the reason I pose the question is that isn’t is not enough to be in an occupational position where one is legally asserting his supremacy over other people, even entire communities, by physical means? Could this “drug of superiority” be manifest in a decision to join the military due to the very nature of what the occupation entails when put into practice?

On a related note, “Living and Fighting Alongside Men, and Fitting In” highlights how women have really been able to succeed and even outperform men in military occupations that previously excluded women or were solely male dominated. I found it interesting that despite having seemingly proven their worth, that women still must resort to “showing a disarming brashness” to cope with slights from the men, mainly because I immediately thought about Levy’s argument against taking on masculine characteristics for their own benefit, because by embracing construed notions of “masculinity,” to Levy, a woman thereby rejects femininity. However, the article implies that any “brashness” or stoicism that military women exhibit in the context of living and working in war zones is an adaptation that is necessary for integration and that furthermore allows them to succeed in their work. In other words, along with my previous speculation as to how much the military can be compared to the “real world,” I am more inclined to view a female’s stoicism in the military as one of necessity to do the type of work that is presented as opposed to a conscious effort to subordinate other women (and the idea of femininity) for one’s own benefit as is more pronounced in the corporate world. The article “Living and Fighting Alongside Men” states, “women in today’s military say they do not feel the same pressure to prove themselves [as women before them did]. They adapt and expect others to adapt. They preserve their femininity without making much of it.” There are no specifics about what “preserving their femininity” entails or looks like in a military context, I think it is a good thing if female military personnel are able to do so, yet I am still wondering about how much room there is for traditional constructions of femininity in the context of a war. That is not to say that women can’t distinguish themselves as women amongst their comrades, but I feel like when comparing the idea of masculine vs feminine in the military that the nature of the environment and the missions make it such that an analysis here would be a slightly different case than what we previously have discussed with regard to “gendered” behavior.

The Struggle for Control

“Supremacy Crimes” by Steinem, “Mapping the Margins” by Crenshaw, and “Peril in the War Zone” by Myers all discuss issues of violence against women and groups who are in power. Although there are variations about who holds the power, the common theme that holds all of these readings together is that the group in power affects women— of all colors. As a result of a patriarchal society, women often become the silent victims of male dominance.

In Steinem’s article, she discusses the group most likely to get hooked on the “drug of superiority” are young, white, heterosexual males. This claim makes sense when we consider a “normal” individual in the powerful business world. Belonging to the business world, symbolizes access to a plethora of resources and power. As a result, Steinem explains that power is, “A drug pushed by a male-dominant culture that presents dominance as a natural right; a racist hierarchy that falsely elevates whiteness; a materialist society that equates superiority with possessions, and a homophobic one that empowers only one form of sexuality.” Individuals who feed into concepts of power like these, perpetuate the cycle of who can claim power—and its often seen as a natural right to white individuals. Once claiming this power, the statistics of large crimes and murders show that these young, white, heterosexual men will do anything to hold on to their social standing, even if it means killing other people. In fact, Steinem believes, “Others may kill to improve their own condition--in self-defense, or for money or drugs; to eliminate enemies; to declare turf in drive-by shootings; even for a jacket or a pair of sneakers--but white males addicted to supremacy kill even when it worsens their condition or ends in suicide.” Although Steinem does not exactly bring in how men who take this power can specifically threaten/abuse women, it is clear that anyone who feels they deserve such a large amount of power is a dangerous force.

After considering thoughts like this, I understand our reading for last class a little more clearly. Susan Brownmiller’s definition of rape as, “nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear… an exercise in power that perpetuates male domination of women “ (272) now makes more sense to me. However, in addition to how she defines it, male’s power also seems to extend to the realm of controlling what can be and is not said. The best example of this type of power is revealed in “Peril in the War Zone”, where Myers discusses sexual harassment in the military. I was shocked to hear that “A woman in the military is more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq”. Yet even with this truth and other statistics listed in the article, “The majority of sexual abuse allegations end with no prosecution at all. Of 2,171 suspects of investigations that were completed during the fiscal year that ended in September 2008, only 317 faced a court-martial. Another 515 faced administrative punishments or discharges. Nearly half of the completed investigations lacked evidence or were ‘unsubstantiated or unfounded’”. After reading this, it is clear that the unique environment of the armed forces are allowing sexual abuse and harassment go on by not doing enough to prevent it. Although there are many methods mentioned about the Army’s improvements recently addressing the issue, it is clear that women do not feel comfortable coming forward to make complaints about fellow soldiers. I do not blame them for not wanting to rock the boat in a group that should be so united. After all, in many cases the unity in the troop could play a large role in survival when in combat.

Considering the example of a military lifestyle, puts an interesting new spin on sexual harassment. Similar to the issues of intersectionality that Crenshaw brought up in “Supremacy Crimes”, it is important to remember that not all sexual harassment is the same. Where it is easy to judge a situation like sexual abuse as one that a woman should do anything to end, it is never that simple. Crenshaw brought up that each case of abuse is, “multilayered and routinized forms of domination that often converge in these women’s lives hindering their ability to create alternatives to the abusive relationships that brought them to shelters in the first place”. Like the military example, sometimes speaking up can sacrifice the unity of a troop in combat. However, more applicable to the “everyday” woman, sexual abuse is usually committed by an acquaintance. Walking away from a situation where a spouse or loved one violates the trust between partners is much harder than it would seem to an outsider looking in. Last semester in one of my psychology classes, we learned about the effects of abuse on their victims. In a study that we learned about, abuse actually led to stronger feelings for the abuser. Specifically, there were two groups of chicks. Individual chicks were put in a box. Some boxes had a hand that hit the chicks and the other box did not make any harmful movements toward the chicks. Affection for the hand actually grew for chicks that were hit. Although this is a random example, it makes it easier for me to understand why so many victims of abuse have trouble leaving their loved ones. On top of many factors that discussed in Crenshaw’s article, such as economic dependency, many victims of abuse genuinely believe their abusers can change. This faith can lead to further physical and psychological pain.

Response to Kirsten's "Pigs in Training" Post:

I agree with both Kirsten and Caren in regards to the fact that some of the issues that Ariel Levy addresses in “Pigs in Training” are relevant in today’s society. Young female teens are “dressing provocatively and fellating promiscuously” in hopes of increasing their popularity (Levy 144). However, the people that these teenage girls are hoping to impress are the boys. Their outer appearance and actions are all done in hopes of gaining their attention. Levy makes it clear that boys do not have a long attention span and that girls need to do more than wear a low cut shirt and short skirt to keep the boys entertained. Thus, girls partake in sexual activities in hopes of gaining further attention from these boys. But Levy also notes that these girls are not having sex for their own sexual pleasure, but rather “it is primarily for bragging rights” (Levy 145). In other words, in order for a teenage girl to be popular, she must wear little to no clothing, constantly allude to sex, and most importantly have sex.

