Paternity Leave??

When thinking about pregnancy, we always seem to do most of the focus on the woman and the developing, soon to be born child. The man often gets left out of this picture. Although this blog may be a little unconventional based on the materials we have read this week and our discussions in class, I feel like the father needs to be brought into the picture more.

In our reading Are Mother's Persons? by Susan Bordo she emphasizes how in many conversations about mother and fetus and that most of the focus is on the fetus itself. She even goes so far as to call them "super subjects" (p.88). Although she does mention men in this article, it is more their rule with the woman cannot make a decision for herself as in occurred in the court case Taft v. Taft (p.78). I want to use this blog to describe the man's role during the pregnancy and after the child is born.

Throughout a woman's pregnancy, although many will disagree with me, men will accompany their partner to prenatal appointments, help them through cravings and mood swings, and drive when the woman goes into labor. Women can encounter very intense feelings of depression and sadness while pregnant and their partner can really help to reassure them that everything is going to be okay and their beautiful child will be here soon. This may sound incredibly cheesy, but I think it is important to remember that the male in the relationship of a pregnant couple also has a large responsibility of helping the woman through the pregnancy so that both his partner and soon to be child remain healthy through the entire pregnancy.

After the child is born, the woman's place of employment will give her a paid maternity leave so that she can be home with her baby. But how many businesses give the father a paternity leave? The answer is not many. A woman is giving maternity leave so that she can take care of her newborn child and not have to be distracted with the stress of work, but what if the father wants to spend those first few precious months with his child too? Many people may think that how can both parents take a leave and still be able to pay for their newborn and all of the new financial concerns that accompany a baby...well I do not have the answer for that. What I will argue is that some people criticize how some men have a disconnect with their child and the mother has such a deep and passionate care for her baby. Maybe this separation between the child and its father is because of the lack of constant contact during those first crucial months of life.

I am not saying that the mother to child connection can be compared to a father spending an extended time with the child, but I think it would prove to many that it is important for the father to be there all the time with the child. I would like to continue this conversation and get other people's opinions on the topic of paternity leave......let me know what you think

Athletic Feamle Bodies: What is Accepted?

What is considered to be an appropriate female body when it comes to athletics? This question has arisen numerous times in both this class and other classes that I have taken here at Allegheny, but I still do not know if it has ever been answered. So many people have different opinions about what an ideal female body should look like that I don't see this question ever being fully answered.

Looking at the pictures above, which one looks more "natural" to you? Most people would pick the one on the left and think the one on the right would be too masculine even though she is a boxer. Further analyzing these pictures, both women are wearing boxing gloves yet the woman on the right still appears far more masculine because of her muscles and the intensity in her face. The picture on the left seems like someone imitating a boxer and her lean stomach is clearly shown beneath her sports bra compared to no stomach being shown in the right picture.

Relating these pictures back to some of our readings, Changing the Game by Pat Griffin mentions the idea of mannish lesbianism (p. 217). Which many people may assume by the pictures above that the woman on the right has masculine and lesbian characteristics. This would then cause people to question her sexuality and if her boxing career is as a female boxer or a "mannish lesbian". And yes I am saying that mannish lesbian has been created into a category that is in a separate sphere from female athletes.

This then brings in the idea that is also presented by Griffin about homophobia in women's sports and how it may have manifested itself there. As we discussed in class today, sexuality and homophobia are intertwined within sports. And if sexuality is removed from sports then, theoretically, homophobia would disappear as well. This then would erase the image of the mannish lesbian and finally ending the discrimination of a muscled female body (hopefully).

Going back to the question asked in my title, what is the accepted female athletic body? With the information that I have discussed above, I am wondering how you would analyze the pictures that I have provided. Do you think one is more accepted then the other? Why? When you first looked at the picture on the right, did you think about or question her sexuality? Female athletic bodies are a major discussion in the media and just within our normal conversations. I ask one final question, will we ever stop talking about the ideal female athletic body?

The next time you are watching women's basketball, soccer, boxing, etc. look at their bodies and think about what Griffin was discussing and how it really does affect our outlook on their bodies regardless of the talent that they may have. Also listen to the commentary and see if their bodies are ever mentioned and if they are, carefully listen to what they are saying and see if it is realted in any way to sexuality or sexual preference.

To Stare or Not to Stare

Staring has shown to be a part of our everyday lives. Whether we notice it or not, we stare constantly. We may be ease dropping on an interesting conversation, staring at a cute guy/girl, just spacing out and looking at nothing in particular, etc. The point here is that we stare, a lot.

