Hi,
For those who have facilitated (or will facilitate for Week 9) section discussions, please write one or two paragraphs to summarize the readings you presented (or will present next week). You can use the "comment" function to post your summary.
Remember to include the names of the authors and the titles of the readings.
Freud-Three Essays
ReplyDeleteThe first essay concerns "The Sexual Aberrations." He suggests that childhood events do affect sexuality later on in adulthood. Starting from two basic concepts, instinct and object, Freud stated that "it seems probable that the sexual instinct is in the first instance independent of its object". He stressed that one must distinguish between types of perversion, according to whether the sexual anomaly is related to the object or to the aim, that is, to the activities that lead to sexual gratification.
His second essay, on "Infantile Sexuality", demonstrated that 'children are born with sexual urges, which undergo a complicated development before they attain the familiar adult form'. Freud argued thereby that "perversion" was present even among the healthy, and that the path towards a mature and normal sexual attitude began not at puberty but at early childhood Looking at children, Freud claimed that 'infantile sexual emotions and desires take many and varied forms, not all of them palpably erotic: thumb sucking and other displays of autoeroticism, retention of faeces, sibling rivalry, masturbation'.
In the last of the three essays, Freud described the "The Transformations of Puberty." It consolidates sexual identity, revive long-buried oedipal attachments, establish the dominance of the genitals for the attainment of sexual gratification'. Freud also formalised the distinction between the pleasures of infantile sexuality which 'may be suitably described as "fore-pleasure" in contrast to the "end-pleasure" or pleasure of satisfaction derived from the sexual act'.
Gayle Rubin - The Traffic in Women
Gayle Rubin discusses about the definition of the sex/gender system. In defining it, she looks to Freud and Lévi-Strauss for foundations of oppression. The sex/gender system is defined in the as occurring when a particular culture "transforms biological sexuality into “products of human activity”, when society transforms males and females into 'men' and 'women'.
Rubin states that Marx cannot truly explain women’s oppression because he does not address sex. Basically, Rubin explains Marx by saying that women’s domain became the home because capitalism is an institution inherited by men and women were not given the chance to lead or be in positions of authority.
Rubin explains that the desires of sexuality and procreation must be fulfilled and that they are not usually satisfied in a natural way. Also, in terms of procreation, every society has a sex/gender system, but the system is changed based on the differing cultures. Rubin clarifies that the sex/gender system is also known as “mode of reproduction” and “patriarchy.”
Next, she defines kinship as “a system of categories and statuses which often contradict actual genetic relationships”. She also notes that kinship varies greatly among cultures. Marriage is a basic form of gift giving, as women are the most precious gift and that the incest taboo is put into place to ensure marriages outside of the family occur and thus the “gifts” that come along with it. Moreover, women cannot truly benefit from this exchange because men are the “giver” and women are the “gift.
Rubin explains that “the oppression of women is deep” and that Lévi-Strauss and Freud serve to outline the structure of women’s oppression.
Overall, she states that the purpose of her essay was to build a theory of women’s oppression by utilizing ideas from anthropology and psychoanalysis. She also hopes to change the sex/gender system through political action.
Masculinities--Connell
ReplyDeleteConnell engages life stories as method to explore the opinions on change in masculinities. She examines 4 groups of men, and they are 1. Men who live and work with feminists 2. Gays and bisexuals
3. Young working-class men without regular jobs 4. Men of "new middle class".
First(Live Fast and Die Young) Connell studies the life stories of five unemployed young men and they are compared with three men from similar backgrounds but in different positions of class and sexual politics. The narratives of all the young men display similar starting points and share some characteristics such as the importance of family networks in low labor market, radical pragmatism, violence they have done and the block of state violence. Connell states that these men are compelled to be heterosexual, although some of them have experienced homosexual relations in their life. A scornful attitude and respect towards women sometimes coexist their head. Although they have similar starting points, their politics diverge later on in life. Some enjoy the benefit of hegemonic masculinties while some have moved outside of the common masculinine identity.
In Chapter 5(A Whole New World), Connell focuses on the remaking of masculinities in the context of the environmental movement, a field that she correlates with the rise of feminism. Although all of the men investigated initially tied themselves to hegemonic masculinity to some extent, they all have developed the heterosexual sensibility, and powerful women played significant role in their early lives. These men all became active in environmental movement. Environmetal movement has challenged hegemonic masculinities in many ways. Their encounter with feminism indicates a personal change and the redifination of masculinities.