Kirsten makes a brief reference to Levy and Anne’s discussion about girls in high school during Levy’s generation. Levy explains that “it was the same in the sense that you always wished you could be the prettiest and the most popular, the one who guys wanted to be with and girls wanted to be. But the obligation to present yourself as the skankiest…is something new.” This is the part of Levy’s argument that I am not fully convinced on. While I do believe that dressing slutty has a greater effect on a girl’s popularity in today’s society than say in the 1970s, I still do believe that it effected her overall popularity.

For example, lets look at the movie Grease. The final scene in the movie shows the transformation of Sandy. In the beginning of the movie she is this goody good who has no friends at school and is the girl who the Pink Ladies mock. Mind you the Pink Ladies are the girls that are depicted as too cool for school. They tend to dress in I guess in their time would be considered “sluttier” outfits however, I have a very hard time describing their outfits as slutty, especially compared to today’s culture, because their clothing is not slutty or revealing, just slightly tighter perhaps. However, Sandy comes to the conclusion that in order to truly gain the full attention of the boy she likes, Danny, she must change. Thus, she gets rid of her long pastel poodle skirt and simple sweater, and trades it for absolutely skintight black pants and a black leather jacket and shirt. Voila, Sandy now has the man of her dreams and she has finally gained a large group of friends, including the Pink Ladies. All this was accomplished by increasing her sex appeal.

Ultimately, the girls from the 1950s are unbelievably tame and well clothed compared to the teenagers of today. I curious to see what the next generation of female teenagers will be like. I honestly do not know how much more clothing they can afford to remove from their outfits, because at this rate the next generation will give an entirely new meaning to Levy’s definition of exhibitionism.

I also quickly wanted to comment on Whitney Walker’s article “Why I Fight Back”. I found what Walker had to offer interesting. Scarred from one of her early experiences as a teenager with a man exposing his private parts to her outside of her school, left her feeling weak and defenseless. As a result, she eventually took it upon herself to prevent those feelings from repeating. Learning martial arts and self-defense changed her confidence and level of comfort being alone in public.

I found this article interesting because I feel like I am also a strong female. Although I am not trained in defensive training, I agree with her when she said that there is a link between “knowing I am strong” and the refusal to “be weak” (130). It is impossible to know if I would ever have the strength to “fight back” in a situation like Walker’s or any one of Emilie Morgans’ three, but I value what Walker said to combat the “cultural ‘wisdom’” that has “always held that women’s bodies were not made to fight, and that we are constantly vulnerable to sexual violence” (130). Specifically, “women’s bodies are perfect for karate: we have more lower-body strength and tend to be more agile than men” (129).

On a similar note, I found this youtube video that talks about women hitting men. I find it relevant because it presents a situation where onlookers have the opportunity to stop the violence of a woman beating a man. However, because no one sees the woman as a threat, almost no one stops to confront the couple. This fact supports the same “cultural wisdom” that women are powerless to men, no matter how hard they try.



*plus this video is great because it features Colgate's very own, Professor Keating :)

3/29 Pigs in Training

The readings assigned for today covered a variety of topics, so I will focus mainly on that of Ariel Levy.

In “Pigs in Training,” Levy describes some prominent incidents involving pre-teen and teen promiscuity in schools as an introduction to a larger discussion about the way that girls seemingly act to be popular. Her mention of “sex [being] something you did to fit in more than you did for pleasure” was reminiscent of her comments earlier in the book about figures like Paris Hilton promoting the image of appearing sexual but not actually gaining any benefit from it (Levy 154). In other words, this middle school/high school culture of competition in which girls compete to appear sexy but not actually seek pleasure is a microcosm of what is being promoted in popular culture. Her argument, consistent with previous contentions, seems to be one of wondering why girls go through the effort to appear sexy and partake in sexual acts that they don’t even benefit from just to climb socially. Furthermore, this culture exists regardless of when boys like David state clearly “what girls don’t understand is that guys always want girls. If every girl dressed casually, you’d still like girls. It’s like, you don’t have to exhaust yourselves” (Levy 151). David obviously is just one teenage, heterosexual male, but his statement makes this culture seem even more ridiculous by essentially implying that girls go through so much effort to look hot, yet in the end it probably isn’t necessary to attract male attention. Yet it does attract male attention, but the manner in which it does is by making girls into exhibitions for boys’ benefit, which is what Levy objects to. The examples of girls making out with girls because they think that guys will give them more attention, and the one girl snapping her thong at another boy actually made me laugh out loud, yet if you look around in a middle school or high school and observe the way girls dress and act, it really is evident how consuming it is (Levy 149, 150). However, I think what drove the absurdity home was Anne’s reaction to Levy’s comment that in her day girls would have been embarrassed to look slutty: “So how did you get the guy? Charm?” (Levy 155).

Levy eventually refocused the chapter to discussion of sex education and how given that the government has spent over $1 billion on abstinence education since 1996, that teens clearly are left with conflicting messages between what school tells them and what media and pop culture tells them (Levy 156, 157). I knew that abstinence is promoted in a lot of public school sex-ed programs, but I was shocked to read that in many cases that contraception, is mentioned, is taught as ineffective or not mentioned at all (Levy 157)! Frankly I find that very hard to believe, because its obviously an outright lie (to teach that its ineffective). It’s ineffective if not used properly but that’s outrageous – if teens are going to do what you tell them not to, to send the message that contraception isn’t even worth trying is just setting them up for disaster. Reading that made me think of this clip from Mean Girls. The “Miss Tape” presentation that Levy witnessed also seems a little outrageous…not only is it very crude but is hard to relate to in the context of hypersexual contemporary pop culture. Finally, I thought it was interesting how Levy sought out an abstinence-only proponent to interview about why her beliefs are so. The way that she angled the conversation made Peggy Cowan’s arguments seem ridiculous in the context of what teens are doing, and seemingly going to do anyway, but Levy still did make the distinction that there is a difference in allowing teens to feel “sexy, secure, or confident” and finding teens that can recognize what really does make them feel “sexy, secure, and confident” (Levy 168).

