Psychology of Women

As long as I have known what abortion was (which I was probably 12 or so when I learned what it was), I have always been pro-choice. I never believed in a woman being forced to sacrifice her body for 9 months just because she didn't want to have a child at that moment. You always her pro-lifers saying “adoption is always an option”, but the truth is, there are already so many children waiting to be adopted. Also, they say that abortion should be outlawed because their religious views (normally Catholic) claimed that abortion was murder and against their religion. What I found SO interesting about this article is that in fact, abortion was hardly punished in the early stages - not even by the catholic church. So basically their whole argument is thrown out the window. The only reason (or should I say three reasons) abortion was originally made a crime around 1860 was not for religious reasons by any means. The first reason, according to the article, was that abortions could be dangerous. At the time this might have been true, but now it is a fairly safe procedure when done in the early stages (which it is done early for the majority of the time). The second reason actually has nothing to do with the child or the mother themselves, but for the benefit of society! Countries that were losing the population race just wanted a way to boost their own population, and that idea spread to other countries because they realized they needed more workers. BUT, it’s still about the babies! rIgHt?!!!!! The third reason, and the most offensive to me, is that sex for pleasure is bad, and pregnancy was a punishment for the pleasure of sex! As a woman, I find that so sexist that women can't have sex for pleasure without pregnancy being threatened as a consequence they can't back out of, but men can have all the pleasureful sex they want and if they don't want a baby, they just pretend it doesn't exist! That is such a double standard. While at the time these laws were passed women were considered less than men, it is still an argument I hear today in regards to abortion, that “she shouldn't have had sex if she didn't want to get pregnant”. You hardly every hear people say “The guy shouldn't have had sex with her if he didn't want her to get pregnant.”

“Masked Racism: Reflections on the Prison Industrial Complex”

I read ahead on the syllabus because this article seemed so interesting to me. This article honesty just blew my mind. I always knew how messed up the prison system was because of a person I know who was in prison, but I didn't realize the full extent of how f*%&#d up it really was. The racism embedded in the prison industrial complex is real, and nothing is being done to stop it. More than 70% of the prison population are people of color. A good amount of people in prison come from areas of poverty and other social problem. People in these areas also tend to be people of color (which is a product of systematic racism which needs to also be addressed). The first line in the article states that imprisonment is the first resort to “end” many social problems, such as homelessness, unemployment, drug addiction and other problems. By imprisoning victims of these social problems, it lowers the public into believing that these problems are being solved, but they are only being hidden away. “Prisons so not disappear problems, they disappear people”. This quote couldn't have explained the issue better. Racist people in power are making a profit from sending underprivileged and underrepresented people to prison in a “win-win” type of situation; they are padding their pockets and getting people of color off the streets. This is so absurd to me and something needs to be done to stop this disgusting practice. Not mentioned in the article, but very closely related, is the difference between sentences of white people and people of color. My mom dated guy who was in prison when I was in middle school and we used to visit him on the weekends. He was white. One of his friends there who we had met during our visits, (who was of color) was in for the same thing as my mom’s ex-boyfriend. My mom’s ex-boyfriend had a previous record, and this man did not have a previous record. My mom’s ex-boyfriend got out in 2014 after 5 years, and the other man is still in there. Doesn’t sound racist at all, right? Maybe her ex-boyfriend had a better lawyer, maybe not. But the fact that people with the same convictions are sentenced to very different times, and it is more than likely to be about the race of the people, is appalling. He also told me about the very inhumane treatment they received in there, which is also addressed in the article. I find this so disgusting because even though these people did break the law, they are still people and have rights. We as social justice advocates need to figure out a way to combat these problems, and we need to do it fast.