In Chapter 6(A Very Straigt Gay), Connell analyses eight life stories of gay men in Australia, and find their initial engagement with hegemonic masculinities. Most of them had sex with women before, but their sex orientation closes gradually later on. Conventional views regard homosexual as lacking masculinity, while gay people believe that the choice of a man as sexual object is more the choice of embodied masculinities. The reification of "gayness" is a sign of sexual freedom, and it opens possiblities for change in the social structure of gender.
Chapter 7(Men of reason)focuses on potentials for change in masculinties connected with rationality. These men expertise in high-tech field but lack the social authority and social status given by wealth and old profession. They develope masculinity in their childhood experience, and construct rationality in education. Technical rationality reforms masculinity, it corrodes gender hierarchy and sets tensions within hegemonic masculinity. All the men sense the change in gender relations but some resist to change. Embracing change in masculinity is sometimes seem as the path of rationality.
"The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism" -Heidi Hartmann
ReplyDeleteHartmann compares marxism and feminism to a common law marriage to show how recent attempts to integrate marxism and feminism tend to absorb the feminist struggle in the marxist struggle against capital. Marxist analysis examines the relationship between women and the economic system, not the relationship between women and men. It is therefore not a feminist question but a woman question. Early marxists believed that capitalism would draw women into the wage force abolishing the sexual division of labor. They believed that capital and property were the reasons women were oppressed just as they are the cause of worker's exploitation in general. Early marxists did not see the differences in the experiences of men and women under capitalism. She also argues that the accumulation of capital both accommodates itself to patriarchal social structure and helps perpetuate it. She addresses the problem between patriarchy and capitalism with the family wage system that was designed to solve the conflict. The family wage secured the material base of patriarchy in 2 ways: Men are given better jobs/wages and women are encouraged to seek marriage as a career. Women's housework/child rearing directly benefits men while reinforcing women's inferior labor market position. In sum, Hartmann argues that Marxism can be used by feminism but earlier approaches have failed, Marxism clearly dominates feminism, is sex blind, and fails to explain why women are subordinate to men.
"Feminism and Marx: INtegrating Kinship w/ the Economic"-Linda Nicholson
Nicholson asks the question: What must feminists do to improve upon the conceptual tools for social analysis that Marx gave us, in order to make them effective tools for feminist social analysis? Nicholson rejects the "dual-systems" approach that many other marx-feminists use. She believes that gender IS class in 2 senses: 1. In pre-capitalist societies, kinship organized around gender was the system that organized economic activity. Gender relations determined economic relations, so gender was class. 2. Even within capitalist societies, economic class is not entirely independent of gender. Nicholson argues that Marx was wrong because he failed to historicize. It was probably easy for Marx to regard the economy as autonomous because at this point in history it was. With a market economy, economy is independent of the state and family and thus Marx could remain blind to gender while analyzing class.
"Capitalism and Women's LIberation"-Michelle Barrett
Barrett considers whether women's oppression is inevitable under capitalism. She concludes that it is not-- that there is nothing "in the logic of capitalism" that makes women's oppression inevitable. Women's oppression has become so interwoven with capitalism that it is highly unlikely that women's liberation could be achieved under capitalism. Her argument is that material change is not automatically accompanied by ideological change. Barrett rejects the appeal to biology as the origin of oppression. She attempts to explain women's oppression in terms of capitalism and patriarchy, but both pay insufficient attention to the role of biology in shaping social relations. She argues that women's oppression is not solely a function of ideology and while capitalism isn't necessarily oppressive to women, it is unlikely that capitalism will abandon women's oppression. Barrett believes that women's liberation can occur within capitalism. 1. There needs to be a change in the current division of labor/childcare responsibilities. 2. Society needs to do away with women's economic dependence on males. 3. There needs to be a transformation of gender ideology that includes beliefs about femininity, masculinity, and family.
Gayle S. Rubin: Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality
ReplyDeleteRubin's article Thinking Sex, is broken into six parts. In the first part: The Sex Wars, she states that sexuality is a product of human activity and it is political. She discusses how in the late 19th century, there were many political campaigns to encourage charity, eliminate prostitution, and discourage masturbation. This was mainly done to "protect" the young because there was a belief that sex is harmful so society wanted to keep minors from sexual knowledge and experience. During the 1950's there was a "War on Homosexuals" when the gay rights movement began and also anti-gay laws were passed.