Response to Katrina 3/24

Response to Katrina 3/24

I can’t help but agree with both Caren and Katrina that after reading these articles the idea of giving birth is painful to think about! I remember watching some sort of documentary about the birthing process in 8^th grade health (I think it was called “The Miracle of Life” or something to that effect) and remember everyone, myself included, thinking “ewwww!” But now, as a more educated and informed college student, my thoughts remain similar. (The men in class were probably thinking how lucky they are to get to bypass the discomfort!) As does Caren, I really admire the courage of mothers to go through childbirth, as painful and unappealing as it is, especially those who have had more than one child. I don’t want to come off as a wimp but I much rather would have a procedure done that would minimize the discomfort and expedite the process than go through something like Elizabeth Rourke. I also would feel far more comfortable to have a procedure that is relatively standardized and “perfected” than have an incompetent physician attempt the Woods corkscrew maneuver and fail. My mom delivered my younger brother through a C-section and she is doing fine, so I can’t help but think that even though it has a lot of risks, as does any invasive procedure, that it’s not as dangerous and debilitating as Goer makes it out to be. With that said, when Gawande described the details of a Cesearean section that did not sound appealing either! I feel like an extensive and detailed analysis can be performed to compare Goer and Gawande’s articles. The vehement language employed by Goer made me immediately assume that she was overreacting and in my mind made her less credible, though she does have statistical evidence to back up some of her arguments (a stylistic criticism I suppose). At the same time, I think using the term “industrial” in the title of the article is a little strong, though I assume the point was to generate a better standard for child delivery. I think that women to some extent should have a choice in their mode of childbirth (unless of course complications happen that make an emergency C-section seem more necessary/imperative) AND should be informed about the risks and benefits of all possible procedures. Until reading this article I’ll admit I didn’t know too much about the specifics of the process, though I guess that makes sense since I’m not exactly at that point in my life yet. The juxtaposition of these two articles, while it makes sense to put them together, makes me question what is best, though there might not be a right answer. Assuming that I eventually have children I’ll just have to suck it up and do it and hope that my doctor knows what they are doing – it seems like no matter what way you go its going to be uncomfortable!

in response to katrina

After reading Gawande and Goer discuss all of the things that could possibly go wrong while giving birth, I have to agree with Katrina that childbirth is something I am in no way looking forward to now. On top of reading about every single negative aspect of birthing a child, I happened to watch a recent episode of MTV's "Sixteen and Pregnant" that complimented our readings incredibly well. In the full episode that I have selected (around 20 minutes in), Samantha (16) is induced into labor and dilates very slowly. Her birthing process turns into one similar to that of Elizabeth Rourke explained by Gawande. However, on top of simply dilating slowly, Samantha also has to endure painful contractions and back labor that make her scream in pain. Around 23 minutes, Samantha’s doctor decides to do an emergency C-section and MTV actually shows the procedure. Seeing the infant pulled from her mother’s uterus (26 minutes) is especially vivid in my memory, and will probably stay that way for a while. Viewing this process in combination with reading all about the birthing process, especially the births that lasted 30, 40, 50 hours, really makes it hard for me to look forward to giving birth. It makes me respect mothers so much more for knowing more about the pain they had to go through to deliver their children. Last it makes me consider a scheduled C-section that more appealing. Although both Goer and Gawande have issues with the idea that a scheduled C-section, reading about the pain and watching Samantha scream in agony make me view the surgery in a much more positive light. Although Goer in particular seems opposed to scheduling c-sections, watching "Sixteen and Pregnant" makes it easier to overlook his points. While Gawande thinks, “We are losing our connection to yet another natural process of life” (10), I think I would personally allow myself to diverge from the natural process of life if it meant I could miss out on the birthing process Samantha and Rourke had to endure. Where I used to think of childbirth as a “miracle”, I almost flinch when I think about the process now.

The Truths Behind Childbirth

After reading these two articles my desire to have children seems to have decrease. I know that the birthing process is not pleasant, but these articles make it seem very unpleasant and really emphasized all the negative side effects, including the death of the mother and/or child. In the article “How Childbirth Went Industrial”, the author, Atul Gawande, describes (and spares no details) the process of childbirth. I must say that I am happy that I will not be giving birth in the 19^th century. Gawande goes on to describe what seems to be the evolution of childbirth.

One point in Gawande’s article that I was unaware of, was the fact that a “cesarean section on a living mother was considered criminal for much of history. It was considered a crime because it almost always killed the mother through hemorrhage and infection” (Gawande 3). I knew that it was a dangerous procedure and that there was a high chance that the mother might die, but I did not now that it was considered a criminal practice. However, Goer’s article really seemed to emphasize the fact that today’s cesareans are not safer than a vaginal birth. After reading both of these articles I was really left wondering which practice was the safer, or better of the two.

However, what I found most interesting in Gawande’s article was the fact that “in 1933 the New York Academy of Medicine published a shocking study of 2,041 maternal deaths in childbirth...Hospital care brought no advantages; mothers were better off delivering at home” (Gawande 3). Gawande goes on to describe how doctors might have better tools and medicine, but ultimately midwives knew what they were doing.

Gawande’s article echoed a lot of the same points that Professor Eric Lunch made in his brown bag presentation. In the speech “Masculinist Obstetrical and Childcare Practices in the Time of Henry VIII”, Professor Lunch discussed how Jane Seymour, Henry VIII’s third wife, died of postnatal complications. During this time period, midwives usually delivered babies; however, aristocrats and other wealthy individuals used doctors to deliver the babies. However, while these people believed that doctors were more knowledgeable than midwives, the reality was that doctors were not more knowledgeable, they just had better tools. In fact, Professor Lunch stated that if midwives had delivered Seymour’s baby, she might not have died. I think that this point is extremely fascinating and it is still relevant in today’s society. I think that people believe that whatever costs the most or is the most expensive, especially in regards to medicine, automatically means that it is the better than its cheaper counterpart. However, it is very clear in this example that this is untrue. The average woman who delivered her baby through the help of a midwife actually had better care and was safer than a woman who used a doctor.

Yet, after reading Goer’s article I was left questioning everything that I read in Gawande’s argument, as well as, Professor Lunch’s brown bag. Thus, I am confused and unsure which side provides better facts to support their claims. However, I will say I am inclined to lean towards Gawande’s argument because I have just heard Professor Lunch’s support Gawande’s claim. Despite this, Goer does provide an abundance of statistics to counteract Gawande.

