Cinderella Ate My Daughter- Orenstein

Reflection
As soon as we were assigned to read this piece I was excited because the title drew my interest. Unlike most girls I wasn't really big into the whole princess theme. I was definitely a tomboy who loved playing with the guys. However, I did have a few barbie dolls but I was never crazy over the whole typical fairy tale ending because I knew that most likely that probably was never going to happen to me. To this day I find it kinda funny because all my good friends that are girls there favorite color is pink while mine has always been blue.

Of course I have Disney movies with princesses in them that displayed prince charming coming to the rescue to save his princess, there classics. When  I was little there was a point that I did want to have this fantasy fairy tale world come true for me, however as I started dating I soon  realized things aren't as simple as a fairy tale. Another reason I feel like I wasn't a huge girly girl growing up was because I have a twin brother so a lot of the time I would want to play with him, so we would end up playing GI Joe  together or construction together, but I never would mind.

One thing for sure is that if you are a girly girl who loves princesses theirs nothing wrong with that and if your a tomboy theirs nothing wrong with that either. I say do what ever makes you happy.  When I have kids and if I have a girl I'm definitely gonna let her be her own person so she can learn what she likes and doesn't.

I don't let it bring me down the whole ideal princess and pink stage for girls. I enjoy being my own unique person because if i want I can turn to the Disney princesses to daydream about how simple my life would be if I was one, but  I like the way my life has turned out now. I like that I'm not super girly but just girly enough that I'm not on pink and glitter overload. 

A point I want to add is that shows like toddlers and tiaras don't help with the fact of girls not being like Cinderella. Instead it puts the image even deeper into their minds by having girls dress up with a bunch of makeup and a fancy dress to compete to win a crown. Some of the contestants don't seem like their having fun which makes me feel kinda bad for the child.

I can see where Orenstein is coming from with the fact that now a days girls love and grow up loving pink and princesses based on whats out their in the media and stores. An example, is the little girl I babysit her entire room is pink everywhere with a princess comforter and curtains and princess dolls everywhere.

The Choice 2012

I everyone I found this interesting video on PBS.org about the presidential candidates. It talks about both sides and gives a deeper look into the people they really are in cases people are still on the fence about either candidate and not quite sure of who to vote for. The video is about 2 hours long and its called the Choice 2012. Feel free to check it out :)
 http://video.pbs.org/video/2288869682/

What Are Little Boys Made Of - Kimmel

Extended Comment
I just finished viewing Jessica's blog post and wanted to comment on some of the issues she brought up. She decided to do her blog about quotes. The 3 quotes she chose were, "Gurian argues that as feminists have changed the rules, they've made boys the problem. By minimizing the importance of basic biological differences, and establishing girls' standards as the ones all children must follow, feminists have wrecked boyhood." (157).  The point she makes about this quote it that boys haven't been changed for the worst because of feminism making them act like girls. But it doesn't make it ok for them to be going around being violent all the time. I liked the last point she made about this quote which was I don't believe that we're trying to make them feminine, just well behaved. And what makes these standards girl standards? Is it because they aren't rough, or violent?   The reason I liked this point was because I felt it was true. There's nothing wrong with society wanting to make people specifically boys less violent because if we start while their young teaching them that violence isn't the key then when they grow up hopefully there will be less fighting and getting into trouble. I also felt she was right to say what makes these standards girl standards because some girls can be outside the norm as to what people think girls should be like.

The next quote she brought up was, "If all the boys are white and middle class, at they're not all straight. Most therapists treat homosexuality casually, dropping in a brief reference, "explaining" it as biological, and urging compassion and understanding before returning to more "important" stuff." (158). For this quote Jessica mentions, Why do all these writers only briefly mention homosexuality? If they're so involved with talking about how boys should be boys, why not give this more say? These authors only talk about testosterone, and how boys are wild and crazy. Not all boys are like this either. It seems as though they are as restricting as they say feminism is on men. They're only talking about a certain type of boy, not all of them. This isn't fair. I 100% agree with this. If they are going to talk about boys and how they have been influenced by feminism then why not discuss that and focus some of your argument on them, instead of just boys and their testosterone making them wild and reckless.

The last quote Jessica brought up was, “The books that are written with an understanding of male privilege - and the need to challenge it - are the ones that offer the most useful tools to improve boys' lives.... Feminism encourages men - and their sons - to be more emotionally open and expressive, to develop empathic skills, and to channel emotional outbursts away from violence." (159). She states, The authors of these books Kimmel talks about need to recognize that male privilege needs to be changed, and that the people that will change it are the people who have it themselves. Feminism should encourage men to be more emotional. Many men (I know) don't show many emotions, and I think this is part of the reason that men can have outbursts. I like this point Jess made because I find it to be true. None of the guys I know ever show emotion and instead they hold it in till it gets to the point where they can’t take it and react by yelling. 

Question for class:
Instead of guys holding everything in until they can't take it anymore and have a outburst is there a way they could possibly relieve steam/let somethings off there chest in a way they feel is ok for guys without being called a girl?

