Short Response 11/08/10

Although I completely support the idea that women have our rights to completely take control of our reproduction choice, I was enraged when reading And So I Chose by Allison Crews. In And So I Chose, Allison describes her experience of choosing to give birth to her child when she was in high school. Actually, at first, she scheduled three abortion appointments but cancelled each of them. Finally she decided not to abort her pregnancy for reasons like no transportation and money. I can understand that she was a child when she made that choice, but it seems she had no regret at all when she wrote this work. Choosing and actually undergoing to give birth to a child is a big and serious issue. Preplanned pregnancy is far healthier to both the baby and the mother. A well balanced diet, regular exercises, and frequent examinations can help insure both mental and physical health of babies. When my step-mother decided to bear a child, both my parents had prepared for a long time and conducted a lot of actions; my step-mother started taking pteroyl-glutamic acid three months before pregnancy and my father stopped drinking and smoking at the same time. So my little brother is very healthy and smart now. But I do not mean that women should abort unprepared pregnancy; I think women should be really cautious and bear responsibility for their children once the pregnancy is detected and they have decided to bear the children. However, in Allison’s case, she did not make her decision at once but procrastinated until almost the last minute. And during her pregnancy, she remained depressed because the people around her hardly gave her any support. I doubt she cautiously bore her child. It seems she did not take her pregnancy seriously other than on pro-choice or pro-life issues. Her work enraged me because I think she cares more about the respect she received other than the health of her child. She even decided to give birth in her home herself because she felt kind of repressed by the doctors and feminist community members. While describing the doctor’s response when hearing her decision about giving birth at home, she describes the doctor as a sexist who thought “delivering babies is a man’s job”, though I do not agree with the doctor either, I think she purposely neglected the health issue to address the feminism issue. However, giving birth at home can be extremely dangerous especially for young girls like her. How could she be sure that she could handle it? Is her feeling really above the health of her child even though that she/he would be adopted by others? As Judith Arcana states in Abortion Is a Motherhood Issue, “being pregnant meant having a baby growing inside our bodies”. Being pregnant also means have responsibility to the well-being of a new life. Being careless towards pregnancy can cause lifelong harm on the children being born. I myself am a victim of careless pregnancy. My mother was kind of careless when she bore me, she did not prepare for the pregnancy as my stepmother did and she even refused to eat healthily because she had no appetite. It turned out that I was very susceptible to diseases when I was young and I had to suffer from hearing loss which can never be restored again probably because of an infection during her pregnancy.

Main Post for 11/09/10

Abortion is one of the most controversial topics of the day, one that has two distinct sides that have very strong views. The readings for Tuesday all deal with this topic. Listen up had two stories about two different women and their experience with being pregnant and the option of abortion. The first article, “Abortion, Vacuum Cleaners and the Power Within” by Inga Muscio deals with a women and her aversion to the abortion process. She compares it to a vacuum cleaner. She also describes the emotional effects of the machine and how she cried and vomited, and how she had a gapping hole in her for two weeks after. This didn’t happen once, but twice, she had to do the whole things over again. After these experiences she decided to study medicine and healing processes and what she found was that healing tarts with in, which is contrary to mainstream society because we look for most things outside from the body. “We look outside for just about everything: love, entertainment, well-being, self-worth, and health (Muscio 115).” She also sees that people don’t look to themselves for answers or truths, but look for experts in whatever area your studying. When she got pregnant for the third time she did not go to the abortion clinic. Instead she hired a masseuse and drank herbal abortifacients and emmenagogues. Through this her baby died. She believes that if abortion were in our own power then abortion clinics would be completely unnecessary. While I understand how the stigma that comes with going to an abortion clinic would disappear if people did this, I also think this way is really unreliable. How safe are the things that this women doing, and how effective? You hear about homemade remedies to have an abortion, but some of them don’t work and some are also very dangerous.