Ultimately, these articles have let me cringing about the thought of childbirth. The thought of going through 20-something hours of excruciating labor and all of the other unpleasant things that go along with the process of childbirth are unappealing. Goer does not seem to leave out any of the possible complications, illnesses, diseases, etc that can come about as a result of childbirth, whether natural or a C-section. I am always one to believe that it is best to know as much as one can about a specific topic, but in this case, there was a lot of information, and not all of it was pleasant.

Abortion Sucks

Although the decision of whether to abort a fetus physically affects women on an individual basis, it seems that every one has an opinion on it. One of the most striking ideas to me from our readings this week, was the division between “pro life” and “pro choice” stance. In my mind, the “pro life” stance came to life with Allison Crews’ description of standing in front of Planned Parenthood with her mother and her fellow activists shouting at a young girl with tears in her eyes. The crowd with posters and only demeaning words to shout at the young girl who had just received an abortion left them in tears, sobbing. Reading about this experience makes me wonder why so many people felt they had a right to judge the young girl with “blood on her hands” (144). Although I do not want to judge the activists who call themselves “pro life”, I wonder what makes the unborn child’s life more important to them than the young girl who chose to have the abortion. Since the protesters firmly believe that abortion is wrong, they have no way to consider the decision that each individual woman makes when she decides to abort.

However, in the end, I believe like Inga Muscio that abortion simply “sucks”. In no way am I comfortable thinking about a vacuum that sucks the life out of female’s wombs. Reading her description made me cringe and want to hide the book so no one could read over my shoulder what I was reading. Truthfully I feel that reading about Muscio’s experience as a story makes it easy for me to judge her. Stories like those, that describe terrible amounts of pain, on top of movies like Juno, that describe the unborn fetuses already have toenails, make it easy for outsiders looking in on abortion to judge the decision. However, I believe like Arcana convey in her piece, that abortion should strictly be a motherhood issue. The only people who should judge abortion are the people faced with the option for themselves. Because as Arcana suggests, whether the individual wants to admit it or not, they are a mother deciding what is best for their child. I believe this private matter should be kept as that, private and away from the scrutiny of onlookers.

News Flash: Male or Female (Choose Only One)

News Flash: Male ☐ Female ☐ (Check One and Only One)

(http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/sports/20runner.html)

(http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/sports/25intersex.html?_r=1)

Is she a woman? Is she a man? Rather than people focusing on her athletic achievements, Caster Semenya, a 18 year old mid-distance runner from South Africa, has been bombarded with questions about gender. In August 2009, Semenya competed in Berlin at the world championships. She was victorious and won the gold in the women’s 800-meter race (Dreger 2009). However, both the media and general public, instead of congratulating her, scrutinized her physical appearance and hypothesized that she was actually a he. How can someone with such a low octave, virtually no womanly curves and lightening quick speed possibly be a woman? These were the things that lead people to believe that Semenya was actually a man. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place here, with no solutions.

The International Association of Athletics Federation (I.A.A.F) is the governing body for track and field. I.A.A.F. is forced to deal with two difficult topics: the first, determining what athletes should go through the sex verification process and second, should those athletes who are classified as an intersex person be allowed to compete in athletic competitions, and if so as what sex.

According to Jere Longman’s article, “as soon as Semenya posted the fastest time of the year as the 800 meters, track officials said they began sex verification testing on her.” The basis for this testing is the belief that women are incapable of running this fast. However, other factors and reasons to conduct the testing was due to Semenya’s physical appearance and her drastic improvement. Not only would the results from I.A.A.F test determine whether or not Semenya could continue to compete as a woman, but also it decided if she was allowed to keep her gold medal from the world championships.

Like most secrets, the sex verification test results for Semenya were leaked, and the public was almost relieved to find out that their assumptions were true: Semenya was transsexual. However, neither Semenya nor her coach, Michael Seme, would comment on the results of the testing or her future as a runner. However, Seme did mention that “Caster will retain her title as the fastest 800-meter runner in the world” (Longman 2009). Thus, I am left wondering what was discussed beyond these closed doors. Why was there a statement about her 800-meter gold medal, but no news about her racing future? If she were allowed to continue to compete as a woman, it would only seem logical that Seme would announce that terrific news as well, but he does not. Semenya’s case shows me that the I.A.A.F does not know how to deal with intersex athletes.

“Disputes in sports over athletes’ sex are rare, and perhaps never has such a case been as volatile as the one that emerged at the world championships, when it became apparent how unprepared her sport was to handle cases of athletes who may have both male and female characteristics” (Longman 2009). Longman’s article states that “sex-determination testing was once obligatory for female athletes at the Olympics because of persistent allegations that some competitors were not really women.” However, this is no longer the case and as in the case of Semenya, sex verification is done on an individual basis.

In my opinion, if all female athletes were mandated to partake in a sex-verification test prior to any significant athletic event, like the Olympics, the public would not question an athlete’s sex because it would already be established. Also, it would be performed on all athletes, which would than be less discriminatory and thus, would not do physiological or emotional damage to an athlete as a result of being singled out. Further, since “the genes involved with intersexuality are very frequent…and the incidence of intersexuality may be on the rise” the I.A.A.F has sufficient reasoning to mandate sex-verification testing (Fausto-Sterling 53-54). However, once the I.A.A.F determines that an athlete is transgendered what happens next?

There are different levels and cases of intersexuality (Fausto-Sterling 52). In regards to Semenya, her body is producing as much testosterone as a man. However, the levels of testosterone vary and technically her sex can vary on a daily basis. One day she might have a higher level and thus, be classified as a man, and the next, her levels may drop down and she can be considered a female. As a result of the influx of intersex cases how can the I.A.A.F decipher who is allowed to compete and who is not? Ultimately, while I still stand behind my previous statement and believe that all athletes should undergo sex verification for the purpose of not exiling and further discriminating against those individuals who are transsexual, I do not know what happens next for transgendered athletes. Mandating all athletes to undergo sex verification testing does not solve the problem of what happens to the intersex athletes’ athletic careers. Thus, it seems that once again the I.A.A.F is stuck in a rut.

I would be quick to say that it would be best to just adopt Fausto-Sterling’s “five-sex system” instead of our two-sex system. “In addition to males and females, I argued, we should also accept the categories herms (named after ‘true hermaphrodites’), merms (names after male ‘pseudo-hermaphrodites’), and ferms (names after female ‘pseudo-hermaphrodites’)” (Fausto-Sterling 78). However, lets be realistic, we do not live in a very accepting and open world. If the US cannot even pass same-sex marriage laws, there is no chance that it will accept a five-sex system. Thus, I firmly believe that the majority of society will not accept Fausto-Sterling’s five-sex system.

