#homosexualissue

 I always enjoy being engulfed to a whole new world and the Documentary Paris is Burning did just that. It is a world i see many times but I didn't quite understand. The profound impact of the film will forever change how I see the world of people who are oppressed for being brave and unique. The film introduced the world of "Balls" which are competitions and shows that people like homosexuals,drag queens, transgenders, African American, Low income or even heteresexual people could take part in. The Ball covers competitions similar to beauty pageants with categories judged on appearances and even dances. 

These Balls were of profound meaning to the outcast of the 80's who found themselves in a world were their sexual orientation differ from what the world told them it should be. Through the film you meet the transgender/transsexual society ring; participants& members of the Balls.

You meet characters such as Dorian Corey a famous Drag Queen who through the film tells the reality of the world; in terms of being a transgender. Also inspiring people like Octavia St.Laurent who is a transgender woman who longs to be rich and famous in the most humbles way. Yet her biggest ambition and like many of the people introduced in the film is to be accepted and loved by the world.

In the article of Paris is Burning it explains why these people felt like they needed to do this "Balls" and why they spend so much time in preparing for them. The article talks about how the transgender/homosexual/transexual people looked for recognition of who they really felt like they were, and they looked for love from others for they they felt likt they truly were. Through this Balls if only for hours they felt this "love" the so badly craved for. They weren't judged based upon their sexual orientation, race or income status. They were judge upon how they looked and expressed themselves on how they felt they should really be. 

At the end this documentary was mind blowing and at the end it reminded us why Transgender, homosexual, ect. people are so brave and so alive and how is it that they have survived for so long. 

It got pretty confusing! the whole misused or difference between a transgender and a transexual. Yet the article did a good job in explaining what each of the terms actually mean. Being transgender is to actually physically change your gender through surgery. In contrast to Transexual in which you just act like your opposite sex, dress and feel. Which coud also be a transvestite? yet some people are transvestite just for a hobby...

Anyways its still pretty interesting to see that through the years the whole issue of Transgendering has opened up a different world and many discussions. It must have been hard in the past where the issue of transgendering wasn't even a discussible topic. Where there wasn't even an option to feel this way because no-one would agree and you would be shunned out of society. 

In the article Be all that you can be; it was pretty interesting to read about a personal experience of a transgender through a comical way. They article talks about how you can classify yourself and picks on some interesting points.

Such interesting points are "The Perks of becoming an Outlaw."

We always want to think about the positive outcomes of our decision yet we never want to see the dark side of them. Bornstein talks about how when you transgender you are breaking natures law and society recents that. I really like when she states "After all we are no longer seen as "real man" or "real woman" in fact if we ever were. This is a very deep statement that talks concentrates on the heavy outcomes of deciding to be a transgender yet it also touches on the fact that these trangender people never actually 100% felt like the gender/sex they were born in. So at the end society can really see them as  something they were truly never sure of being. Another interesting point is when Borstein talks about "The Gender we love to fear Is no Gender"

Growing up without a father I can argue in favor of this article because my mother has been there for me as a mother and a father. My mother has taken on a “male role” as to say in being strict, providing the family and at the same time she has a mother. Which is just one type of family that exists today. I believe that in the future I want to have a balance in my relationship in the house workload(including the kids) with my husband. Except that there are still some prejudice to such relationships from society.

I can totally relate to the article where it says that man are usually the “helping fathers” who need to be told what to do. I see this a lot in my male friends and even in my brother. I also see the woman trying to share their housework but retain their “management power.” Woman usually want things “their way” and are very picky when it comes to the appearance of the kids and the house. This leads to the man being less interested in helping out around the house in fear of disappointing their wives or embarrassing their wives. In example my uncle helped dressed his children for church and cut their hair. Which was met by my aunts angry disapproval of “dressed like clowns” “you can’t do simple things”: which lead to my uncles feelings gotten hurt an his initiative to help “stepped on”. What I can also relate to is the fact that man in families that the household are equally distribute are more taken in notice that the woman. As the fact that the woman is doing household chores and taking care of the children is just “natural”. Yet society praises the man who is helping out in the house but doesn’t give any credit to the woman (as woman are SUPPOSED to be doing such work.)

            Apparently a bus driver[Cleveland, Ohio] uppercuts a young woman due to her disrespect and bad behavior. Throughout the ride she constantly threaten him and even got physical[asking for a fight]. After the bus driver had enough he hit her. When the crowd in the bus rushed to him and said "Thats a woman!" he replied with "She wants to be a man and act like a man, I'm going to treat her like a man."