The second article, “And So I Chose” by Allison Crews, dealt with a young women and her choice to keep her baby. Growing up she was taught to be pro-life, but after seeing a young girl go into a clinic and see the pain on her face, she decided not to be. She put together a website to empower feminist teen mothers. When she was a sophomore in high school she got pregnant and decided to go through with the pregnancy. People told her that she was an irresponsible teenager and a hopeless breeder. People told her that she could not be a good mother and the only option was adoption. She was not able to make any choices for herself because people said she was to young to make these important decisions. But when she went through labor and her son was born, she felt reborn and decided to keep the baby. “Through giving birth, I loudly and publicly proclaimed my freedom of choice (Crews 148).” Allison Crews believes that pro-choice is our right to choose whatever reproductive option we want. I really like Crews thoughts because whatever choice you make it affects your life, not any one else’s. It’s your life and you should live it whatever way you want to. Who are other people to judge you on what you do, they should worry about their own lives.

“Abortion Is a Motherhood Issue” by Judith Arcana brought up a good point about the link between abortion and motherhood. She says that they are often separated for convenience but also purposely. She also says that maternity starts at conception. “When the pregnancy is deliberate, or accepted, we say baby. When the pregnancy is an accident, or reject, we say fetus or embryo… (Arcana 225).” This is a good point, because people do this to help protect the mother’s feelings. Judith Arcana worked an Abortion Counseling Service and saw the effect that abortion had on these women and that they did not make this decision light. “Every woman who has an abortion know what it means, and lives in the meaning the best way she can. Abortion is a matter of life and death… (226).” Obviously most women don’t go into abortion clinics not knowing what they are doing. They are accepting responsibility of whatever choice they make knowing its best for them and their babies.

“Feminism in our Time” contained an article on the Roe v. Wade case. It describes how Sarah Weddington, Linda Coffee, and Norma McCorvey came together to fight the Supreme Court to legalize abortion. The high court voted 7 to 2 state laws that restricted a woman’s right to an abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy (Feminism in our Time 400). Abortion used to only be allowed to get if the mother’s life was in danger, but that changed after it was found to be unconstitutional to not allow a women to get an abortions. The article describes that the abortion law was a product of Victorian social life that discourages illicit sexual conduct. This might be partly true but most people don’t have unsafe sex because they can “fix” it with an abortion. Another reason the article says abortions were made illegal was because back in the day they were really dangerous and that a lot of women died because of it. The last reason they say that the abortion law was enacted because it was State’s job to protect the fetus, because it is a human life once conception happens. The law was overturned based on the idea of personal privacy and liberty and this should include a woman’s choice to get an abortion. Abortion is a tricky topic with a lot of different opinions.

Short Response 11/8

Although I found all the readings interesting, I specifically want to address one of the readings in Listen Up.  Inga Muscio discusses her personal experience with abortions, which she is seriously opposed to. She begins by relating abortion tools to vacuum cleaners, which I found quite disturbing. Her description of her first abortion was absolutely terrifying. Not only was it physically painful, but it seemed to be emotionally damaging. Despite this trauma, Inga actually got pregnant two more times, which I found to be quite incredulous. Her second abortion was more familiar because she knew what to expect. Finally, for her third abortion, she decided to use herbal remedies and specialty massages to abort her child. Muscio wants a more informal discussion of our bodies and personal health to help us better understand what is going on internally. She calls for the destruction of abortion clinics and instead promotes organic abortions, stating " Abortion would be a personal, intimate thing among friends." This quote seriously disturbed me for several reasons. First, I do not think it is normal for a woman to have three abortions. I think many people can relate to getting caught up in the moment, but aborting three children because of reckless behavior is not only irresponsible but hypocritical. For her to be so opposed to abortion clinics after she used and benefited from their services twice is ridiculous to me. Secondly, her support of organic abortions seems very risky. I wonder if she took into account the fact that she had two abortions in the past, which probably had a significant effect on the success of her organic abortion. Thirdly, she feels that if organic abortions were explored than the debate over abortion would disappear. This belief is totally overlooking what lays at the heart of the abortion discussion, which focuses more on the morality of the issue than the technical methods used. Finally, her belief that "Abortion would be a personal, intimate thing among friends" just sounds so odd to me. No matter what your views on abortion are it should never be taken lightly, which is how this statement sounds. Her whole article truly put a bad taste in my mouth. Maybe I am missing her argument, but I entirely disagree with most of what she wrote.