Thus, since it seems that the I.A.A.F is left to group athletes into only two categories, male or female, they are left with many possibilities, but no real solutions. With that being said, should the I.A.A.F measure an intersex’s levels of testosterone on the day of testing to see whether or not the individual is a woman that day, and if so allow her to compete in female events? This technique would prove to be very emotional and detrimental for an athlete because it would further alienate the athlete from being able to identify with one gender, for the athlete might be told that she is a female one race day and the next race, her testosterone levels label her as a man. Thus, with that being said, does the I.A.A.F just say that if an intersex athlete can be a identifies with her female sex and has some physical or biological attributes of a female, then she should just be allowed to compete as a woman? However, according to Dreger, an intersex will dominate the women’s events because she has an excess amount of testosterone, which ultimately puts her above the rest of her female counterparts. Being an athlete, I have always believed that women can challenge men, but I have concluded and fully admit that while us women can challenge men, men will ultimately prevail ahead of women in the world of track and field. Men are faster than women. It is not because women do not put in as much hard work as men, but rather it is physiological. Eric Vilain, a professor of human genetics and pediatrics at UCLA, who specializes in sex development acknowledges that “there is a good correlation between functional testosterone and muscle mass” (Dreger 2009). Thus, men are able to compete at a higher-level then women. So, is it really fair to allow a female athlete, who produces as much testosterone as her male counterpart, to compete in a female event? This is one of the main concerns surrounding Semenya. People fear that she will just dominate her events because of her physiology. Thus, I have no solution and can understand the troubles that the I.A.A.F is faced with when it comes to the topic of intersex competitors.

“In the twentieth century, the body has become the central personal project of American girls ... Today, many young girls worry about the contours of their bodies -- especially shape, size, and muscle tone -- because they believe that the body is the ultimate expression of the self ... The body is a consuming project for contemporary girls because it provides an important means of self-definition, a way to visibly announce who you are to the world” (Brumberg, 97).



Feeding off a nation of insecure females, the magazine industry offers answers on every “Self Help” cover. The February 2010 issue of “Shape” Magazine claims it will help you “Shape Your Life.” The cover advertises the ability to “Beat AB Flab” in two minutes, “Stop Winter Weight Gain” in 28 days, and help figure out why you are so “cranky”. The magazine displays three or four ways to help women shape their body towards one that looks just like Katherine McPhee,
this issues’ cover woman. Standing thigh-deep in clear blue water, Katherine is accompanied by her quote, “I’m in the best shape ever!” which stands above the claim that following in her footsteps will get you the same results. Instead of promoting a healthy image of the natural female body, claims like these make me wonder if this magazine should be considered “Self-Help” or just another tool to fuel “women’s obsession with their appearance” (Valdes, 28). If women are so concerned with shaping their bodies to resemble Katharine McPhee’s, how will the feminist movement ever gain enough momentum to make a large impact?

With so many messages that support the “Lets tone up!” mentality, positive messages about the female identity get lost in the mix. Squished under to the supermodel’s bikini-clad body and the miracle two minute workout that eliminates ab flab is the smallest subtitle: “How I learned to love my body: The must-read for EVERY woman.” Including this last message is a genius advertising tool. First fuel the mentality that every woman has imperfections in her body that need to be fixed and start her down the path to fixing it.
But, more importantly, make sure to also provide a light at the end of the tunnel--at least ONE woman has learned to love their body, maybe you could be next! By Shape Magazine’s focusing on ways to mold the female body into a Barbie-like image, closer to the “ideal” pre-pubescent, skinny female, it is difficult for readers to walk away feeling satisfied. After all, no one will ever look like Barbie. “If a woman of Barbie’s proportions existed, she wouldn’t be able to walk, breathe or digest food” (Valdes, 26). Yet, magazines like Shape and celebrities like Katharine McPhee make us want to chase after that perfect body. Even though, “none of us… will ever reach our real goals playing by the rules of that industry, no matter how many inches we shed” (32). At the end of the day, reading through the magazine points out how different each reader's body type is from the ideal and by doing so, rubs how far she needs to go to achieve the ideal in her face. Instead of promoting healthy images of a female body, the cover of Shape puts the “ideal” woman on a pedestal.


Shape Magazine is filled with messages that perpetuate female gender stereotypes and unconsciously promote ideas that females are diseased, disordered, unclean, and simply imperfect. With a magazine like this, it is no wonder that society has trouble moving away from negative messages about the female population. Either you can accept your body in its natural state, or devote yourself to a lifetime of work in pursuit of an ideal you most likely won't achieve. Confused by whether or not dedicating your life is an empowering movement or not, fitness causes yet another rift in the feminist movement. It is no longer clear who defines beauty, each individual, or however magazines like Shape decide to represent society’s view.


Some feminists, like Alisa Valdes temporarily, believe women in the gym empower the entire gender because women have closed in on the male’s territory (29). In addition, the gym provides a freeing environment where women can “let go of inhibitions and trust their bodies to move big” (Valdes, 30). Considering this point of view, working out and incorporating techniques that Shape advertises marks a huge improvement for the feminist movement. In this way, females are breaking down the gender walls in their kickboxing classes every day. As a result, some women find confidence in being in “the best shape ever!” like Katharine McPhee. In addition, striving for improving the female body seems beneficial to the feminist movement. If the female body is as diseased as many unconsciously tend to believe, working on it to get it in better physical shape seems like a good idea. In addition to gaining power by joining the “attractive” population, getting in shape has many health benefits. Perhaps the endorphins released after working out can combat the hormonal mood swings and emotions that plague all females. If that doesn’t work, Shape suggests turning to page 34 to find, “Three secrets to a happier life.” Working to break down gender walls and improve the stereotypical image of a woman, helps the feminist movement in many ways. Breaking down gender walls while actively working towards a better physique, seem like a win-win situation for these feminists.


