Within Chong-suk Han’s article he makes emphasis of the problems within the gay community and issues of race and racism. Han mentions this term whitewash, that allows the gay American community the possibility to be proud of what they are. He also claims that gay men are usually associated with being white therefore not having enough representation for the gay men of color. He argues that, “Whiteness takes center stage and it becomes synonymous with gay where gay comes to mean white and white comes to mean gay” (386). Han means to focus his article on the ways that white gay men participate in making gay men of color insignificant. Asian gay men and black gay men feel invisible within the gay community because gay men are only seen as white middle class men. What I find interesting is that even though these men that do not fit the norm of gay men they are seen as exotic in a different sense. They are  only seen as desirable as you look at them outside of the gay community. He mentions that, “Latino men, like other men of color, also fall into two categories within the gay community. Either they are invisible or exist only as props for white male consumption” (388). I like that white men can CHOOSE when they want to be objectified yet on the other hand men of color do not have that option. They are seen as sexual objects much like women are seen to heterosexual men. How interesting! 

Men dressing as women is seen as going from having power to being powerless. Men are perceived a certain way within society which differs for women. It is interesting the point the author makes of comedians using drag in order to make fun of women. To choose to appear as female it is expected to be an act of ridicule towards women. The black men that appeared on television in drag simply helped sustain sexism and racism (146). Within the movie the author mentions that these black gay men desire the vision of femininity and most importantly the aspect of being white. (white women) By black men ridiculing black women and women in general demonstrates how they are participating within white patriarchy. “The whiteness celebrated in Paris is Burning is not just any old brand of whiteness but rather that brutal imperial ruling-class capitalist patriarchal whiteness that presents itself---its way of life--as the only meaningful life there is” (149).  The movie demonstrates how these men praise whiteness and see it as the only type of living acceptable since they are black and gay. I agree with the author and her friend about viewing most of the scenes throughout the film as sad and tragic instead of how the white people who were entertained. I guess it comes down to how you think and view things I can see how some of the scenes may have entertained white people but the thing is that they are not thinking about everything else that is going on in these black gay men’s lives. How they are struggling to live day to day, how they barely have anything to eat, how they have to keep their way of live a secret. There is so much pain and hardship behind all of individuals in the film. 

Feinberg emphasis the point that people that do not seem to fit into society's views receive harsh social penalties. Within the article we get various examples of transgender people throughout time for example in gay american indians the berdache, the Egyptians and Greek gods. The example of the emperor Elagabalus, where he dressed in drag in public, had sex with both sexes and announced that one of his male lovers was his husband caused great commotion. He was assassinated and then his body was dragged through the streets of Rome. I completely understand that not everybody will understand how different others can be but to commit such cruel acts seem so inhuman. I know these were different times but just considering how people that are different still get treated so horribly makes me wonder if things will ever change. 

I find it interesting that feminists had to demonstrate that women participated in the making of history. It is as if historians believe that women had to role within the changes that have occurred throughout time. Disability played an important role within minority groups. The author says, “The most common disability argument for slavery was simple that African Americans lacked sufficient intelligence to participate or compete on an equal basis in society with white Americans” (37). Most of the reasons for this thinking were due to physical causes like diseases. There were two diseases that African Americans were subject to one being a condition that causes slaves to run away and the other that caused them to avoid work. I find it crazy to read that white Americans actually believed in these two mental illnesses. The only way that might lower a white person’s scale of life was disability. It is really disturbing to read how a caucasian woman is described in contrast to the way a black woman is described, the black woman is described to have animal features. Benjamin Rush had explained that, “the skin color of Africans was due to their suffering from congenital leprosy, black skin itself has been treated as anomalous, a defect and a disfigurement, something akin to an all-body birthmark and often a sign of sin or degeneracy” (40). People really did not understand that not everyone was the same as soon as they saw someone was a little different they quickly assumed it was for the worst. The ad mentioned about an African American boy cleaning himself with soap in order to alter his “unfortunate” skin color really creates a disturbing image. Women’s social position was seen as a medical problem that needed care. A good point that is made was that women were not disabled but were made disabled by inequality. 

