Short Response 11/4

In "The Lady and the Tramp," author Gwendolyn Mink talks about her frustrations as a welfare activist during the 1990s when the Personal Responsibility Act was passed, stripping poor women from their entitlement to welfare. Throughout the article, Mink expresses her concern at the number of women who supported such a bill and robbed their fellow sisters from a right that their priviledged positions provides. As a result of the bill, poor women were forced into the workforce in order to make ends meet and give their children proper financial support. While the priviledged middle class has the financial security to decide for themselves whether or not they will stay in the home or "free" themselves by working, poor women do not have the same opportunity to decide which road to take. They lack the means to stay in the home, if they so decide, and thus have one more constraint forced upon their lives. Mink argues that welfare should be a right to all poor women, since motherhood is equally as valuable as any paid job, such as nursing or teaching or cleaning. After all, isn't a mother all these occupations twenty four hours a day? I think Mink makes a strong and compelling argument for welfare. Poor women should not be forced down a single path due to their often pre-established position in society. Instead, they should be given the choice, just as priviledged women are given, to decide for themselves if they would like to work or stay in the home. This is the only way they will be treated with dignity and freed from just one of the many constraints their sex and financial situation impose upon them.

Main Post 11/4

     Gwendolyn Mink’s article focused on the devisive nature of welfare reform amongst the female population. Her main qualms with this issue is the fact that a majority of feminists were not willing to help or support women who received welfare. In fact, many feminists were anti- welfare. They gave their support to the Republican party to effectively win their war against working class single mothers. The bill in question was  the Personal Responsibility Act, which was supported by every woman in Congresswoman, except for one. Mink goes on to say that although women did not personally write the legislation, they did very little to stop it from passing. The implications of this law have both economic, political and social effects. Poor single mother’s are outcast in society and looked down upon. They are treated much differently by the government than other demographics of people. Welfare reform devalued the situation and struggle that these single mothers faced. It seems that there was very little understanding of the lives these women led. In the United States there is a terrible stigma for being a poor single mother, especially if you are on welfare. Society views these women as careless, freeloaders with loose morals. Many believed that they preferred to have children and live off of the government than get a real job. Of course, a racial issue also existed. Many women who received welfare were minorities, mainly African Americans and Hispanic women. Such racial issues are rooted in our countries deep racist attitudes. Views of African American women as lazy, promiscuous and poor have existed for hundreds of years. As we see the racial issue come into play, it is pretty obvious as to why many feminists didn’t help these single mothers. When I was reading this article it made me think of the divide between feminists and womanists. Many African American women broke away from the feminist movement, because they felt that these women were only concerned with white middle class issues. For instance, many white women wanted to work outside of their household, because they felt trapped by their responsibilities. However, African American women were more concerned with the safety of their children when they encountered white people. Or the fact that they could barely get jobs due to discrimination and blatant racism. Many feminists believe that  working outside of the home was the key to equality. Of course they neglected the fact that African American women couldn’t get jobs or would be paid even less than the white women. I feel like this article also relates to Dyce and Rangel’s article. Both women were faced with very desperate situations in which they were made to feel ashamed about their choices. Clearly, our system needs to be modified so that women aren’t stripped of their dignity if need help.

short response 11-04-10

“The Lady and the Tramp (II): Feminist Welfare Politics, Poor Single Mothers, and the Challenge of Welfare Justice” by Gwendolyn Mink was an interesting read. Mink discusses in her article how women and feminist need to come to together and fight for welfare reform. She believes that feminist, usually white middle class women, need to stop lobbying against it and start being for it. The women of congress were not necessary responsible for welfare reform, but they were in a position to change it (Mink 57). While I was reading all of this, I was thinking that these white middle class women are not going to do anything about, but why? Why are they not helping out these women in need? This is one of the questions that Mink seeks to answer in her new; she says, “It is a call to middle-class feminists to practice true ‘sisterhood’: by upholding poor mothers’ rights as we do our own (Mink 58). This is an awesome statement made my Gwendolyn Mink because it’s calling out feminism and saying that they only care about the issues that deal directly with them. Feminist need to help these women because even though they are in a different economic situations, they are women and they do need help. I don’t know much about the welfare system in place, but how she describes it; it does not make it sound good. Its horrible that they are treated like a separate caste and that they are subject to different laws. Mink explains that persons who work in their own house and who take care of their children should be given welfare as an income that is owed to them. Just to play devil’s advocate here, I can see people saying that all women who have a kid she be given this income. Why should only single mothers get it? They are doing the same work as other mothers in better economic situations are doing. Based just on work they are doing to the same thing, just because the single mother doesn’t have other income doesn’t justify them getting paid and other mothers not getting paid. I can also see how people can take real advantage of this system, by having kids just to collect a check, and that is unfortunate because they ruin it for the people who really need it. “In the popular imagination, welfare participants are reckless breeders who bear children to avoid work (Mink 59).” Feminist need to realize that these type of people only make up a small majority of people that use welfare; once they do that they will realize that they need to help their fellow women out.