I have a friend who's baby suffers from strokes and has to wear a padded helmet all the time. I will call her K in this blog. Although she is just a baby, people and especially young children stare. K's helmet is pretty obvious and has her name printed across the front, but I think she looks adorable. However, when we are out in a public area the stares are constant and I can feel her mother feeling vulnerable. I usually take this time to pick up the sweet little girl and make her laugh so that her mother will see that there is nothing wrong with her child's condition does not affect her happiness. I know that these people are not staring at this little ball of fun to make her sad, it is just not something you are used to seeing a child in every day. When I am discussing this with my parents, we talk about that this kind of staring is not something to be seen as offensive and that most people comment on how beautiful and cute she is in her little pink helmet.

My family friends and family often get together and I am usually in charge of babysitting all of the kids. When playing with the kids, it is often hard to have K play as well. I have to be very careful to make sure she does not fall over or get too excited as this might induce a stroke. It is often hard to tell the other children to play easy with her and to not touch her helmet. The kids just seem to be attracted to it and HAVE to touch it and look at it. I tell them that it is like her little force-field and it protects her from getting boo boos. The kids all laugh and usually leave K alone at this point, however they still stare. This stare is less about judgment and more of jealousy because of her awesome force-field. I do not tell them not to stare, because looking at K and seeing how she plays is a learning experience for the kids that will hopefully help them later in life when the encounter different kinds of people with disabilities.

Disabilities affect people daily and the addition of being stared at due to their disability can make it feel even worse to be "different". I realize that staring is hard to just stop doing when you see someone who does not fit the social mold that has been engraved into our heads. However, I do suggest that we think about when we stare what our face looks like. Emotion and thoughts are often expressed through our facial features and when we stare at someone with a disability, our face may show criticism or confusion. Rather I propose we smile and show that we appreciate who they are, disability or not. This may sound very hippie, but I think it is a rather simple solution to an everyday problem that every one has.

I end this blog with some questions. Have you ever caught yourself staring at someone with a disability? Did they make eye contact with you and you quickly looked away? Why did you divert your gaze and not make eye contact and smile? What were you taught as a child about staring?

Eyes Are Our Center

Eyes. The human eye is a beautiful and powerful part of us that makes us who we are. Eyes tell the stories we may have never wanted anyone to hear. Eyes hold our deepest secrets, desires, fears and joys.

They are a part of our body that we can never change unlike the look and color of our hair. Hair fads continuously change according to what's in.

But do eyes ever have fads? The answer to this is no. Fads about how we decorate ours with makeup certainly change, but not the eyes themselves. This shows how personal our eyes are and how they are ours and only ours.

Eyes are almost like a window into our deepest feelings and insecurities. As you can see by the pictures I have provided, eyes evoke emotion. Just by looking at someone's eyes, you can tell what they are feeling. Sad eyes are different from happy eyes which are different from scared eyes, etc. Although many people are really good at hiding their emotions, eyes cannot hold a secret. They can a hold a secret almost as well as a 4 year old. Even a simple eye roll can upset a parent or friend. Why are they such a part of who we are?

Eyes can also be a source for submissiveness and challenge. Girls are taught from a young age to never stare into the eyes of a male for too long because that is disrespectful and may seem like a challenge. I even catch myself saying hello to one of my male friends but then quickly looking away. I do not do this intentionally and I kick myself every time for doing it, but it has been engraved into me and the way that I present myself to men. Eyes can also be a form of challenge like in dogs and other mammals. When two people fight (verbal or physical) there is a lot of eye contact. When someone breaks the stare, that person is looked at as the loser and is going to get their ass kicked.

In the book The Bluest Eye, eyes are significant because even though the girls may not openly tell their stories when someone looks at them, they can guess what they have been through. Once again I will relate my blog to Pecola trying to make her whole body disappear, but is unsuccessful. She knows her eyes cannot change no matter how bad she wants them to because they are hers and she has only seen through her lens and also no one has seen through hers. She has seen too much to let her eyes just disappear and not be a part of who she is. People stare at her after what they heard happened to her and the power of a stare creeps into her and causes her want for blue eyes to be even more extreme.

Eyes are such a small part of our overall appearance, but eyes are the place that hold who we are and what we have been through. How can something so small and seemingly unimportant be so powerful?

