Anu Bhagwati argues for more women in the U.S. military to curb sexualized violence

In a recentl op-ed with the Washington Post, Anu reflects on some of the themes she also talked to us about:

 

She then asks "So why are we surprised that sexual[ized] violence is such a problem in the ranks?"
Read more here.

An Apt Cartoon

Oh Subliminal Messaging.... Thou art Still so Rampant!

Charmin Commercialhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo4oEdtDRPo

Here is an example of overt and subtler gender stereotyping.  (Sorry I couldn't get the YouTube video to show up here, but check it out!!)

The commercial is promoting Charmin Ultra Strong as a way to help keep underwear clean.

Overt: Women do laundry and its cleanliness is a primary concern of theirs.
Women are peppy, smily and feminine.
In the bear sections we see all the other normal stereotypes about males being large and females small and men grunting and women having soft voices.

More subtle: Messiness is a masculine trait - only the son and the dad are implied as leavers of skidmarks in their underwear.
Bathroom etiquette is not something we can speak about - (More below!)

The commercial is enforcing many overt gender stereotypes, but the most interesting connection I found was the following.  According to Charmin, women do the laundry and are cleanly, but their sons and husbands are not, sometimes leaving "skidmarks," fecal matter, in their underwear.  Direct conversation about bathroom habits would seem to be the obvious solution, but such conversation is societally taboo, especially across genders.  So, concludes Charmin, one should buy their brand of toilet paper in order to solve the problem without breaking any taboos.

This really struck me because I had to watch the commercial several times (I was watching Hulu, so you see the same commercial over and over) to get this deeper gender stereotype.  These stereotypes have been so normalized, are so taken for granted, that even a recent graduate of the 2013 Davies Forum had to look hard to get the deeper message.

Be careful what you watch, because the subliminal messages can pass by unnoticed, and then get stuck in your subconscious.  There they may fester and subtly influence your decision making process, leading to future actions of your own which enforce gender stereotypes.

Such insidious conditioning is everywhere in our society, and it is highly dangerous.  This can be seen many places, but is especially true of Charmin commercials, because as a Montana native, I can tell you that bears are neither cute nor cuddly, and anything that tells you otherwise might get you mauled.

WATCH OUT!

Tavi Gevinson on female representation in the media

I found this really inspiring - I hope you do too!

A MUST READ for anyone who wants be informed about Iraq

What Kind of Liberation? Women and the Occupation of Iraq by Nadje Al-Ali and Nicola Pratt

            This book is the most incredible piece of writing I have ever encountered concerning the Iraq War.  It was comprehensive but concise, informative but easy to read, and clear while presenting a perspective that few Americans ever consider – the history of feminism and women’s (continuing!) activism in Iraq.  This book chronicles the rise and fall of women’s rights and movements in a country that the American media has portrayed as unflinchingly misogynistic and archaic.  Al-Ali and Pratt cut through this fabrication with a precision that takes the breath away. 

            They present a holistic and nuanced version of women’s active participation in Iraqi society, both politically and socially.  They manage to speak about the horrific reality of living conditions in Iraq without sensationalizing it, and to clearly and solidly refute the rhetoric of the Bush administration which claimed that Iraqi women were in need of the kind of liberation it could provide.

            I found this piece extremely meaningful because it contains the data to prove all of the half-baked theories I’ve gleaned from headlines and things other more well-informed people have told me.  And the writing style is so perfect for the content: simple enough that you don’t get lost in the academia and so compelling that you can’t put it down.  Such a piece of literature is exactly what I needed to really get a grasp of the reality of the situation in Iraq.  I often find myself shying away from learning about that war, either because it’s so gory and sensationalized that I feel sick, or so dry that I can’t get through it.  But this book is so obviously written from a place of caring for the women of Iraq, a caring that includes a desire to tell their story correctly, and to work towards a more tenable future for them, it makes it easier for me to care about the war in a way that is productive.

            In essence, this book contains all the facts one might ever need in order to prove that, at least for women, the invasion of Iraq has not brought any kind of liberation.