However, there is a line between working on physical appearances as the result of an individual belief and working towards what society deems “attractive” and “healthy”. What motivated us to break down the gender walls in the first place? It seems that the female population needed to make some sacrifices in order to make any progress. While flipping through the pages of Shape to find the answers to happiness in life, be prepared to face conflicting messages. Next to the “empowering” messages about how to “tone up”, there are also suggestions to help you deal with your mood swings and “female problems.” Shape offers practical solutions to overcome that hard time of the month. For example to overcome dirtiness, L’oreal will help you “Go beyond clean. Go 360 degrees clean” and Olay will help you accomplish “A clean so pristine even your towel will notice.” More specifically, Kotex invites you to the “undieground party” that is panty approved to prevent leaks while Yaz says it can control symptoms of PMDD that include irritability, anger, feeling anxious, fatigue, markedly depressed moods, headaches, bloating, muscle aches and changes in appetite. Including advertisements like these confirm many of the negative stereotypes of female’s that are seen as abnormalities. L’oreal, Olay and Kotex suggest females are unclean, while Yaz’s two page spread in addition to the Abilify’s treatment of depression suggests that females have diseases that require serious medications to resolve. Symbolizing the feminist debate of whether to support exercise or not, the advertisements that fit side by side next to “empowering” editorials contradict positive messages.


Although I respect what Shape is trying to do, give women the tools they need to improve their bodies, I wonder if the existence of magazines like Shape go too far altogether. Simply by existing, and picking celebrities and models to pose for the cover of their magazines, the magazine industry is defining beauty. Next, as a result of these images, females start workings towards looking like people like Katharine McPhee, instead of defining their own images of beauty. Instead of promoting one definition of beautiful, I believe the feminist movement has a chance to unite here and start teaching other women that they should define their own version of beauty. Instead of feeding a nation of self-conscious girls who are overly focused on their body image, we should start feeding a nation of confident girls, ready to leave their body image behind and start tackling more important issues.

News Flash 2: The Basement Boy Culture - A Male Reaction To A Female Threat?

The Newsweek article “Basement Boys” is an interesting perspective on a growing trend of contemporary societal structure. In sum, author George F. Will discusses the phase-turned-lifestyle of a “basement boy,” or “a culture of immaturity among the many young men who are reluctant to grow up” (Will). While this trend is quite visible, it is somewhat of a paradox within the confines of the working world where machismo – for both men and women – still seems to be a prevailing requirement for success. It is also disconcerting that part of the rationale for the rise in number of “basement boys” in this article is attributed to the increasing presence of women in the public sphere. While the author frames this in terms of an “injury to men” and male confusion, what you actually see is a shift in the visibility of women that is a step closer to a more egalitarian society. Accordingly, basement boy culture is a response to changing cultural norms, which includes an apparent decrease in male overprivilege as women’s access to and presence in the working world increases.

Gary Cross, a Penn State University historian, states that the influx of large numbers of women into the workforce has made “many men” feel marginalized, and

that the “opening of careers to talented women has coincided with the attenuation of male role models in popular culture” (Will). Together with permissive parenting that began with the baby boomer generation and a rise of consumer culture that idealizes the retention of childhood, Cross contends that all of this led to a generation of men who were seemingly confused about what it meant to grow up as a male. The children of the baby boomers have continued the trend and can even visit restaurants such as Dave & Buster’s, popular venues where adults can play games and drink beer. All of this may exist, but I think it is more a reflection of changing cultural norms than a few generations of confused males. One online comment on the article supports this viewpoint:

Nowadays the sex drive has many outlets. Masturbation is OK, homosexuality is OK, sexual entertainment is OK, fornication (if you use condoms) is OK. So now a young man considering the prospect of marriage and adulthood fears the loss of his opportunities for fun and pleasure. Celibacy is no longer the price one pays for a life of self-indulgence.

The author of the comment essentially pinpoints a historical difference between now and seventy years ago, when marriage was the only legally and socially sanctioned outlet for sexuality. In contrast, the recent rise of raunch culture places sex as part of a consumer culture and m

akes it acceptable to indulge in pleasure. At the same time, though media may glorify youth, there are also prevalent stereotypes of an idealized male. Cross cites Hugh Grant as the image of “manliness” in the context of basement boy culture, but it’s not like the Vin Diesel's of the world have disappeared.

However, I will focus on the article’s contentions of women’s involvement with this puerile male culture. George F. Will cites many statistics that demonstrate that by volume, women do have a presence within the workforce: currently, women earn almost 58 percent of bachelor’s degrees, and

“28 percent of wives between ages 30 and 44 have more education than their

husbands, whereas only 19 percent of husbands in the same age group have more education than their wives” (Will). Finally, “23 percent of men with some college education earn less than their wives” (Will). Though the author’s perspective seems to be one of a report rather than an appraisal, at least to me, these statistics were presented as if they are

surprising or a bad thing. Furthermore, Will fails to acknowledge that women still earn less than men for equivalent work and tend to be in positions of lesser power within corporations. Aside from

the bachelor’s degrees, none of the statistics report situations that are of a majority. The emphasis on the effects of increasing female presence in the public sphere reflects the opening statements of Peggy McIntosh’s article “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack,” where she highlights male reluctance to admit that they are overprivileged and benefit from women’s disadvantages. In addition, “they may say they will work to women’s statues, in the society, the university, or the curriculum, but they can’t or won’t support the idea of lessening men’s” (McIntosh 1). And yet that seems to be exactly what Gary Cross is getting at when he commented on how many men feel marginalized by female presence in the workforce. Apparently, men feel threatened by female presence in the workforce.

If that is the case, that men feel threatened by working moms and single women who choose to have careers before children, is “basement boy” culture then a reaction to this threat? The opening of the article pointed out that men held almost 80 percent of the jobs that were lost due to current economic hardships. When considering this situation, perhaps “basement boys” are on the rise simply because it is easier. It is much more difficult to get a job nowadays, so it is reasonable to consider that because “adult” responsibilities in terms of work are harder to come by that more men would find comfort in existing as a basement boy where they have minimal responsibility and capitalize on their parents’ willingness to support them. It is worthwhile to note that basement boy culture is one of white middle to upper class men, for those in lower socioeconomic classes cannot afford to “veg out” and indulge all of the time, but for right now that is beside the point. Will calls this disproportionate loss of jobs previously held by men as an “injury to men.” Though nobody wants to lose a job, the way that Will shifts the discussion quite abruptly from a detriment of economic crisis to juxtaposing female presence in academia and careers makes it apparent that he is not speaking of an “injury.” Rather, Will is touching upon a decrease of male overprivilege. This is not an “injury,” because a slight loss in overprivilege does not make men all of a sudden underprivileged. The United States has a patriarchal culture, so for the time being, men, specifically white men, will be dominant.

