Saturday, November 28, 2015

Addition to Social Justice Events: Diversity Week:  Disability and Employment

While listening to this speaker talk on behalf of Diversity and Employment I saw connections to SCWAAP. SCWAAP is an ideaology that we live by as we are born into it. SCWAAP stands for Straightness, Christianity, Whiteness, Able Bodiness, Americaness, Maleness and Property Ownership. The speaker stated how people who deal with disability(s) may deal with some hardships as they move from interview to interview. This group of people are judged by their Able bodiness. The employer questions if they can physically withstand the job, the employer continues to question as they wonder where is this person coming from. What social class? One aspect that is declared instantly is Maleness, is the interviewee as women or men because women are paid less than men are within the work force. For example, if I were to interview for a place of work they would question if I could handle the job duties if they were aware of my language disorder. The employer may assume that I am not qualified because I am not socially comfortable and I become confused at written work easily. While this employer would be proven wrong as I am smarter than a person with dyslexia is given credit for. Employers do not always take the time to see how some people with language difficulties need to translate the work in their own way to understand what they must complete.
Addition to Social Justice Event: Diversity Week: Advocacy and Beyond

This event reminded me of Alan Johnson's article because his main point is how we live in a unfair world that is not just. In this world, we as people are determined into identity categories. For example, a person who is blind may be seen as that person who walks around with a white stick, "that un-abled person." The kind of person who deals with a disability that visually seen so they are seen as dependent instead of independent.
Emma Holman

Week 14

The Roles of Allies as Agents of Change by Andrea Ayvazian
Combatting Intentional Bigotry and Inadvertently Racist Acts by Fletcher Blanchard

Blanchard believes that within our world there is still a significant presence of racial discrimination as he said "Your vocal opinions affect what others think and say." He states that he has seen racism from  experiments he has completed with college students. From some of his studies, he has discovered that the number of white people exposed to people of color before college is a minority. From this information Blanchard thinks that we all need to work to come together so we can accept each other presence and proximity as well as the friendship between a white person and a black person.

Ayvazian feels that if we are ever faced with some kind of oppression, the best kind of help is to become an ally. Ayvazian believe an ally is a member of a dominant group in our society who works to take a part all forms of oppression from where he or she is given a benefit. Ayvazian wants us all to take a stand, use our personal responsibility to make the societal changes that must be altered. She did not say it is an easy task as she states that questions the social norm consistently until change is made. It is not fair for some to be targeted with oppression while others are not.
Ayvazian continues on with "oppression" to show the combinatoin of prejudice and access to social, political, and economic power exists on the side of the dominant group. This leaves the other group of people to be considered the "target" who are denied the advantage.

These two articles go hand in hand as Ayvazian is speaking on behalf a more general "wall" she wants to break down while Blanchard is speaking for a more specific wall, which is racism. People who are of color can be seen as oppressed because not all people accept people of color. These people who are not accepting will target the group of colored people. Make them feel less of a human, not as important, unwelcome in the area. The group of unkind people will be advantaged with the power to be unaccepting and live comfortably while the group of black people will be "targeted" with disgusted looks, invalid judgements and hard jokes. Blanchard believes that to solve this issue it will take multiple little things as a whole. The little things can be seen a significant things, such as smiling or keeping the door open for someone. The movement we must make is large but taking baby steps is the best way to success. Blanchard reminds us that from a public poll, only a few white college students have grown up in an integrated area, attend school with a diverse body of students, watched their parents talk with people of color. Which can make college a culture shock, however this does not mean we treat blacks any less. It simply means what Blanchard states, to regulate racial harassment, aimed squarely at the well intentioned many, consists of urging civility. He also states an importance on the punishment of hurtful actions and/or words spoken. It will take more than laws to change this issue which encompasses civility and punishments.

This wall of issues could be represented in many other derogatory ways as well. For example people who identify as lesbian/gay/pansexual. However, if someone feels a little Ayvazian in them, they may step up as an ally. When stepping up as an ally, it may not break the wall down completely. Despite that you are raising the problems about the topic. For example, the PFLAG, which are Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays who organize support groups as well create advocacy among other heterosexuals regarding the problems of gay and lesbain liberation. When a "straight" person is taking instead of a people who is considered lesbian people may listen more. The speaker will show how that even heterosexuals have an impact on the LGBT community. People want to listen from someone they can relate to, a struggling single mom or a two adult mom and dad pair. They may think less of the gay couple who has adopted a child as an image can speak a thousand words.

 Frye states oppression means to be stuck in a bird cage, I believe that Ayvazian and Blanchard may agree because until we as a people improve discrimination and actually being an "ally"  many are stuck in a bird cage while others aren't due to their social class and appearance.

This made me think of being an innocent bystander. When people watch someone else drop something, one person is eagerly ready to help while more than often others will walk right by. I think we need to work on being an innocent bystander as well as an "ally."

Sunday, November 15, 2015

Week of November 16th

The Feminist Sexuality Debate
Ann Ferguson


While reading this article I became lost in attempting to comprehend bit and pieces through out the article. However, I could clearly see some important distinctions. The most vital one is the clarification between the two feminism. I thought it was strange to have two types but it made more sense as the reading went on. The two kinds of feminism are Radical feminism and Libertarian feminists. Radical feminism is identified by the group of people who live in a lesbian community, that  frowns upon male dominated heterosexual sex which includes pornography, prostitution, and adult/child relationships. Libertarian consider themselves to be heterosexual feminists who support any kind of consensual sexuality that brings the participants pleasure which include pornography, role oriented sex, and adult/child sexual relations.