I say she gets what she was looking(through that behavior) regardless of her gender, since it could have also been a woman who could have hit her. 

She wants to act tough like a man ( in a sense), but when she gets the reaction a man would get: she cowards back and defends herself with " I am a woman."

Ironically,

Who are we? & What role rather than being a woman can we hold? Friedan asks with her awakening book "The Feminine Mystique". 

She states that there is " A problem with no name." And that this problem has kept woman at bay to their own true feelings and desires. Friedman takes in example the American Housewife who in eyes of the world has the perfect life.To a woman the role of being a good wife, a mother, and having a happy marriage would complete her inner feminine. But what if theres more than having this role as a housewife and what if theres more to feeling this "inevitable" feminine. Throughout the piece Friedman studies in how this role was assigned to woman, and how such roles came to "define what a woman is". In the early 20th century housewives found themselves unhappy with their daily lives- consumed by their housework, their job as a mother and a wife. In the midst of their perfect  lives they lost themselves: not knowing their true meaning as a woman or even as a human being. This problem with no-name united such woman as they found out they weren't alone.

I can only imagine how this woman felt. Living in the shadow of everything that surrounded their lives and never truly having an identity to identify themselves with. I find myself privileged to live in a modern world where a woman is able to find a role for herself behind no- one elses shadow.  I am also privilaged to live in a world where woman can get an education and persue a career[ not because it limited before]; because in a more modern and progressive society a woman is not oppressed( in terms of education) and the world presents to her a different idea of what a woman can be and can accomplish. Leaving the limitations to herself. 

Back in the early 20th century woman had no real identity as they were never the identified with anything other than a man, children, being a good mother and feminine characteristics. But they changed that by facing "The problem with no name" and by realizing and acknowledging that they needed something more: they needed a true identity who they themselves would achieve. 

Yet we cant assume that all woman want the same thing or feel the same emotions. Especially because woman are so disconnected from one another. Discussed in "This Bridge Called My Back".  Woman seem to have a hard time connecting with other woman, as previously discussed not all woman are and or want the same thing. Yes we are all biologically female but we are so different from one another. This difference has created a wall that has prevented woman from forming relationships with each other and blocking the progress of their "sex". In between all the racism, sexism and the rest of the -isms woman have neglected other woman and have even oppressed their own. 

I have never personally looked at my biology textbook and have said "damm this is sexist" in referring to the description of fertilization. Where the sperm meets the egg... why cant it be where the egg is found, or where the sperm actually succeeds. This is all very new to me "Gender stereotyping in scientific language", yet when I look at it now it seems to that it is true. I can go look at my bio textbook and find a distinctive vocabulary that depicts the sperm as something strong, and brave. In contras to the "weak", "dying" and dependent egg or eggs. How is it that as a society we stereotype things without even noticing, but of course we do and we start from the sneakiest corner where no- one will notice not even me); science!!. I do however now aware see how they categorize anything womanly with words of inferiority and they praise the manly categories. I really found the part in which Martin talks about how a woman is born with a set number of eggs and which sort of "pre -writes" her life; with no control over it. Unlike a man who throughout their whole life, continuously produce sperm. I even do this, not super scientifically of course but as a child i wold assign sex to objects such as:the broom(man) and the mop(woman) or the spoon(woman) and the fork or knife as a man. Then it goes to the question Is there really only two sexes? .

I personally dont think about that much but I have always been fascinated with the fact that only two human sexes have been recognized in todays society. Fausto, in his piece identifies three extra sexes: Ferm,Herm and a Merm. This is counting for the population who has mixed parts of a woman and a man. Event though as a society we dont recognize these sexes, some religions do. Such as the Jewish religion which even has laws set out for such individuals to follow. I find this intriguing since this is a basic form of support and guidelines to something that is recognized. Yet in the bigger spectrum we oppress sexes out of the normal woman and male, and in result the individuals who evidently dont fall into such category of just being a man or woman; they are left in the dark and mostly hide themselves from the world.

In Faustos piece, something really bothered me. It was the fact that Emma a part of his research study felt that s/he was more of a "man" but when asked if she woud like to become a fully physical man, she declined. Emma stated that there were advantages to her "vagina" it brought her support from a man (her husband) and security. As to her being a woman was easier because she didn't have to work; at the end, she was only keeping her vagina for beneficial reasons.