In the second part of her article, called: Sexual Thoughts, she explains how sexuality and race and gender are social constructs, not biological entities. She discusses how sex has a negative meaning and is thought to be sinful and erotic behavior that deserves harsh punishments if it is performed out of wedlock. She also explained the Modern Western Society's Sexual Hierarchy with Heterosexuals at the top, Unmarried Heterosexuals next, then Long term lesbian and gay couples, then Gay Men, and lastly Transexuals, Transvestites, Fetishists, Sadomasochists, Prostitutes, and Porn Stars. She explains how society looks down upon others in the lower levels of this hierarchy. She then puts her own view says how the hierarchy should be organized criteria such as: how partners treat one another, Level of mutual consideration, presence or absence of coercion, and quality of pleasure. Not depending on if they are heterosexual or homosexual. She ends this section by questioning why people think that there is only one best way that people can have sex and that everyone should do it that way.
In her last three sections, she makes various points regarding sexuality. She points out how freedom of speech about sex has been made an exception to the first amendment. She also points out how it is legal for young people to see violence in movies but they are not able to see sex in movies or the television. She ends her article by saying that gender and sexuality are politically organized into systems of power and that it is time for society to recognize this.
Hanne Blank: Straight-The Surprisingly Short History of Heterosexuality:
In this novel, Blank begins by saying that there is more to heterosexuality than meets the eye and that it has only been possible to be a heterosexual since 1869. Before this date, she believes that "Sexual Identity" did not exist. She states that Heterosexuality has become successful because it was useful for reproduction and has now become a sexual normality. She also says that Heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality are dependent on the idea that there are only two biological sexes but her personal example of her husband who has XXY sex chromosomes rejects that statement. Her five main points in this book are:
1.) Biological sex and social gender are characteristics in which an individual may take a sexual interest.
2.) Sexual desire and sexual behavior are not the same thing and may not be related.
3.) Sexual activity take on more forms than we may be accustomed to recognize.
4.) all sexual activity s social activity and only a portion is for reproduction.
5.) Relationships between perception, thought, emotion, and behavior, are neither automatic or constant.
"New Black Man" by Mark Anthony Neal
ReplyDeleteNeal looks at the idea of a "New Black Man". He discusses the different issues that male African Americans face in a society that considers itself post racial. The term "Strong Black Man" needs a new definition because it "unfortunately helps reinforce a rigid model of black masculinity that allows for little if any flexibility" (27). Neal discusses how this positive label covers the negative aspects of African American culture such as the messages of misogyny, homophobia, and lack of fathers playing roles other than providers for their families. He brings up many examples that have been scrutinized by the public which then contribute to the negative fallacies of African American men.
Examples:
Nushawn Williams- He infected over 30 women in NY with HIV from 1996-1997. The media portrayed him as the predator and not the disease, giving into the white American fear about black male sexuality, interracial relationships, and sexually transmitted diseases. "America has rarely been nuanced in its demonization of black men of all ages, ethnicities, and economic status. Many Americans, particularly those whose perceptions of black masculinity are colored by media portraits, comfortably believe that a significant number of young black men engage in 'sexually perverse, predatory behavior (towards) unsuspecting and defenseless victims'" (7).
Reverend Calvin O. Butts, III- He led a campaign against "gangsta rap" in 1993. Condemning the message for violence and sexism that rappers send in their lyrics and music videos, the church engages in sexism against African American women who then remain quiet. The silence within the church is a way to condone the behavior, which is why the oppression from the church community continues. Black women tend to protect black ministers as a way to "save the black community from white racists accusations of sexual and domestic pathology" (11).
Barbershop, Reverend Jesse Jackson, Sr. and Reverend Al Sharpton- Comments made from a character in the movie "Barbershop" caused controversy because of negative comments about Rosa Parks and Dr. Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. Although the comments were seen as unnecessary and negative, there was some truth behind the comment made about King and bringing light to an extramarital affair. Jackson and Sharpton argued that they do not want negative light being shown on the few prominent African American males in our history. “One of the greatest inventions of the twentieth century is the African-American male—invented because black masculinity represents an amalgam of fears and projections in the American psyche which rarely conveys or contains the trope of truth about the black male’s existence” (14-15). The simple act of mentioning a negative aspect of a man's life is enough to harm a reputation that was extremely difficult to build, is an enormous fear for black males.
Million Man March in 1995- It was a day to "declare to the world our readiness to stand up like free Black man to take responsibility of the freedom allegedly given to us in 1865" (16). The leaders made it a call against the destruction and negativity within the African American community, and that it is up to the black man to solve the problems. However, the March left out women and children, because it wanted women to stay home with the children to teach them sympathy for what black men have decided to do. The day this occurred, attitudes towards African American women were different yet once the day was over, everything went back to the way it was. The March also brought out homophobia within the black community because being gay is seen as being soft and not a "strong black man".