Radical Feminism

"Heterosexual relations generally are characterized by an ideology of sexual objectification (men as slaves owners and women as the slave)"
The statement above states that men are seen as the person in control of what will happen and then women has absouletly no say in the choice to the matter. In this matter things like rape can occur which is not taken well by the public.

I think that using someone as a "slave" is not right, taking advantage of someone is not fair. It is different if you ask politely for their help, if you assume and demand them to do something for you then this is something that should be questioned. A women is not an object, they are as much a person as men. We may look a certain way despite that, we should not be taken advantage because of how we look.

"The attendant ideology of sexual objectifcation is sadomasochism, that is masculinity as sadistic control over women and femininity as submission of the male will."
Essentially, this states when you take advantage of someone in a sexual manner that in some way inflicts pain on that person that pleasures the person inflicting pain. Submission in this manner that one person is taking control of the situation end.

Personally, I think taking control over someone in any way is disrespectful, I found it even more intrusive when it is regarding a sexual manner because that is very invasive to someone's personal space. A sexual encounter for people is important part of life so it is not something they want to be ruined by a uncomfortable experience. It is our own experience we should be able to control how it happens. For example, lets say there is a couple who love each other and want to wait a certain amount of time to go to that level of a relationship, neither of them would want to have that special time in their relationship ruined due to someone physically inflicting pain on either person from that relationship. 

Liberal Feminism

"This begs the question, for any feminist position has to examine the concept of consent itself in order to explore hidden power structures that place women in unequal positions."

This quote essentially stating  idea of consent between a man and women facing possible sexual encounters. It is trying to say that women should always be faced with consent because a sexual encounter should not be forced, if it is forced then a liberalist would believe it is not respectful to the woman.

This group of people want women to feel comfortable, not uncomfortable when asked to partake in a sexual encounter. When you hurt someone in sexual sense that can inflict a significant amount of physical and emotional damage. A close friend of mine was physical affected by men in her life and it hurt her in the way she was scared to meet new men. She was afraid of what could happen due to past experiences.

"To further resolve this dilemma I think we must adopt a transitional feminist sexual morality that distinguishes between basic, risky, and forbidden sexual practices."
Ferguson states we should state a clear and fair practice regarding sexual practices with things that we should do and things we should not do.

This discovery of finding a fair sexual practice of do's and don'ts will take a long time to become a successful use for people. People who are charged as sex offenders may not ever see what they do to women or young children as a negative action. We simply cannot tell people what is wrong or what we see as "wrong." You can bring a horse to water but you cannot force it to drink.

The author wants to find a correct theory regarding feminism in a sexual perspective. However, this is something that will take significant time as these two groups of feminists are so diverse. When a group of people have a set belief it is hard to allow vision of other opinions and thoughts. This is especially difficult because of the topic, sexuality within treatment of women and men.

Monday, November 9, 2015

"Aggressive, Rage, Violence = Boys, or so they say"
Connections to Article to Video

The video, Tuff Guise 2 was disgusting because this is how manhood is depicted in our world. It states that 86% of robberies are male driven, 86% domestic violence is completed by males. The percentages increase as rape comes into picture at 90% male driven. These percentages back up what the video and the reading is speaking about the view of the male gender.

The world shows us that men need to be seen as angry, tuff and able to handle physical pain as stated by the book, Guyland. I think this is wrong, this teaches young boys the wrong idea so they grow up thinking it is not okay to show emotion unless its anger and disgust. This idea is carried on in the movie, The tree of life. The father is showing the son how to physical fight so he can gain fierceness to survive in this world on his own. "boys will be boys" is ridiculous. This article backs up what Kimmel say as it states that it has nothing to do with genetics in any way, it said that having the male parts does not in anyway mean that they will hurtful towards others around them.
The father said "to be your own man." I could not imagine listening to my father if said "hit me" like this boy in the movie. Kimmel states that these people who believe in the saying. The article brings up "Boy Code teaches them that they are supposed to be in power and thus to act like it." This is telling young boys that to be considered a man you have to have some kind of power and to act so all see your power. Not all kinds of power are positive, such as being able to play Call of Duty seen in the documentary. This depicts men in service as powerful because they use a gun to kill people, the whole point of the game is kill people. However, in life that is not a main goal of people's lives so this game says that it is not necessarily bad to kill. A solider kills to keep our country safe so it is seen as heroic. Despite that, it sends the wrong idea to the public. It was not heroic in any way when that man went to Sandy Hook Elementary, where he killed 26 people. 

For boys and older men they feel pressured by others as they do not feel comfortable feeling emotion. Many negative outcomes can occur, such as hurt name calling such as "fag", or "homo." Boys and young men are scared to show what they feel. Being manly is far more then your genetic make up, the documentary states that it is not gender that determines aggressiveness. Instead it is the complex factors around such as Call of Duty, the idea that boys will be boys, movies like The tree of life and books like Guyland.