I'm not going to lie this article was a confusing and dragged! I tried to read it about 3 times in order to understand what the hell was going on in the article. All I got was that it had to do with Abstinence, Christianity and Goths. “Although teens do seem to have retreated from sexual intercourse in the '90s, among young adults mixed cultural messages about sex are more likely to result in sexual contradictions than in abstinence” (118). Teens result in making their own decisions whether to have sex or remain abstinent. It is easier for teens and young adults to have sex then to stick to their virginity. Race also plays a role within abstinence because it is believed that, "black girls are seen as "always and already sexually opportunistic" and that white youth specifically girls should keep their innocence. (120).  In the article it is also mentioned that since Unity men do not prove their masculinity like other men do.. having sex they have to prove their heterosexuality in other ways. They talk about temptation and they turn abstinence into an act of self control. Christians believe that, "sex is a universal, ongoing temptation that must be constantly managed" (129). What I did find interesting was that it is difficult struggle for both Christian men and women to deal with their temptation. Men have to deal with the struggle of sexual temptation and women with the desire of romantic intimacy. I do like that the Christian men see sex as an important act that should be shared only once you're married and with the right person. For example, Jon is worried about STDs and getting a girl pregnant, he also mentions that he is not ready to have a family  (131). I like that he is worried about the possible consequences that come with having sex that many people don't automatically consider. In the women's case they had trouble with their desires and their identity within the Unity Christian. 

Coltrane focuses his article on how parents construct gender behavior through the division of labor. Throughout the article we get insight to the conditions of shared parenting and the responsibilities each parent has. One father said, “She would nurse them but I would bring them back to bed afterward and change them if necessary, and get them back to sleep… I really initiated those other kinds of care aspects so that I could be involved” (205). We see that both parents share the duties of caring for their children equally. Most of the families that were interviewed expressed that both father and mother shared the roles. They both did the same duties and contributed to raising their children. Most fathers talked about their interest in being a part of their children’s lives by doing ‘motherly duties’ like waking up in the middle of night to attend their babies. Some families talked about their flexibility around the house so whoever was able to do a task first would do it and then the other person would help doing other things. Coltrane mentions, “Nevertheless, almost all parents indicated that no one should be forced to perform a specific task because they were a man or a woman. This implicit equity ideal was evidenced by mothers and fathers using time availability, rather than gender, to assign most household tasks” (208). I think it’s important to realize that home duties and parenting should not be something that is gendered it should be a mutual caring and duty. Many of the couples mentioned that their divisions of labor were fair. The mention of increased sensitivity for the fathers occurred through childrearing, they started to adopt motives and feelings similar to the mothers’. One of the fathers mentioned, "It's at that moment that I'm maybe closest to understanding what my mother and other women of my mother's generation, and other women now, have felt about being housewives and being at home, being themselves. I think I emotionally understand the satisfaction and the gratification of being a homemaker" (214). I like that after being a father that takes care of his home he began to understand women's duties throughout many generations. He understood that being a homemaker is not a easy task and should be respected.  

Bird focuses her attention on hegemonic masculinity in terms of sociality. Heterosexual men in homosocial circles express their masculinity as detaching themselves from emotion, being competitive and viewing women as sexual objects. Gender roles and socialization help sufficiently explain how individuals conceptualize identity. Bird also mentions that males have various meanings for their gender identity. Within male homosocial interactions expressing your feelings is to demonstrate vulnerability and weakness doing otherwise is to maintain control. Competition among males establishes hierarchy and separation within a group. Objectifying women provides men with a base where superiority is maintained. When the author talks about the emotional detachment in males she mentions that it is assumed that “boys will be boys” and of course as adults “men will be men.” By being men it is of course assumed that they are “doing masculinity” meaning anything that demonstrates their masculine roles. Therefore Bird mentions that, “Being masculine, in other words, means being not-female” (125). Men need to demonstrate that they do not lack any masculinity and that they are detached from their feelings. The men within the interview barely referred to their feelings because to them it is seen as 'personal stuff' that they do not talk about. 