Being partially blind in one eye, I constantly think people are judging me when they stare at my eyes. I know they cannot see my blindness, but I can't help but feel like that's all people see when they look into my big, blue eyes.

Do you want to change your eyes? How would you change your eyes to make them be what you wanted? Have you ever said you hated your eyes?

Why Are Blue Eyes Beautiful?

In Toni Mirrison's book entitled The Bluest Eye it is obvious that she is showing the difference, discrimination, and stereotypes between the African American and White communities. However, when I was reading, I could not help focusing on the obsession with eyes, especially blue eyes that Claudia (one of the main character young girls) has throughout the first two "seasons" of the book.

While thinking about this obsession, I recalled seeing a little African American boy on YouTube with brilliant blue eyes. The video, entitled Wonderful Black Baby with Blue Eyes, that I have provided below is a short composition of pictures with a sad song playing, however below the video is written "LAREN IS FULL BLACK , THIS ISNT PHOTOSHOPPED , AND HES NOT DEAF OR BLIND." To me, this is a striking sentence to provide directly beneath the video for anyone who watches it to see. The obsession with this young boy shows that when something physical, like eye color, falls outside the "norms" for a race, they are shown as completely beautiful or in some cases called an outcast. When a child is born that has characteristics that blur the boundaries between what is Black and White, our society questions it continuously and consumes ourselves with figuring out why this has happened.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LA9ktC90KM

Another question that came into my mind while reading was, why the title The Bluest Eye? Why are people so in love with blue eyes? During Hitler's reign blue eyes and blonde hair were idolized but also hated as they were a part of his Aryan or "perfect" race. Many people despised these people who were seen as higher than they were just because of their hair and eye color. When did blue eyes become less about the perfect Aryan race and more about beauty?

Having blue eyes myself, I often receive many comments about how pretty and big my eyes are and how people wish they had eyes just like mine. I have also noticed the prevalence of blue eyes in many song titles and lyrics. For example, Blue Eyes by Elton John, Behind Blue Eyes by The Who, Beautiful Blue Eyes by Chiodos, Pale Blue Eyes by Velvet Underground and many more. As you can see, blue eyes are adored and talked about frequently. But who decided that blue eyes were so beautiful when people with blue eyes typically have poor eyesight? I wonder why people see my eyes as so beautiful when I am partially blind in one eye and my eyes stick out further than my head.

The image of eyes is mentioned frequently throughout the book especially when Pecola (another young main character) tried to make herself disappear after witnessing a violent fight between her parents. She pictures each part of her body vanishing as she hides under her quilt, but can never seem to make her eyes disappear with everything else. This passage really stuck out to me because yes everyone has eyes, but not everyone has seen what you have personally seen. Eyes hold the passage way to our hearts and souls and can never be completely erased no matter how bad we may want to forget something we saw. What we see is directly connected to who we are, which is why I think Pecola could not make her eyes disappear. She had seen too much to be forgotten.

Tony Morrison, in my opinion, has incorporated some very deep and meaningful symbolism within the pages of her book and she is just waiting for us to discover them.

Fat = Un-Civilized ?? Really?

In Amy Farrell's book entitled Fat Shame, she examines the ideas of civilized vs. uncivilized when it comes to body weight in chapter three. When discussing this chapter in class, my group discussed that the key between these points (civilized and uncivilized) was if you were able to control your instincts. If you were incapable of controlling your instincts about food consumption and had a "fat" body then you were considered uncivilized, thus meaning that if you could control those instincts you were categorized as civilized. (Due to Farrell's lack of masculine influence in her book, I will be discussing about primarily men and their roles in this idea.) But has this always been true?

If you look back into history at King Henry the VIII (left picture), you will see that he was considered to be a large man. But at this time in history, fatness was seen as an image of wealth and power. They had a lot of money so they could afford to eat well, while the pheasants were shown as very skinny signifying little or no money to pay for food. When you compare the image of Henry the VIII (powerful man) to our current President Obama there is an obvious difference. The picture of President Obama shows his slim figure while the picture of Henry the VIII shows his large body size. So in the sense of the power structure, the image has flipped from fat = power to skinny= power. As discussed in class, we decided it would be very, very difficult for an overweight politician to win a presidency because of the social constructs that tell us that fat equals uncivilized.