News Flash #2: Four attractive faces out of 67 hundreds million of people?

http://springerlink.com/content/e175751w73028088/fulltext.pdf


Recently, a Korean plastic surgeon attempts to put an end to the controversy of beauty standards by trying to create the most attractive faces of different races. In his letter published online on the latest issue of The Official Journal of the ISAPS, Seung Chul Rhee, a plastic surgeon at Ilsan Paik Hospital, shows the results of his study “Attractive Composite Faces of Different Races”. In this study, Seung Chul Rhee created four ideal female faces of four races: African, Caucasian, Chinese, and Japanese, by using computerized morphing systems to mix and match the facial features of some the biggest stars of these four races. The African attractive composite face was created by using 13 African female models including Agbani Darego, Beveryl Peele, Brandi Quinones, Faustina Agolley, Kate Tachie-Menson, Lerato Moloi, Pearl Amoah, Rihanna, Soraya Khalil, Waris Dirie, Yamin Warsame, Yvette Nsiah, and Zoe Saldana. The 16 Caucasian female stars whose facial features contributed to the attractive caucasian composite face were Aishwarya Rai, Alexis Bledel, Angelina Jolie, Ashley Olsen, Blake Lively, Brooklyn Decker, Ciara Harris, Elisabetha Canalis, Eva Longoria, Hayden Panetierre, Hillary Duff, Jessica Alba, Mandy Moore, Marissa Miller, Megan Fox, and Scarlet Johansson. The Chinese ideal face generated from the facial features of 20 entertainers including Li Gong, Bingbing Li, Bingbing Fan, Vivian Hsu, Jingles Xu, Dee Hsu, Wei Tang, Yifei Liu, Jacqueline Li, Chiling Lin, Qinqin Jiang, Maggie Cheung, Cecilia Cheung, Yuqi Zhang, Zilin Zhang, Feifei Sun, Huang Sheng Yi, Xun Zhou, Gillian Chung, and Ziyi Zhang. And for the Japanese look, Seul Chul Rhee used the facial features of the following 14 Japanese stars’ faces: Masami Nagasawa, Nanako Matsusima, An Watanabe, Riyo Mori, Erika Sawajiri, Juri Ueno, Miho Yoshioka, Namie Amuro, Norika Fujiwara, Nozomi Sasaki, Yuu Aoi, Ryoko Hirosue, Kyoko Fukada, and Mina Hayashi. Seung Chul Rhee expresses that “the average face is not an attractive face and that the most attractive face is the average of attractive faces”(1). He also expected his research to be used to “understand the aesthetic preference of different races”(1). Despite the rather tepid results Seung Chul Rhee received, I found this study rather threatening. And although Seung Chul Rhee created four ideal faces of different faces, these four faces are actually atypical within these four races and this study actually suggests a rather single standard of beauty which denies beauty of other shapes.

These four attractive faces shown in this study are quite unrealistic. The attractive composite face of Japanese is “relatively long” and has “slightly slanted eyes, sharp chin, and chubby cheeks”(1). The Chinese ideal face is slim and thin with a “relatively narrow cheek” and “lantern jaw”(1). The attractive face of Caucasian is some what masculine which “has a narrow palpebral height, angulated and squareshaped mandible, protruding cheek, and fuller lips compared with the average Caucasian face”(1).And the African female ideal face “has a narrower nose, smaller and more acute eyes, smaller upper lip, and slender chin compared with the ordinary African face”(1). However, all these faces are relatively atypical within their corresponding races. Most African women are fascinated for their fuller lips and broader noses, however in this study, the attractive composite African face “has a narrower nose” and “smaller upper lip”. Although, I have been the United States for no more than three months, I am quite aware with the fact the eyes of most African Americans are rather large; but the eyes of this ideal African face not merely become “smaller and more acute” but also reduced to the same size as these of the Caucasian, Chinese and Japanese. It is elementarily knowledgable that Asians are yellow race. But on this article, quite strangely, the two Asian faces appear even lighter than the Caucasian face. And the African face also appears lighter than ordinary African women.