Why is it that boys are always told not to cry? Why is expressing your feelings a negative or non masculine thing to do? Boys get hurt like girls do and should be able to express those feelings without being judged. In a way boys are turned into men at a young age because they demonstrate all the qualities men are suppose to have by being aggressive, hiding their feelings, and putting each other down. The Act-Like-a-Man box ultimately limits boys and men in many ways because they have to act and portray themselves in a certain way to be able to fit it with the rest. The main thing they all have to learn is to stay in control whether it is their feelings, bodies or jobs. They cannot lose control of things because that is when they are pushed out of the box they are struggling so hard to stay in.

I was a bit confused throughout the whole reading but I did enjoy the bits that were in spanish. I enjoyed them mainly because in spanish most words have a greater meaning than they do in english. I understood that the bridge is a type of metaphor used to connect different people to each other to stand up for the struggles occurring. For example, black women and white women are different yet they are still going through similar problems that causes them to be restricted. Also that in order to cause a change you must take action into your own hands or else nothing will happen. The author wants us to unite and make a difference. 

Women were not expected to want to improve themselves. The women that did want to be other things in life were seen as unhappy and unfeminine. In a way it was a way of controlling and dominating women by restricting them from having all these opportunities that men had.  Women were expected to devote their lives to finding a husband and bearing children. The author mentions, “A girl refused a science fellowship at Johns Hopkins to take a job in a real-estate office. All she wanted, she said, was what every other American girl wanted---to get married, have four children and live in a nice house in a suburb” (18). It is crazy to think that a woman would prefer a regular job than pursue an education and to then call being a housewife an “American dream.” So many women during this time were basically satisfied with so little in their homes they did not see things outside of their home. They were basically close minded of the possible opportunities they could obtain. I thought it was interesting that women would proudly write on the census blank occupation: housewife (18). 

"Some say that, having been created after Adam, she is evidently a secondary being: others say on the contrary that Adam was only a rough draft and that God succeed in producing the human being in perfection when He created Eve" (17). 

The article mentions the differences between men and women's reproductive systems and the language used to describe each one. Men are seen as superior due to the amount of sperm they can reproduce yet woman on the other hand are seen as inferior because they only produce one gamete per month. The author makes emphasis of the way both the egg and the sperm are depicted. She mentions that many texts illustrate women’s reproductive system in a negative light. Women are born with 1 million follicles and do not reproduce any more throughout their life yet men produce hundreds of millions of sperm each day. Which for that matter makes them seem superior. Martin claims that, "The texts celebrate sperm production because it is continuous from puberty to senescence, while they portray egg production as inferior because it is finished at birth" (488). All these texts see women as unproductive and wasteful due to them having so many eggs and having them degenerated. Yet they don’t see men in the same light as reproducing so much sperm and it is ultimately wasteful as well. The author also mentions that the egg is sometimes portrayed in an aggressive manner making emphasis that women are dangerous and can cause a threat. Basically women and their reproductive system's are never seen in the same light as men either they are wasteful or they are aggressive. We can't win. 

"The relevance of this new gender identity theory for rethinking cases of ambiguous genitals is that gender must be assigned as early as possible if gender identity is to develop successfully" (70). Doctors feel that in order for a child to be brought up okay they need to make a decision rather quickly on the child's sex. Having a child grow up with both sexes can lead them down a confusing road. I like the idea that if the sex of a child is unknown for parents to treat it as 'neuter' and giving them a name like "Claude" (73). Also that they should refer to the baby as "baby" instead of assigning a gender of boy or girl. The doctors feel that is not necessary to announce the sex of the baby. It all comes down to the size of the child's phallus in order to make the decision for the baby to be a boy or to become a girl. 

Everyone is involved in patriarchy what we do not understand or do not want to understand is that it is the way we participate in it that shapes it. We hold the control to what is involved in this kind of society. Like the author says it causes men greater difficultly to see the way they are benefitted due to women being oppressed because they then have to see themselves as the oppressors.