Main post for 11/02/2010

Since when giving up maternity becomes another sacrifice that women need to make for successful career while childlessness does not usually relates to men with successful career? The answer is self-evident: since women undertake most of the work of raising children, they can hardly be “unencumbered” and make great success on career; however, men do not have the same problem, because, to some extent, they can be “unencumbered” but remain fatherhood at the same time, as long as their wives raise children for them at home.

The message about motherhood that I get from the society, which is strongly related to the U.S society, that I grow up in is that motherhood baffles women in pursuing successful career, so it is something that “new independent” women would be better not to pursue. And since China has been threatened by overpopulation for decades, Chinese people view low birth rate, for example in some North Europe countries, as a sign of social progress and childlessness as success of feminism, and Family Planning Committee keeps propagandizing late motherhood. But overpopulation is not the only factor that gives me that message about motherhood. Nowadays in China, most female actresses and singers over thirty are unmarried and motherless, and pregnancy often means giving up their career entirely or at least for several years. And the former vice-premier Yi Wu, the most active and successful female in government, remains single and motherless until retirement.

Although I largely agree that women have our rights to choose whether to have children or not, I still think it is abnormal that more and more women tend to give up their incomparable innate ability for career. Why the society never cheers on the most basic success of human being -- the happiness of family life?

However, the truth is motherhood does hinder women from pursuing successful career and often charges women for a high “mommy tax”. Women may be dismissed because of pregnancy (though the law prohibit employers from directly doing so, they still have excuses to fire pregnant or mother) or face penalties and decline on wage. And employers tend to hire motherless young women for they are more “unencumbered” than mothers. However, most people are not aware that this is discrimination. And when women hardly handle their career and family at the same time, they tend to think that it happens because they are not strong enough. As Cindy DiBiasi, who gave up suing the company that she worked for fifteen years but discriminated her because of her motherhood, has pointed out “there is a contradiction in these kind of suits, because in order to get punitive damages, you have to show damages; you have to show that you’re a wilting flower who has been hurt by all this. If you’re strong, and are determined not to be a victim, they can argue, so what’s the problem?”

But most women are not Laurel Gilbert, who wrote You’re not the Type, who can remain active on feminism works while raising two children, they are more like Maria Cristina Rangel who struggled to raise her children while pursuing higher education.

So the real problem is, this society does not provide enough welfare for the most important people among human being -- mother. If every country can provide women with such welfare that French and Scandinavian government provide for the mothers and children that make women to be more “unencumbered”, women can easily be more productive.

Short Response 11/2

In "Reality Check," author Aisha Hakim-Dyce recounts her experience as an unemployed college student looking for a  job that would provide her with the funds to survive and obtain an education. Unfortunately, her experience was met with much frustration, as the only jobs she found paid well and worked around her busy schedule as a full time student were those jobs that sexually objectified. She says that she struggled with completely dismissing of one occupation in particular: go-go dancing. While she rejected the idea that women should prance around naked in uncomfortable and flashy high heels and give men sexual favors, she could not ignore the rewards that would come about from taking such a job. She could work flexible hours and make a great deal more money than any other minimum wage telemarketer position by simply shimmying her naked body for "silly" men. She tried countless times to convince herself that desensitization would allow her to ignore the inherent sexism present in jobs like go-go dancing as a means to pay for her college tuition.