Farrell states that "Interestingly within this line of thinking the differentiation between women and men was most pronounced the higher one rose in the "civilized ranks", and least pronounced among the more "savage" people, whose size, clothing, and cultural roles appeared scandalously close according to contemporary observers" (pg 63). This sentence emphasizes the ideals of civilized rank and how body weight rises proportionally. Which was clearly visible in leaders of European countries. However this stigma changed after the 16th century, "one of the key bodily signs of inferiority for scientists and thinkers of the 19th and early 20th centuries was fatness" (pg 64). The inferiority was directly related to body weight (fat now equaled un-civilized).

This change seemed to be directly related to the industrial revolution and the want to resist the king and yearn for more and more possessions.

The un-civilized "fat" body is looked at with criticism and scorned for the way that person has decided to act on their instincts of food consumption. However, when looking at a malnourished body, many may have sympathy or the want to help. This clear divide is sad to me because regardless of weight, people need someone to look out for them and help them through problems with weight gain or loss.

Body weight and social class rank have always seemed to go hand in hand even though the ideas have jumped in past decades. Weight will always be an aspect of our culture that we can not eliminate. The "civilized" and "un-civilized" body will always be an area of controversy because of the generalization and categorizing images that place people into these offensive categories.

I leave you with these questions. Where do you think you fit into these categories? Are you happy with your category of civilized and un-civilized?

Fat Shame through the Media

When commercials are advertising for weight loss programs the usually show a before and after picture. The before picture is usually a picture of an unhappy "over-weight" person in an unflattering outfit in an awkward position that makes the person look larger than they actually are. The after picture is the same person either in a revealing bathing suit or a flattering outfit in an appealing pose that shows off the skinnier waste line. But is this really what dieting is about? Are all "over-weight" people that unhappy and feel like that have to get the tiny waste line?

I feel like these commercials and advertisements are offensive and very generalizing. Some over-weight people love who they are and what there bodies look like, but when these commercials come on saying that over-weight is unattractive and here is "what you should look like" can make them look at themselves differently and worry that other people are looking at them differently. The commercials may also make them decide on poor health decisions to try to get to these perfect body ideals and be able to be called beautiful by the public.

Some people look at these commercials in disgust and say "I love what I look like and what my weight is" and I will not change who I am just because these people on TV tell me I should. This is how, I believe, most people should react when seeing these types of commercials that tell you that only skinny is pretty. Honestly, if you are happy with the way you look, then why should you be told differently.

Another thing that really bothers me about these commercials is that most of the time it is women portrayed as over-weight and needing to lose weight to be attractive to men. I believe they target women because the know that many women are very sensitive about this topic and are willing to try as many different work out programs and diet regimes that are broadcasted to them. Some people are even willing to pay the outrageous prices that some ridiculous diet pills cost just to try to be that ideal figure.

Speaking of the ideal figure, what even is it? It seems to change almost daily about what the ideal female body should look like (how thin should her waist be, how big should her breasts be, etc.). How can anyone ever be able to be happy with what their body looks like when it is ever changing ? What happens if one day that obese is attractive, will everyone start packing on weight to be as big as they can be? (I don't see people actually doing that). But what is the difference, health wise, from gaining a lot of weight to losing a lot of weight?

I know I have asked a lot of questions, but I just want to know if anyone else feels the same way about the ridiculousness of these weight loss commercials and how they portray women (and men) as being unattractive and disgusting. The before and after pictures still frustrate me in the way that the women are shown with no makeup and basically as ugly as possible, but then all dolled up after and as pretty as possible with a handsome man on your arm. Lets get real, that is unrealistic. Just because you lose some weight does not mean you are magically engaged to an attractive body builder and look great all the time now.

Commercials and media really make me mad. Someone help me to understand and answer some of the questions I have presented.

Are Drag Shows a form of Expressing Transgender?

While discussing transgender I could not help but think about drag-queens and drag shows. I could not decide if this was a form of expressing transgender for all members who participate or is it a fun thing/hobby for some people to try or watch? I can see this going both directions, which is why I am so confused.

First of all, drag shows are incredible display of elaborate costumes, singing of famous songs, and even showing a little (or a lot) of skin to a loud and excited audience (if you have not been to one, you should certainly go). However, the amount of time that the actors take to get ready for this show is incredible. As you can see by the two part picture above, the amount of just make-up and hair or wig styling is intensive. Most actors love doing getting all "dolled up" and showing everything they want to. People of all forms of sexuality and gender can go to this shows and enjoy the enthusiasm, energy, and love that the performs exhibit during the act.