The doubtable authenticity of these entertainers’ faces that be used to create these four attractive composite faces also accounts for the unreality of this study. Despite the possibility that these entertainers may have undergone plastic surgery, other means such as makeup and light effect must have made these entertainers look better whenever they are under shot. In this society with highly advanced beauty industry, it has become public that people can easily make extreme makeover with the help of makeup and skilled cosmeticians; apply a shade darker than the skin on both sides of the nose can make it look smaller, curl eyelashes make eyes look bigger and put a bit of light eyeshadow right at the inside ridge of eyes, where the upper lid meets the bottom lid, near the tear duct brightens eyes and makes them look whiter. So these entertainers appear on the media can look completely different after removing makeup. Because Seung Chul Rhee used the photos of these entertainers appear on the media in which the faces of these entertainers are deceiving, his study is actually based on unreal beauty. Additionally, it is unwise to use the faces of entertainers to compose attractive faces because most these entertainers are popular not for their appearances but for their profession on acting, singing, and modeling.

This study also denies that beauty comes in all shape. Though the plastic surgeon states that “attractive faces differ considerably according to race”(1). It is not hard to tell that these four faces are actually alike despite their color; all four in oval shape with eyebrows, eyes, and lips on the same line. But in fact there are approximately 9 different shapes of faces, including oblong, oval, round, rectangular, square, triangular, diamond, inverted triangle, and heart. And it is impossible to tell which shape is better and more attractive than others since it is easy to find existing attractive faces that come in all these shapes. And there are approximate 14 hundreds million Chinese people and half of them are female, but this Korean surgeon only used 20 faces of them and tries to find the most attractive Chinese face.

Most importantly, this study neglects the most attractive parts human race -- diversity. Life always provide us with surprise and seeing people of different features can be enjoyable. Even, as a woman, it is really interesting for me to see beautiful women come in different features. Eyes do not necessarily need to be big with double-fold eyelids, Chinese eyes with single-fold eyelids and outer corners going up can also be very attractive. Baby faces can be as charming as those thin faces. But this study unwisely tries to suggest the standards of attractiveness. If this world, which has 67 hundreds million people exist in it, has only four attractive faces, can these faces still be attractive?

This study also endangers the independent aesthetic judgment. Although in American society this study has only received few attention, it does have some effect on Chinese society, at least on Chinese internet society according to the many reviews I found on Chinese websites and I actually first noticed this news on a SNS website because people keep forwarding this. On that SNS website, people are talking about how to judge the attractiveness of women by this study. This reminds me a similar study which uses so-called new golden proportion of women’s faces to determine the level of attractiveness of women. Because of that study, many plastic surgeons suggested many female entertainers whose faces fit that golden ratio perfectly. Although these entertainers were said to be standard beautiful women and they are really beautiful, but they are far from the most attractive and a lot of entertainers whose faces do not fit into that scientific finding appear more attractive. But this kind of studies is really threatening as many people, who tend to believe scientific research rather than individual judgement, will use them to judge who is more ‘attractive’ and ignore, and even deny the beauty of these people who falls out of the ‘rules’. If things goes like this, people will gradually lose our abilities on judging.

As Seung Chul Rhee is a plastic surgeon comes from a country which has and is well-known for highly advanced plastic surgery industry, it is easy to tell the real purpose lying behind his study -- to brainwash people and to prosper plastic surgery industry. By providing people with the images of the “attractive” faces of different races, this study persuades women to deny the facial features that they possess but different from the facial features that are presented on this study, and men to disprove the appearance of their partners and women around them. Therefore, women will try to adjust their appearances to the facial features approved by plastic surgeons. This kind of scientific suggest can really impose effects on public just like the makeover shows can prompt people to take plastic surgery, as Susan J. Douglas presents in Enlightened Sexism; “a 2007 study by the ASPS asserted that four out of five cosmetic surgery patients reported that they had been “directly influenced to have a procedure by the plastic surgery reality television shows they watch” ” (Douglas, 225).