While Hakim-Dyce in the end does not take the go-go dancing job, as she is offered another job as an English tutor right before her audition is about to take place, single mother "Melissa" (she asked that her name not be used in the article) has been dancing for four years and has been successful attending college and raising her younger daughter. In the article "Single Mom Strips to Support her Child and Pay for College," author Jasmine Rivera explains how Melissa went from working as a manager of a movie store, working 12-18 hours a day, seven days a week to picking her own hours and having ample time to spend with her daughter. Melissa states, “I turned to stripping and I learned to ignore society’s views and judgments against my job, which used to make me feel guilty and ashamed. I allowed myself to take advantage of what stripping can offer.” Melissa's experience dancing has been positive and she hopes that by sharing her experiences with others, she may be able to "minimize the stigma and humanize who we are inside and outside the club." I think Melissa's content with her job is a product not of what she does day after day, but instead is a product of what her job allows her to do day after day. It is the consequences of a job that provides her with ample money, flexibility and free time that has made Melissa happy with her decision to be a stripper. However, if Melissa was not reaping all these benefits, would she view her job in the same light? Or would she agree with Hakim-Dyce that dancing for ogling men is another way patriarchy oppresses and sexually objectives the female sex?

Short response 11-02-10

The articles in "Listen up" were very interesting to me and gave me insight into what it is like for women who have circumstances fighting against them succeeding. In both articles these women were not very well off and struggling to make ends meet while trying to make their lives better. "Knowledge Is Power" by Maria Cristina Rangel featured a young with a kid trying to make a better living for her and her kid. She felt especially mad at the government because she felt that they were patronizing her. To her they made it seem like she wanted this life and that it's her fault it's like that. She says that "the whole system is based on the assumption that you are trying to screw the DTA over" (Rangel 192). I can see how this would upset her because no one wants to be treated like their low class, but I can see where the government is coming from. The truth of the matter is that a lot of people do take advantage of the system. Look at the move Precious, the mother was pretending that she lived with a special needs child to get the financial benefits from the government. it's good that they check up on people. Yeah they can probably do it a better way, but some people are just condensing like that. I feel like it's easy to put the blame on the people when you haven't been in that situation. A lot of people think that people growing up on welfare, do it because they don't work hard, they truth is that a lot of them weren't born into situations like upper-middle class people. When you look at education costs today for college it's ridiculous who could afford a 50,000 dollar tuition, I know if it wasn't for my basketball scholarship, I would not be at Colgate. It just sucks that some people like, Aisha Hakim-Dyce, have to consider stripping in order to pay the bills. It's just sad because she was seriously considering and coming up with ways in which she could cut off her emotions so she could do the job. No women should ever have to that, unless she wanted to. Life is hard for people coming from the bottom, we hear about all these success stories like Oprah and Denzyl Washington and people think that any person from unfortunate circumstances can rise above it. But the truth is that those stories are very rare. I look at my dad and he was one of thirteen and only he and one of his brothers made it out of their area. Most of his family still live in the same neighborhood on welfare. Hopefully in the feature, we figure out a way that everyone has equal opportunities to succeed in this world.

Short Response 11/2

     All of the articles touched upon both prevalent societal gender and class issues. To synthesize their main arguments, all of the women personally experienced the downfalls of patriarchy and how difficult it is to be a working woman with a child. Critenden discussed the vulnerable position women are put in when they want to become a mother and still work. She discussed a woman who worked for Aetna, who had a very successful career and received several promotions and raises. However, she was subsequently fired after asking for a more flexible work schedule due to fact that she was pregnant. The women decided to sue Aetna but ended up losing the case and later appeals. The people on the jury felt that a women wouldn't be able to successfully handle her work load and the responsibilities of a child. I found Rangel's article particularly interesting and unique. Her experience at an elite institution such as Smith was extremely trying , specifically because she had children. As she was telling her story it dawned on me all the extra responsibilities she had due to being a single mother. Her time at Smith was spent worrying and rationalizing all of her decisions. Similarly, Hakim- Dyce found herself in a bad position when she had to pay for her expenses. Her options were very limited because she was under-qualified and thus couldn't obtain a good position. Dyce seriously contemplated becoming a stripper to help pay all of her bills. She tried to justify it by thinking that if men wanted to spend all of their money to see girls get naked then they were the stupid ones. However, as time passed she realized that this was not the lifestyle she wanted.
    After reading all of these articles I realized the desperate and almost hopeless situation some women are put in. To this day women make significantly less than their male counterparts, yet the media makes it seem like everything is for the most part equal. These women had to make extreme sacrifices in order to survive. Many times, government agencies only demoralized and looked down upon these women. It is clear that there aren't many places women can go to get help and if there are it is a long and strenuous process to be approved. Our country as a whole needs to be more proactive in assuring that people who truly need help have some resource to obtain it, or else these inequalities will continue to be reproduced.