Al-Ali, N., & Pratt, N. (2009). What Kind of Liberation? Women and the Occupation of Iraq. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Put the blame where it belongs - On the Perp, even it it reflects back onto us

           In “Why Doesn’t She Leave,” an article by Ann Jones (in: Next Time She'll Be Dead. Boston: Beacon Press. 1994), we are reminded of an old adage: history is written by the victor.  In our current American society, where research is conducted mainly by men, trials are overseen by mainly male judges, and policy is made by mainly men, it is absurd to imagine that we would have a concept of domestic violence that is unbiased, fair, or representative of a female perspective.

This becomes particularly clear when we examine the research that has been conducted in the area of domestic violence.  Not only is the language used in this research blatantly biased (See “The Language of Love,” Jones 1994) but the focus of the research itself is inexcusably skewed.

Most research conducted in the United States of America on the topic of domestic violence is centered on the victim (Jones 1994), as if figuring out what unites victims of domestic abuse will give us the key to stopping it.  This is an overt example of a misogynistic scientific research process which has extreme consequences for victims of domestic abuse including rape, torture and death.  What needs to stop is THE ABUSER’S VIOLENCE TOWARDS HIS VICTIM.  Stopping abuse cannot be achieved by changing the behavior of the victim.  This is MISSING THE POINT ENTIRELY and is victim-blaming in the simplest terms. 

The incidence of victim-blaming in current mainstream media can be easily explained by our consistent patterns of misogynistic research practices which place the blame on victims.  It can be seen everywhere, from politicians protesting a regulation that would require physicians to ask about domestic abuse in regular doctor’s visits, to high-profile abusers being given lighter sentences because the public is sympathetic to an athlete’s need to “get out his stress” by beating up his wife. 

It all links back to the fact that we as a culture refuse to place blame on the perpetrator because it leads to a recognition that we all participate in a society which normalizes a male mentality which leads to such violence.  In Kelly’s “Continuum of Sexual Violence” she examines the slew of sexualized violence which, legally and societally, is considered acceptable.  In a society that accepts “goosing” and “cat calls” as “funny,” it is often forgotten that, subconsciously, what women fear when these “commonplace bits of fun” occur is death itself. 

Liz Kelly (1987) uses a quote from Stanko (1985) in her “Continuum of sexualized violence” that emphasizes this point.  “In abstract we easily draw lines between those aberrant (thus harmful), and those typical (thus unharmful) types of male behavior.  We even label the aberrant behavior as potentially criminal behavior…Women who feel violated or intimidated by typical make behavior have no way of specifying how or why typical make behavior feels like aberrant male behavior” (p. 10).  Anu Bhagwati stated it even more simply, saying that instead of creating complex metaphor-based anti-rape ad campaigns, the message could consist of only two words.  DON’T RAPE. 

I’d like to see that ad campaign, and others like it.  No matter how uncomfortable it is for society at large and people in power to accept responsibility for domestic abuse, it certainly can’t be as uncomfortable as the abuse suffered by millions of Americans every day.

Ann Jones'  "Why doesn't she leave?" In: Next Time She'll Be Dead. Boston: Beacon Press. 1994.

Kelly, L. “The Continuum of Sexual Violence.” In: Women, Violence and Social Control, edited by Hanmer, J., and Maynard, M. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities International Press: 46-60. 1987.

Is video game violence real?

I saw an article today about video game sexualized violence and it argued that any violence that happens in this setting is wrong and should be considered a crime. This debate has been going on for awhile and it also includes whether or not violence in video games can have an effect on children's behavior. I'm kind of still debating this myself. Before this class, I thought that it was the parents' job to teach children to differentiate between the real and the virtual world. It seemed pretty logical. But now, I think that they should still teach their children but not responsible or liable if their children can't make that difference. This argument can also apply to pornography. In Law and Order, Special Victims Unit, (one of my favorite shows) there had been cases where males see rapes, torturing, among other things in video games and porn and try to replicate it in their personal lives. But in these types of cases, who is responsible: the guy who commits these crimes or the industries that create the scenarios? It's a fine line because society first creates these criminals and then punishes them for the same behavior it taught them. This is a question I still can't answer. But, by using this example, I think that sexualized violence in video games is real because it programs the users to think that this is ok, in other words, it normalizes violent behavior. It is the same process that is seen in the military. Weird how all of these things are connected...

But please comment with your ideas.