Beauty standards are really harmful because they have made more and more women become depressed with their own appearances and bodies. In her book Enlightened Sexism, Susan J. Douglas states that “young women today are more dissatisfied with their bodies than previous generations” (Douglas, 217) because we are exposed to thousands of makeover shows, advertisements with sexy women bodies, and radio shows having women denouncing their own bodies (Douglas).

Again, women are endangered by introducing to beauty standards. By creating what he called as ‘attractive faces of different races’, Seung Chul Rhee neglected the variety of beauty with unrealistic beauty, and made women to be more dissatisfied with their appearances.






Resources:
1. Seung Chul Rhee, Attractive Composite Faces of Different Races, http://springerlink.com/content/e175751w73028088/fulltext.pdf, 16 October 2010.
2. Susan J. Douglas, Enlightened Sexism: the seductive message that feminism’s work is done, 1st ed, Times Books.

Newsflash 11/5: A League of Their Own

            Yesterday, CNN reported in “First transgender athlete to play in NCAA basketball” that a Kye Allums, a junior at the University of Washington, will play on the Division I basketball team as a man this year. Allums, who stands at 5’11”, says he realized his true identity when his mom texted him one day, “Who do you think you are, young lady” (CNN Wire Staff). This “aha!” moment made Allums realize who he truly was. He explains how we grew up as a tomboy, but felt uncomfortable in the body he was born in, female with female parts. Struggling to find his identity, Allums attempted to be more feminine when he reached adolescence, mimicking teenage girls’ appearance and interests. However, Allums finally realized he should stop denying his true feelings: that he was in fact a man “trapped inside a woman’s body.” With courage, Allums decided to identify as a male and was met with support from his teammates, coaches, family and University administrators at Washington. I think Allums' case is unique, but I believe we will begin to see more cases just like his. Further, I think that although the NCAA has been accepting and understanding of transgender athletes, the organization needs to make further steps to clarify rules governing these students who identify as a sex that they were not biologically born to have.

            Allums’ situation is unique, but a growing phenomenon in the world of athletics today. According to NCAA rules and regulations, Allums will be allowed to continue playing on the women’s basketball team at Washington, even though he identifies as a male. This is because Allums has agreed to forego any testosterone therapy while he is a member of the team. Robert Chernak, senior vice provost at George Washington, said the university is fully accepting of Allums’ decision to live as a male student (CNN Wire Staff). “Kye has informed the university that he will not begin any medical or drug protocols while a student-athlete,” Chernak said. “Kye will continue to be a member of the women's basketball team” (CNN Wire Staff).

            Allums is also in a special situation, in that his coaches and teammates are fully supportive of his decision to become a male and to continue playing women’s athletics. Their acceptance of Allums as “big brother” of the team is indicative of a society that is beginning to embrace peoples’ differences and eliminate prejudice towards transgender people. Allums’ friends and family understand his struggle being “trapped” in a body that he feels he should not have and are fully accepting of his decision to identify as male.

            Anne Fausto-Sterling, author of Sexing the Body, would certainly have a lot to say about Allum’s situation as a transgender playing collegiate athletics. Fausto-Sterling reminds us that “the rules for living as a male or female are strict” (Fausto-Sterling 73). Pointing to history, Fausto-Sterling traces the distinctions between male and female from social constructs. She explains that it is not science, but our political and social ideologies that dictate what sex should be. She states, “labeling someone a man or a woman is a social decision... and only our beliefs about gender-not science-can define our sex” (3). Certainly, Allums felt that as a female, with female genitalia, that he ought to act a certain way, like other teenage girls he knew in school. However, his strong inclination towards masculinity was hidden for some time by the strong messages he received from social constructs that he ought to act and appear a certain way. I think that if these ideologies did not exist, as they did not in earlier time periods, Allums and others like him would not have to struggle with finding their true identity, fighting social norms and expectations.