The question still lingers in my mind, is this a form of transgender though? I would say yes and no.

I love drag shows and have been to a few myself and have even participated in two. The reason for my love of watching and participating in drag shows is because I appreciate people just being themselves and doing what makes them feel comfortable and right. As you can see from the picture of the person dancing (which is me), I am thoroughly enjoying participating in our schools drag show last spring. This love of viewing and participation does not mean that I am transgender, it just means that I accept people for who they are and how they want to live there life. So for this instance I would say that drag shows are not a form of transgender.

However......

I would say yes because this is a way for a male who identifies as female or female who identifies as male, to express that desire whether they are pre-op or post-op. Drag shows are a dramatic and elaborate way for them to show who they want to be. The costumes are the visual content that we have been discussing in class that people notice the most. Also the drag show environment is also a safe place where the performers can express themselves. Drag shows are usually packed with people who appreciate this form of art, so little to no criticism is passed making the environment fun and accepting.

Transgender is a term that can mean many different things to many different people. The label of transgender, like we have discussed in class, is a way that our society has put another category onto human beings and they way that they live their lives. Although I think that drag shows are a way of breaking down this barrier by showing the art and passion behind the lifestyle that this people have chosen. Drag shows seem to be becoming more prevalent in most large cities and, like at Allegheny, have been showing up on college campuses as a way to show support for transgendered people. This also sends out awareness that drag shows can be a fun and non-discriminant way of dressing in drag and performing on a stage in front of your peers.

My question that I presented earlier in my blog still is consuming my mind. Let me know what you think. Are drag shows a way for someone to express their transgender or can it be support for the group as well?

Advertising for all ages....not

Advertising is a huge part of our modern culture and without it we would probably all be a lot wealthier from not buying all the ridiculous items that are pitched to us daily on television, radio, in magazines, and numerous other places. However, advertising will do virtually anything to get there product sold which includes sexual and stereotypical images that gain the attention of the audience that the advertisers are aiming the ad towards. Advertising is something that fuels our economy, can you really imagine what life would be like without any ads?

In the ad above, there are so many items in this ad that just scream that this is wrong. First off, the chiseled body of the life guard with his shiny, tan skin is showing that this is the desired body on the beach and the only type of man that can be powerful enough to rescue any women that may need their help. Next to examine is that the lifeguard who is supposed to be saving people's lives is handing off his shirt and duties to a horny younger male that cannot take his eyes of the obviously in need woman lying motionless on the beach. The lifeguard is looking over his shoulder to see if anyone is watching him basically give permission to the young man to take advantage of the large breasted woman lying on the beach. You can tell she is probably not breathing because of the drag marks behind her body and her sprawled body position. This advertisement makes me cringe because of the devious smile on the young man's face as he hands of the Pepsi for the lifeguard shirt. He is most likely going to be left alone with this woman and who knows what his intentions are.....

Going back to body image, the difference between the two men in the ad is striking. The lifeguard is buff, tan, masculine, and confident in his decision to trade away the woman. While the other man is scrawny, pale, and has only one thing on his mind. This is also an advertisement technique to not only attract men to the ad with the attractive woman but also women with the handsome lifeguard. This type of variety in an ad is so that the audience is much broader giving a more likely chance that the product will be sold.

This advertisement also shows that women are not capable of swimming and therefore need to be saved. In this ad however, when she is saved she is put into a new danger as the lifeguard is too interested in a cool refreshment then the well-being of the woman. As we have read in class, the woman is usually shown as an object and that is very, very clear in the ad. Her sexuality is being used as something to trade for a drink as though she is a piece of property or money that can be just traded away without thought. Another frustrating observation of this ad is that when you first look at it, you find it pretty difficult to see what the advertisement is for because the product is relatively hidden within the scene. Only after careful examination do you see the tiny Pepsi can that is in the hand of the obviously sexually aroused young man.

This is just one example of offensive advertisements that float through our culture. Some go unnoticed, because images like the one above are becoming more and more prevalent in our everyday lives. This sickens me and I truly hope that more people start to really look at these images that our thrown in our faces instead of just chuckling and turning the page. Some people think that change is a bad thing, but come on, it is really time for the advertising world to try some new form of advertising that is not racist, sexist, offensive, or just plain ignorant. This is 2011, a year for appreciation and understanding and this can start in the eyes of all generations that are exposed to advertisements.