Yamato, "Something About the Subject Makes it Hard to Name"

Argument

This author Gloria Yamato argues that, “While people of color are welcome to tear up their own neighborhoods and each other, everybody knows that you cannot do that to white folks without hell to pay. People of color can be prejudiced against one another and whites but do not have an ice-cube’s chance in hell of passing laws that will get whites sent to relocation camps “for their own protection and the security of the nation.” People who have not thought about or refuse to acknowledge this imbalance or power/privilege often want to talk about the racism of people of color. But then that is one of the ways racism is able to continue to function. You look for someone to blame and you blame the victim, who will nine times out of ten accept the blame out of habit”. (Page 3)

What Yamato is saying in her main argument stated above is that racism is whatever we make it to be, meaning as long as we continue to act a certain way and display our power/privilege as important, racism is always going to be a big deal. If people just act regular and wouldn’t portray their power/privileges as such a huge level above others and other races then racism would slowly start to disappear and everyone no matter what their race would be considered equal. 

http://www.thefalcononline.com/article.php?id=8022 

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/06/how-much-of-an-issue-will-race-be-in-the-2012-presidential-election/ 

Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence

So I was finally able to finish reading this article and might I just say boy was it long and dense lol. I hope I was able to get the right points out of it to define Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence. If not I will to go back and edit this after our class discussion so here it goes. 

Compulsory Heterosexuality- Adrienne Rich states that our society demands a lot from us and one thing is heterosexuality. Our society doesn't want anyone to be different and expects everyone to be interested in the opposite sex because that's what they have grown accustom to but times are changing and we have to be more accepting and open to change.  

Lesbian Existence- What Rich means by this is that there are several lesbians in the world today but unfortunately they aren't being treated equally and some are even afraid to come out of the closet. An example is,  “the lesbian, unless in disguise, faces discrimination in hiring and harassment and violence in the street. Even within feminist-inspired institutions such as battered-women’s shelters and Women’s Studies programs, open lesbians are fired and others are warned to stay in the closet.” After I  read this I felt awful because that's real life and everyday the same people have to deal with these issues and it's not at all okay to be treating them differently like heterosexual people are higher up.

Economic Justice as a Feminist Issue

While exploring http://www.pbs.org/peoplelikeus/ and http://cwcs.ysu.edu/  I decided to test out a few games on the People Like Us website. One game stuck out to me in particular which was Chintz or Shag this game had you decorate your dream living room that you would love to have one day, then after you finished it told you what class you would be in. I thought it was interesting that the game could classify you based on a living room but then I started thinking about it and now a days we can be judged on so many things no longer just personality and job position. We usually just assume that if a person has all high end name brand quality furniture then they must have a great job and therefor must be in upper class field, but that's not always the case. It shouldn't matter what class you are in or how much stuff you have, people should be judge based on there personality and should be grateful for what they have in there lives.

On the second website Center for Working Class Studies I found it was interesting how right on the front page it said "Wage Theft Resources and Where To Go For Help". I wasn't sure what this meant until I read the caption underneath about how because the economy has took a turn for the worst employers are starting to cut back on employees pay. I find this absolutely horrible how employers would be so cruel as to take advantage during tough times on people who are just trying to make a living to pay their bills and put food on the table for their families.

Above I have posted a video about women's feminist solutions and what they think can help put an end to the struggles that as women we tend to face. 

I also found this video to be interesting it talks about  how much women make compared to men price wise.

Romney and Abortion Rights

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/02/opinion/sunday/kristof-scaring-the-voters-in-the-middle.html?_r=1

     In this article, "Scaring the Voters in the Middle" by Nicholas Kristof he states his opinion in regards to Mitt Romney's approach on Abortion.  Kristof mentions, "Mitt Romney insists that his position on abortion is crystal clear" but according to this video interview he is still very confused. He then goes on to say, "On your campaign Web site, you say that life begins at conception and that you favor overturning Roe v. Wade. As with the Republican Party platform, you give no indication there that you favor an exception for rape or to save a woman’s life.

Likewise, you seemed to endorse a “Personhood” initiative like the one in Mississippi last year that would have treated a fertilized egg as a legal person. It failed because of concerns that an abortion, even to save a woman’s life, could be legally considered murder. It might also have banned in vitro fertilization and some forms of birth control.

      These days, Mr. Romney, as you seek general-election voters, you insist that you do, in fact, accept abortion in cases of rape, incest or a pregnancy that endangers a woman’s life". The last point Kristof likes to comment on is, "Americans are deeply conflicted on abortion, but I think most are repulsed by the Republican drive to impose ultrasounds — in some cases invasive ones — on women before an abortion. Five states now require a woman, before an abortion, to endure an ultrasound that may use a probe inserted into her vagina. Four of those states make no exception for a rape.

And if the Republican Party succeeds in defunding Planned Parenthood, the result will be more women dying of cervical cancer and fewer women getting contraception. The consequence will probably be more unintended pregnancies — and more abortions.

Or there’s sex education. Today in America, more than one-third of teens say that when they began having sex, they had not had any formal instruction about contraception. Is this really the time for a Republican Party platform denouncing comprehensive sex education"

     After reading this opinion piece I liked the arguments that Kristof made about points Romney is fighting for. From the beginning I was on the fence about both candidates Obama and Romney along with the arguments their fighting for. Romney hasn't really displayed a fine example of the set point he's trying to make when it comes to abortion. It seems to me like hes still puzzled in his mind about what call he should take on this issue. You can clearly see this confusing in the video of his interview I posted above.