            Further, although Allums is the only transgender athlete in the NCAA right now, his situation is a growing occurrence in collegiate athletics today. At a Women’s Studies brown bag this year, entitled “Coaching and Gender,” Assistant Director of Athletics-Compliance Coordinator Ann-Marie Guglieri spoke about the growing concern for NCAA officials to clarify rules and regulations surrounding transgender issues. Guglieri explained that the current rule is that a student athlete is eligible to play for the team that corresponds with his or her sex as listed on the student’s driver’s license. In addition, if a transgender changes his or her sex on the driver’s license and continues to play on an NCAA team, the team will be considered “mixed” and therefore will become ineligible to compete in the NCAA championship. This means that if Allums changes his sex to male on his driver’s license, Washington will only be eligible, as a mixed squad, to compete in the men’s championship and not the women’s. While the article does not list Allums’ identified sex on his driver’s license, in order to be eligible to compete for the NCAA title, he must remain female according to state classifications.

Further, athletes must comply with NCAA drug regulations in order to remain eligible. This means that a transgender athlete cannot take hormones that would give them an unfair advantage in competition. Since this is a growing phenomenon, Guglieri explains that the NCAA is continuing to expand and clarify regulations in order to accommodate athletes like Allums, who wish to identify as something other than their biological sex.

            I think Allums’ situation is very interesting and indicative of a society that is growing to accept people on the “sexual continuum,” as Fausto-Sterling writes. As a student athlete at Colgate, I have not had any teammates who have identified themselves as another sex, but two years ago one of my teammates came out to us, explaining that she is a lesbian. Like the Washington women’s basketball team, our team was more than accepting, assuring our teammate that we will continue to support and love her regardless of her sexuality. Athletic teams are truly like families and it is comforting to see the Washington team in full support of their brother, Kye Allums.

            However, I think that the NCAA should take rapid steps to clarify rules governing transgender and transsexual student athletic eligibility, as Allums’ story may give other student athletes who struggle with gender identity the courage to follow a similar path. Rendering a team ineligible to compete for a women’s national title simply because one’s sex on a driver’s license is male seems to be unfair, especially if the transgender athlete is not taking hormones that may give him an unfair advantage. If Allums, for instance, wants to truly change his sex in state records, he will let down his team, which may be in the running for an NCAA title. The only way they could win is by entering the men’s tournament, which would create a distinct physical disadvantage.

            Despite the NCAA’s unreasonable and often vague rules, I think the organization, as well as collegiate athletic programs as a whole, are doing a good job of acknowledging people who identify as a sex that differs from their biological makeup. By even employing rules to govern these people, it shows that the NCAA is doing its best to include all types of people. Furthermore, the support the organization as well as the University of Washington has given to Kye Allums shows that just because someone is different from the norm does not mean that they do not deserve respect for the hard work they put into being a student athlete.

CNN Wire Staff. “First transgender athlete to play in NCAA basketball.” CNN. 4 November, 2010. <http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/03/transgender.basketball.player/index.html?iref=allsearch>. 

Fausto-Sterling, Anne. Sexing the Body. New York: Basic Books. 2000.

News Flash: Too Hot?

http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/the-human-condition/2010/06/04/too-hot-in-the-workplace-it-can-cost-you-your-job.html

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/06/11/debrahlee-lorenzana-a-double-take-on-those-double-ds/            

         It is no secret that the United States was founded and currently exists on capitalistic principles. With capitalism comes the need to consume goods and products that we do not need, but simply desire. These products can range from: clothing, shoes, cell phones, cars and houses. Although the scale of these products differ (some being much more expensive than others) they all represent and symbolize our status in society. People are constantly being scrutinized and evaluated on the products that they “display” and many times this has a serious impact on their lives. In order to obtain these top shelf products that are so coveted by society, one needs money and lots of it. Some people inherit large sums of money, but most find an occupation that allows them to afford such prestigious social statuses. Unfortunately, women face many obstacles and discrimination when it comes to finding and/or excelling in the workforce. The media and large corporations spend billions of dollars to influence the general public’s train of thought. Specifically, they tell women to empower themselves via buying products that make them look sexy and attractive to men. We are told that being attractive is one of the main components to being successful. However, Jessica Bennett’s article Too Hot in the Workplace? It Can Cost You Your Job, disputes this claim by citing the current case of Debrahlee Lorenzana. Throughout my discussion I want to explore the ways in which women are made to live up to impossible standards and once we finally meet them, what the consequences are.