Another reader comment on this article reasons that “basement boy” culture exists because “how can a man behave as a ‘man’ in the patriarchal sense when much of society no longer has a need or desire for all these men?” But is that really what is happening? The influx of women in the workforce certainly displaces some men on an individual level. There is a more varied group of people competing for jobs than in the past when women were primarily in the home and had more limited access to the workplace. But “man” in the patriarchal sense, whether “needed” or not, is here to stay because patriarchy will not disappear overnight. It is an ideology that reflects a set of ideals, values, and beliefs that comprise a culture that “includes ideas about the nature of things, including women, men, and humanity” (Johnson 36). Patriarchy delineates pre-conceived notions of gender identity and is characterized by being male-centered, male-dominated, male-identified, and control-obsessed (Johnson 28). But even without thinking about patriarchy as a system, the way individuals behave in the workplace reinforces stereotypical masculinity. As Ariel Levy describes in Female Chauvinist Pigs, “women who’ve wanted to be perceived as powerful have long found it more efficient to identify with men than try and elevate the entire female sex to their level” (Levy 95). Figures like HBO president of documentary and family programming Sheila Nevins must “appear much more confident, aggressive, and unconflicted about her choices – she has to do everything Fred Astaire does, backward, in heels,” especially in industries that are typically male-dominated (Levy 94). And so it appears paradoxical to me that “manliness” as we traditionally know it will be completely displaced by basement boy immaturity because such attitudes are simply not desirable in the context of a career.

It is logical that in the face of a workplace “threat,” should it really be perceived as such, that basement boy immaturity is a reaction to changing societal conditions and cultural values. The retreat from responsibility is far easier when the weight of responsibility is greater due to increased competition, though the appropriateness of perpetual immaturity as a response is debatable. Men will still to some extent have to take responsibility for themselves as well as their families. It is also interesting to think of this as a role-reversal of sorts with men increasingly becoming more submissive in terms of ambition. If this continues to occur while women continually and increasingly strive to achieve academically and in the workplace, perhaps women can take advantage of the situation to maximize and solidify their presence as well as to have success.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/234248

In response to Kirsten

I also picked up on what Kirsten defined as the, “paradox of a sexually repressed American culture where sex and sexuality is seemingly omnipresent from a consumer perspective yet suppressed in education and dialogue”. Like our group discussed in our first media culture project, there is no secret that sex sells. What we defined as raunch culture in the beginning of the semester is the majority of the things we see on TV, internet or magazines. Considering this I don’t understand how many school districts can brush messages glorying sex aside and attempt to teach abstinence. The issues that were addressed in our three readings should be addressed in schools in order to teach relevant things to our children. If we fail to send the messages we want our children to receive in schools than they will be forced to gather information from things they see on the TV, internet and/or magazines.

Maybe if we start teaching children at a younger age about sexuality, we can prevent new waves of racism from perpetuating themselves. For example, the “new racism” that Collins discusses in “Black Sexual Politics” plants stereotypes into society that it is acceptable to look at people of color as over-sexualized beings who give in to their natural, animalistic, sexual urges. Although the new racism is different than prior forms of racism because Black people no longer are slaves or oppressed by the government, society still “incorporates elements of past racial formations” today (Collins, 33). By representing the African American population in negative ways, television dramas and pop stars in very sexual performances, “ideas about sexuality and gender that were very much a part of prior forms of racial rule remain as important today” (Collins, 33). Watching the first clip of the Jerry Springer show completely dramatizes the stereotype that Black men are sexual beings and the entire Black race are like savage, animals who will not hesitate to fight. Jerry Springer’s stage almost provokes fights with the subject matter he chooses to present. The entertainment value of their fights is also heightened by the sound effects that accompany the punches. In addition, the performance from Beyonce’s performance at the 2010 Grammy’s updates Collin’s example of her and her groupmates performing “Bootylicious”. It makes me disappointed that in ten years, Beyonce has not come very far. Although she is no longer in the jungle, but is starring on a big stage, she is still resorting to a type of performing that highlights her sexual value over her talent as a singer.
Although it is not a simple fix, I hope that in the next ten years we can make some more significant progress in the face of racism. Perhaps teaching a more accurate curriculum when it comes to sexual issues in schools will combat racial stereotypes at a young age.

Repressed Sexuality

The three readings, “Lusting for Freedom,” by Rebecca Walker, “Tight Jeans and a Chania Chorris” by Sonia Shah, and “Why Black Sexual Politics?” by Patricia Collins all touch upon the idea of repressed sexuality, though in each case it is explored in slightly different contexts. Though the majority of the excerpt concerned the stigmas and negative stereotypes associated with black sexuality as reflections of racism, Collins’ piece directly addresses the paradox of a sexually repressed American culture where sex and sexuality is seemingly omnipresent from a consumer perspective yet suppressed in education and dialogue. A wave of conservatism in the late 20^th century seemingly censored “alternative” sexual practices, namely those that deviate from Puritanical standards of heterosexuality within marriage for the purpose of procreation. As a result, research concerning “alternatives” was stifled, and even currently, sex education in schools is not always adequate. Even with high pregnancy rates in adolescents, HIV/AIDS proliferation and the struggles of LGBT people in developing their identities, censorship of alternative practices as well as overexposure of heterosexuality have made the environment repressive.

In “Lusting for Freedom,” Walker describes her own sexual experiences as fulfilling explorations of her own power and pleasure. However, she makes a point to emphasize that her experiences are a rarity. Her confidence in her own self-knowledge, desires and resulting absence of shame stand apart from what many are able to gain from sex as a result of taboos – governmental, religious, and societal. It is important to note that Walker could not completely avoid societal pressures, but it appears that she in particular was in control of her desires enough to gain what she wanted from expression of sexuality in the way that she wanted to do it. Yet like Collins, she explains that the “suppression of sexual agency and exploration” is “often used as a method of social control,” that often creates a divide between one’s instincts and one’s thoughts as influenced by societal rules and imposed boundaries (Walker 22). Walker also touches upon a bind that women are often quick to identify – that as soon as women exercise that what in their minds may be freedom or independence, they are labeled sluts and whores. Perhaps most importantly, Walker calls for healthy exploration of sexuality where constraints are lifted and people are well educated and informed and can use sexuality as a tool for self-actualization (Walker 23).

Finally, Shah examines idea of expression of sexuality under a cultural lens with her analysis of the identity developed by her younger sister. Her initial fears that her sister was “buying into” American myths of female sexuality by objectifying her body through her clothing choices gave way to an understanding that instead, her sister was grappling to navigate her expression. Shah points out that white feminism does not recognize cultural duality, a fact that explains why her “interventions” were such failures in the context of her Indian household (228). Perhaps the most interesting conclusion from Shah’s piece is that one’s identity does not have to be confined within just one culture’s patriarchy. Her initial adherence to white cultural norms clashed with her parents’ Indian cultural context, but when she wore a chania chorri, which blatantly displayed flesh but through a culturally appropriate article of clothing (to her parents), it dissipated the household tension. To Shah, this change symbolizes a middle ground between realms that symbolize cultural context that is exclusively white or Indian, and so relates to the idea of creating a more open space for healthy sexual expression.