Black masculinity contains myriad identities that exist in the same black male bodies, it is just difficult to attribute a positive light to all of them when the social and racial hierarchy only demands a certain few.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMasculinities - R. W. Connell
ReplyDelete1. The Science of Masculinity
People did not find it necessary to define masculinity because it was “normal.” North America has a different view of masculinity compared to that of ethnographic views, as homosexuality is constructed as highly anti-masculine, but many hyper-masculine cultures engage in what would be considered homosexual acts as a part of a ritual to prove said masculinity. This opposition of masculinity versus homosexuality is highly socially constructed. Homophobia is based on the assumption that gay equates to effeminate, even though much evidence points to the contrary. Feminist and homosexual outlooks on straight men are different: the former sees them as the oppressor, while the latter sees them as targets for liberation.
2. Men's Bodies
Medical practice identifies gender based on physiology, as it is grounded in sex dimorphism which serves fundamental purpose of reproduction. This gives it reason enough to differentiate male and female. However, the definition of masculinity endangers the male through what is known in popular culture as "testosterone poisoning" – actions considered "manly" puts them in dangerous situations, as men are expected to do dangerous things because it's socially MANLY. Body-reflexive practice is the concept of the socially constructed body: social events set off physiological reactions, not the other way around
An example would be Steve Donoghue: masculine activities are restricted to him due to social status; despite his status as famous-exemplar-of-masculinity. In other words, the construction of hegemonic masculinity undermines itself.
3. The Social Organization of Masculinity
Masculinity does not exist except in contrast with femininity: A culture which does not treat women and men as polarized opposites have no concept of masculinity – it is only definable as a place in gender relations, the practices through which men and women engage that place in gender, and the effects of these practices in bodily experience, personality, and culture Relationships among masculinities:
Hegemony – group claims and sustains leading position in social life: guarantees dominant position of men and subordination of women (cultural ideal) Subordination – Dominance of heterosexual men vs. subordination of homosexual men: more than cultural stigmatization of homosexuality; subordinated by material practices
Complicity – The hegemonic male who's too lazy to meet its standards; though their lives are more involved with extensive compromises with women than naked domination or uncontested display of authority: likely to believe feminists bra-burning extremists
Marginalization – Race/class relations; white hegemonic dominance keeps institutional oppression and physical terror framing the making of masculinity within black communities
Crisis tendencies: Power relations – fueled by underlying contradiction between inequality of women and men and universal logics of modern state structures and market relations Production relations – Contradiction between men's and women's equal contribution to production and gendered appropriation of products of social labor Relations of cathexis – patriarchal order prohibits forms of emotion, attachment, and pleasure that patriarchal society itself produces (sexual inequality; men's rights in marriage, prohibition on homosexual affection when homo-social institutions are produced by patriarchy)
Shulamith Firestone: The Dialect of Sex
ReplyDeleteFirestone questions the organization of culture itself in order to find an explanation to the sex and gender systems. She states that Marx and Engels developed a method of analysis that was both dialectical and materialist but that before them, social thinkers only moralized about existing inequalities without actually taking the proper actions. She praises De Beauvoir for being the most comprehensive in describing that cultural systems exist as sex dualism. She claims that sex and gender are new awareness than that of racism because unlike economic class, sex sprang directly from biological reality. It is a fact that men and women were created differently and not equally privileged. She defines the biological family as the basic reproductive unit of male/female/infant. It is defined by the facts that:
- Women are at mercy of biology through menstruation, menopause, childbirth, wet nursing. Therefore they are dependent on males for physical survival.
- Human infants take longer to grow and thus are helpless (they are dependent on mothers)
- Mother/child interdependency shaped psychology of every mature female and child.
- Natural reproductive differenced led to delusion of labor and paradigm of caste.
Furthermore, she claims that it is not the male species that should be gotten rid of to stop the biological differences but the construct of sex distinction itself. Overall she claims that class of society is the mode of organization of biological family unit for the reproductive species and that it is society that defines the difference and not biology.
Laqueur Article:
There was once the belief that women and men had the same genitals, the only difference was that one was inverted and the other wasn’t. By the 1800’s this view changed to establish the biological divergence between the sexes. There was a time in which the female body was compared to that of a female canine. This brought about the question over the existence of women’s sexual pleasure. The women were seen as cold while mean were seen as hot. Women now became all that, which men weren’t. Miller stated that what led to the differentiation of male and female societies was civilization itself. Civilization determined that women politics would be the moral, fight for animals, and abortion and humanities because their biological makeup made them different and unfit for jobs.