            The case surrounding Debrahlee Lorenzana is both complicated and intricate. Ms. Lorenzana is a single mother who was recently fired from Citibank for poor work performance. However, she is filing a suit against the corporate giant on the grounds of discrimination, “alleging that her bosses told her that ‘as a result of the shape of her figure, [her] clothes were purportedly too distracting’ for her male colleagues and supervisors to bear.”(1) Before her dismissal she was barred from wearing pencil skirts, three-inch heels, turtlenecks and fitted business suits. Although other women in her office wore similar clothing, her body was said to be “different” from the others and too distracting for the work place. The case is relevant to our class because it calls into question the role of appearance and beauty in the workplace. As Bennett points out, it has already been proven that prettier people have several advantages. She explains that resumes are viewed in a more favorable light when thought to belong to an attractive person. Similarly, attractive students usually receive more attention from their professors than other students in the class. Astonishingly, and to be frank quite ridiculously, attractive women are paid four percent more and men five percent more than their less attractive coworkers.

This statistic speaks a lot to the values of our society and therefore it is important to ask why this statistic is true. Our culture has grown to value looks and appearance above all. We are constantly flooded with images and ideals that we are supposed to aspire to become. Susan Douglas discusses the growing trend in advertising, where companies are now targeting younger generations of girls. The main message that is being sent is to value your looks in order to impress and attract men. Sadly, body image is quickly becoming one of the major issues for teenage girls. This should come as no surprise, when we examine the television shows and movies young girls are watching. Makeover shows are rampant and glamorize dangerous surgeries. Channels such as MTV promote hyper sexuality and feature bombshells with large breasts. So, if us women are supposed to aspire to be like these women we see in advertisements, why was Ms. Lorenzana punished for becoming what society wanted her to be?

Investment banking and Finance are extremely lucrative careers and thus it makes sense that both are very heavily male dominated fields. In 2008 women earned approximately seventy-seven cents of every man’s dollar. Therefore, it is really important for women to gain a stronger foothold in these large corporations, such as JP Morgan, Citibank and Goldman Sachs. Recently, these companies have come under scrutiny for sexist policies and “mommy tracking.” Mommy tracking occurs after a female employee becomes pregnant. Usually, companies will demote the employee upon her return and eventually terminate her for ‘poor performance.’ This phenomenon relates to Ann Critenden’s article The Mommy Tax. In the article she discusses Virginia Daley who worked for Aetna. Despite being at the company for ten years and numerous positive performance reviews, she was fired after getting pregnant and trying to arrange a more flexible schedule. This connects to Lorenzana because both instances feature a male dominated profession and work space, where a woman is penalized for fulfilling her “societal duties.” By this I mean women (Daley) are expected to have children instead of stay at work. Those who chose work over children are often seen as irresponsible and frigid. Additionally, women are also supposed to have amazing bodies (Lorenzana) in order to please men. Yet, both women were punished because they posed a threat to the boys club. If we look at the statistics, women in coveted professions still earn significantly less than their male counterparts. It’s as if men allow women to get a taste of being in the boys club, but then swiftly remind them who is in charge. As women we are facing a double-edged sword, in which we lose if we are too attractive or not attractive enough. Women who are too attractive are constantly having their competence and intelligence questioned. Thus it seems that there is very little women can do to combat this prejudice.

Aside from discrimination, women still face harassment in the workplace. Lorenzana accounts that in 2003 she was named sales rep of the month by Municipal Credit Union. This would seemingly be a prestigious award, in which any professional should be proud of. However, she goes on to say that she was called into the manager’s office to review a picture. On the computer screen was an image of his penis. Not only is this a disgusting display of chauvinism, but it also undermines all of her hard work and effort in relation to the company. Now, she must question whether she received the award because of merit or because the male manager wanted to have sexual relations with her. Harassment in the workplace has become much more covert than in previous times. Men can no longer slap women on the butts or call them ‘baby’. But, it is clear that harassment and discrimination is still prevalent.