Kimberle Crenshaw’s article “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color”, really made me change the way I view things. Even though I am white, I didn't see myself as privileged because I come from a family that has always struggled to make ends meat and could never quite get ahead. I looked around and saw all my friends who had both parents and had money and got what ever they wanted when I had one parent, no money, and worked my ass off to buy nice things for myself. After reading the article and learning more about intersectionality, I realize that even though I am underprivileged in some ways, I am privileged in the fact that I am white. I might not be rich, and I've never had to live in a shelter, but if we had had to live in one we wouldn't have been denied for not speaking English, and my mom wasn't forced to stay in a toxic marriage because of her immigration status. Unfortunately, that is not the case for many people according to the article. Crenshaw writes that as a result of structural intersectionality, many women do not have the resources they need like I do, simply because of their race or ethnicity and related factors. I didn't realize the struggle that so many women face because of intersectionality. Like women who are brought to this country to marry a man so they can become a citizen, they are normally women of color, so that alone means that they are at a disadvantage. But combining that and the fact that they are not legal citizens means that if they end up with an abusive husband, they are more than likely to be stuck in the abusive situation which can ultimately result in death. Their husband might force them not to leave by threatening deportation, and that might be even worse for the woman than staying in an abusive relationship. These women also don’t always have the opportunities to leave because of their lack of resources once they leave. They normally have no job or a low paying job so they can’t afford housing, and if they try to go to a shelter, they can be denied if they don't speak English well enough, leaving them on the streets. These are problems my mom and I wouldn't have faced since we are white, English speaking citizens. The odds are stacked against these women even though some laws to protect them because laws tend to be clear cut, and no situation like these are ever clear cut. I now appreciate my privilege that I wasn't aware of until learning about the struggles of intersectionality.

While the article itself was not ridiculous, the content that was discussed in it was. The article itself was actually very well written and moving. The reason I said the content was ridiculous, though, was aimed more at the practice of sex testing the people in the article endured, not at the stories themselves. A lot of people like Dutee Chand sacrificed a lot to get to where they were in their athletic careers when their dreams were crushed as a result of sex testing. When the test results showed that Dutee Chand wasn’t “female enough” to compete, it makes me think, who even has the right to decide what is considered “female enough” (or “male enough” in instances where men are discriminated against)? Just because a person has different levels of testosterone or estrogen than the average person of their sex and gender, or different genitalia than the average person of their sex and gender, does not mean that that is the sole reason of their advantage or excellence in the sport so it should not be the sole factor that disqualifies them. There are so many other factors that determine ones athletic ability including their genetics, body type/build, training, etc. so they shouldn't have their dreams crushed over one factor like sex testing that might not even have anything to do with their athletic ability. Like how in the article, the girl tested higher for testosterone, but it didn't have any effect on her. It bothers me that anyone can be subjected to this testing in athletics because someone feels intimidated or threatened by them, as if they can't possibly be a better athlete, they have to be cheating or something. Dutee Chand’s story really bothered me though because she didn't know what she was being tested for and was basically lied to during the testing, so she couldn't actually give legitimate consent, so she was essentially assaulted which is not ok.

Overall, I liked this piece of writing and the message it sent a lot, even though I had just one or two problems with it. It was very similar to two pieces I learned about in a diversity class in the last college I attended. It was an article called “Gender X” (I think) and a movie (I don't remember the name) where these two families raised their children without gender. I like the idea of raising a child without adhering to gender norms, but I don't think I would do it myself to such a degree that the families in these pieces do. Gender Education points out how prevalent gender norms are in society and how it can be challenging to raise a child without a gender. When Jeremy wears a barrette to school, another little boy makes fun of him for it saying only girls wear barrettes. it also sheds light on how much media influences gender norms by portraying girls as princesses who need to be saved by a prince, completely objectifying and over sexualizing girls and making guys out to be macho juice heads. The Bem’s did their best to censor their children’s media exposure, but they were still exposed to gender stereotypes in public and at school. I think that to truly raise a child without a gender, they would have to have no media exposure, a gender neutral name (unlike the Bem children) and be homeschooled so they are not bullied or exposed to gender stereotypes by other children. I think it would be really hard to raise a child authentically without a gender, but seeing the results of children who are raised this way and still get exposed to the stereotypes, it is still working the best it can for the time being.