Celebrating the Female Biology

Things like the introductory paragraphs in Fausto-Sterling’s article, “Hormonal Hurricanes: Menstruation, Menopause, & Female Behavior” are the reason female reproductive organs have become such taboo. If society really believes that menstruation and menopause limit the potential of women to be leaders, I do not blame the female population for never speaking about their reproductive organs. If the widespread belief of the time was that women are less competent than men are because their hormones control them more than their intellects, I would be ashamed to be female (Fausto-Sterling, p. 91). As a result, it makes sense that Anne Sexton’s poem, “In Celebration of My Uterus” was seen as groundbreaking in the mid 1900s. Her collections of poems about “breasts and wombs, about abortion, menstruation, masturbation, incest, adultery” (Sexton, p. 329) offered a new position on females. Instead of suggesting women should be ashamed of the natural processes that occur in their body, and their “smaller” brain size, Anne Sexton decided to celebrate the woman she was, down to her very soul (Sexton, p. 331). Beliefs like “if you are a woman, you can’t win” (Fausto-Sterling, p. 95) and women “are a permanent…underclass in our society” (Valdes, p. 28) make it seem like a woman can get nowhere in life. It is refreshing that Sexton seemed to believe that she already had won, just by being born a woman.

Sexton’s poem really sticks out to me because instead of searching for happiness in life with material goods, power in an office, or a beautiful appearance, she celebrates herself and a very large part of herself. Instead of feeling ashamed that her hormones and reproductive organs could possibly make her into a “monster” who abuses her friends and family (Fausto-Sterling), she embraces her uterus. She is thankful for “the central creature and its delight” (Sexton, 331). In addition, unlike the women who attend Alisa Valdes’ aerobic classes, it seems like Sexton is content with her body the way it was given to her. Instead of “hopping around in leotards” for no purpose, Sexton celebrated her natural body (Valdes, 28). Perhaps reading more poetry like “In Celebration of My Uterus” would prevent fueling more women’s “obsession with their appearance” (Valdes, 28).

Ideally, more work like Anne Sexton’s poetry and less of Valdes’ “let’s tone up” mentality would benefit the feminist movement. However, it is completely unrealistic to believe that abandoning all negative stereotypes of women can be abandoned (PMS). Moreover, in these writings specifically it is important to bring up the issue of financial well being. Reading a piece from Valdes represents a more diverse representation from the Feminist movement than the typical white, middle class American woman. Valdes’ racial identity as a “Hispanic” combined with her need to rely on being an aerobics instructor for a source of income to repay her debts. Representation from this author in addition to the few stanza’s of Sexton’s poem begin to paint a picture of how different each woman can be. Although we all may be united by similar biology, it is wrong to oversimplify the entire gender. Reading Fausto-Sterling’s piece shows us that the first group to make this rash overgeneralization was men who claimed to be backed by science. However, it is unfortunate that eventually the feminist movement made the same mistake by only addressing feminist issues pertaining to the white middle class. Even though there is still more to be done, it is encouraging to read from an author of color.

Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus

What is the easiest way to get a guy to walk away or leave the room, simply mention that your Aunt Flow is coming to town or, if you want him to speed walk out of the room, just say you are menstruating or you have your period. These terms carry a more graphic connotation that most guys cannot seem to handle. However, if you really want to see a guy sprint, all you need to do is just utter those three infamous letters- P M S. Not only are men freaked out by the topic of the female menstruation cycle, but also they are even more freaked out when a female’s hormones are uncontrollable. It is understandable why men tend to avoid women when they have their periods, I mean women sometimes even avoid other women when they have their periods, I mean who likes dealing with a moody, chocolate craving, female…not too many people.

However, even though guys may be think that the menstrual cycle is a somewhat disgusting topic, it is in no way shape or form abnormal. As Anne Sexton writes in her poem, “it is a celebration of the woman I am” (331). While, I am hesitant to believe that many other women see this as a happy celebration (most think its bothersome) it is none the less part of womanhood. Sexton goes on to further say how all women factory workers, marine biologists, mothers, etc experience this natural phenomenon.

What I find amazing is the fact that people used to, and some today still do, believe that women were abnormal because they went through this process. In my opinion, it is absolutely idiotic that people still believe that a women’s reproductive functions place them below men in certain aspects of life. Scientists used to believe “that menstruation rendered women ‘more of less sick and unfit for hard work’ for one quarter of each month during the best years of life’” (Fausto-Sterling 93). Unfit for hard work? I am sorry, but give me a break.

There is a Tampax commercial with Serena Williams and Mother Nature. Mind you, Serena Williams is one of the best female tennis players in the world and all one needs to do is look at her and see that she is not a weak individual. The basic point of the commercial is that Williams and Mother Nature battle each other; Mother Nature tries to tell Williams that she has her monthly present and that she will beat and stop her. However, as one might guess, Williams conquers Mother Nature. Not only do I find the commercial amusing, but I also think that it shows how women do not stop working hard when that time of the month comes around.

However, we cannot forget that “If you’re a woman you can’t win” (Fausto-Sterling 95). While women have made progress in gaining power within society, we still lag far behind men. Men are the dominant sex. They are depicted as being strong, power individuals who, especially when compared to females, are right. “Why do researchers looking as women’s hormone cycles and mood changes fail to mention the month cycle of testosterone? The answer, I suggest is that testosterone is seen as a male hormone hence ‘normal’, and thus not an obvious subject for inquiry when looking at the ‘abnormalities’ of menstrual mood changes (Fausto-Sterling 105). I think that this point is extremely amusing.

I do think that it is important to acknowledge the fact that Fausto-Sterling never gives any set answer as to how the menstrual cycle affects women. It further shows how these claims of how women are drastically hindered as a direct result of their period as bogus.

On a quick side note, I was always curious as to how early hunter-gather women dealt with menstruation. Thus, I thought Fausto-Sterling’s section on how in these primitive societies dealt with this situation was interesting. “Women were either pregnant or lactating and since life spans were so short they died well before menopause, low-fat diets made it likely that they did not ovulate every month, they thus experienced no more than 10 menstruation cycles” (96). Ultimately, this like other generations to come, also viewed women as physically abnormal.