As I mentioned in the beginning of my post, this story is not as clear-cut or black and white as it would appear to be. A subsequent article written by Helena Andrews titled Debrahlee Lorenzana: A double Take on Those Double D’s discusses the authors desire to support Debra, but gives reasons as to why she cannot. Andrews discusses the new type of covert sexual harassment that I previously described. Her support for Debra mainly extends to the fact that she drew attention to workplace sexual harassment. However, a recently discovered video featuring a 26- year old Debra has drastically altered the sympathy of the public and media. The video was originally made for a Discovery Health documentary titled “Plastic Surgery New York Style.” The documentary was made to highlight the outcomes of plastic surgery. Ms. Lorenzana had her first operation and received D-cup implants. Her rationale for a second operation to increase to DD-cups is, “I know men have the fantasy of having a Playboy playmate…That’s what I want to be, tits on a stick.”(2) To me this is proof of the strength of media and advertisements. They had succeeded in ingraining this beauty standard into Ms. Lorenzana’s mind. Although I do not agree with her statements, is it fair of us to penalize her for becoming everything that the media wanted her to be? It was her personal choice to get these operations and although her motives were questionable, we do not penalize men for getting hair implants to impress women. Yes, these operations are on very different spectrums, but they can still apply. Women are expected to be beautiful, or else they are outcast, yet when they are as beautiful as the stereotype they are punished. Thus, once again women must walk the societal tightrope of what they are expected to be and what society can handle them to be. 

1. Jessica Bennett. http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/the-human-condition/2010/06/04/too-hot-in-the-workplace-it-can-cost-you-your-job.html Nov. 4 2010. 

2. Helena Andrews. http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/06/11/debrahlee-lorenzana-a-double-take-on-those-double-ds/. Nov. 4 2010.

Despite being totally covered up, Ms. Lorenzana was told not to wear turtle necks and pencil skirts. To me this outfit looks very acceptable, especially since she is not revealing anything.

Short Response 11/04/10

When reading Knowledge Is Power by Maria Cristina Rangel, to be honest, I really hated the way she talked about her life as a student of Smith College and a mother of two children, and how the welfare system let her done. At then, I thought that it is the basic human right to bear children but I also thought everyone should be responsible for the choices they make; poor single mothers do have their rights to give birth but they should consider their own abilities of providing their children with good environment to grow up. I thought Maria wanted to avoid making money by attending Smith College so that she can receive financial aids from both Smith College welfare system.

However, now I realized that what I thought is just the typical view that this society hold towards poor single mothers. We think single mothers are poor because they are lazy. That is why Lyndon Johnson “called for limits on payments to non-marital children and complained that their mothers “sit around and breed instead of going out to work” ”. Since the Second Wave, as many feminists required equal opportunities for women to work outside, the view that women can be independent by working hard is prevalent among the society. Therefore, poor single mothers are simply targeted for not working hard for their own lives and thus are not pitiable. However, ironically, while this society charges these poor single mother for not working hard, it does not truly provide women with equal opportunities and equal pay. And more importantly, while women seeking work outside home, they are still the main caregiver so that women are actually caught by both outside work and domestic work while being expected to perform well on both sides.
Providing poor single mothers and their children with better welfare is of crucial importance and France and Scandinavian have proved that better welfare can encourage women to be more productive.

However, I think the author is quite nominal in emphasizing that “(they) mobilized not to speak for poor mothers but with them”. Although she tries to distinguish them who worked against Personal Responsibility Act from these feminists of the Second Wave by declaring that she and other elite middle-class feminists did not work from a status far from the real situation of these poor single mothers, she does not provide any voice from these mothers in the whole reading. Those who required better welfare for poor single mothers are still those who did not need the welfare at all.