Lauren's Musings
Wednesday, October 22, 2003
not sure what I think about using blogger for this
I haven't got quite a handle on how to make this work for my purposes (indexing for future research, etc), so I'm going to sign off on this blog for a while and go back to the old notebook method. Please keep up with the news through my other blog, though!
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
Book:Proverbs of Ashes: Violence, Redemptive Suffering, and the Search for What Saves Us, by Rita Nakashima Brock and Rebecca Ann Parker
Chapter 2: Haunted by Loss
Rita Nakashima Brock
A second personal story to emphasis why this book is important to the writers, Rita's Story is about a girl who grows up no knowing her own father, living with a man who is emotionally present but practices corporeal punishment, a n emotionally distant mother, a foreigner in America, and questioning religion.
She describes growing up with racial harassment, but not understanding what it was and her family ignoring its existence. She explains the contradictory nature of her family, in which her mother was Japanese and her father American but they would not accept her dating an African American boy in college quoting Genesis "each after its own kind." She felt that her father tried to whitewash her racial identity.
Brock recounted several instances of corporeal punishment-- up through college, and said that this lead to a religious search for answers about violence. A fortunate byproduct of this was a liberation from overt male sexuality (they often lost interest in an exotic Asian woman once they thought she was studying to be a nun).
She explained what she considers to be an incompatibility between Japanese and American cultures, which made me think of many texts I've read along the way: The Joy Luck Club & The Woman Warrior in particular. It also makes me think of my childhood. My parents raised me in a very traditional southern way (down to a mother at home and a father working all hours) and there are more similarities than I originally though between what is part of a southern culture and part of an Asian culture. Both value digression, valuing authority, ceremonial manners, etc. My parents were a bit of a holdback from years before, and many of my peers in the early 80s were not being raised the way I was. Now, when I read books where someone moves here during childhood from an Asian culture, I can often identify more than I would immediately expect.
Brock also discusses this in terms of Buddhism. She explains that in Japan Buddhism is more ceremonial and less about actual beliefs. It does require following certain rituals and valuing elders, community, &c., as does Christianity here. Western Buddhism is more about the individual than the community (self-enlightenment, etc) whereas Christianity in Japan is more about the self (saving of the soul, etc). She concludes from this that displaced religion focuses more on the individual than the traditional religion does.
She touched a bit on what Parker did by explaining her connection to Job in Christianity when she first came here, how he suffered silently and was rewarded. (Apparently when she came here her "father" had to sign something saying she would become Christianity.)
One other thing I wanted to include was a quote: "Christianity is haunted by the ghost of Jesus. His death was an unjust act of violence that needed resolution. Such death haunts us. Rather than address the horror and anguish of his death, Christianity has tried to make it a triumph." She says that we need him and can't let him go and that is what leads us to war.
Book:Gender Vertigo: American Families in Transition, by Barbara J. Risman
Chapter 3: Necessity and the Invention of Mothering
Barbara J. Risman
I did not take notes when I read this chapter a few days ago, but generally Risman addresses the macro-institutional aspects of the gender structure that organize family and work to support and enact male advantage in the marketplace and female responsibility in the home. She discusses male mothering and explains research that indicates that single fathers and single mothers have more in common than married mothers and single mothers.
Book:Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America, by Barbara Ehrenreich
I've been wanting to read this for a long time, even before the UNC debate sparked international interest. Doug and Julie gave me a copy for my birthday and I read it quickly because now it's time to loan it to several other people.
The basic story is of one upper-middle class, highly educated essayist who takes time out of her life to see if she can make it on minimum wage. She takes jobs as a waitress, salesperson, and maid explains life to her audience.
Introduction: Getting Ready
Ehrenreich takes time to explain the genesis of the project and the basic rules that she lays out for herself:
1-She could not fall back on any skills derived from education or usual work
2-She had to take the highest paying job offered and try to keep it
3-She had to take the cheapest accommodations she could find at an acceptable level of safety and privacy
All rules were eventually broken for one reason or another, which really just gives credibility to the difficulty of living in each of the situations the Ehrenreich describes.
Chapter One: Serving in Florida
Chapter Two: Scrubbing in Maine
Chapter Three: Selling in Minnesota
Evaluation
She finishes the book by evaluating her circumstances. Nothing was done with the rigor of scientific inquiry, but generally, the information stands. If she was challenged to find a way to make ends meet as a well educated, white, English speaking person, how hard is it for people who aren't in this most privileged group?
She suggests that her book is useful because privileged people might be more likely to accept the message if it is coming from one of "their own." I have to agree (and then suggest the book to everyone!)
Monday, October 20, 2003
Book:Gender Vertigo: American Families in Transition, by Barbara J. Risman
Chapter 2: Gender as Structure
Barbara J. Risman
I'm gonna run through this really fast in hopes that I can get this in before John gets home.
Risman states that there are four traditions when considering gender:
1- Gendered Selves: is it biological or social?
2- How society is structured creates gendered behavior
3- Contextual: doing gender creates inequality
4- combines the three previous traditions
In Gendered Selves Risman says that the individualist approach focuses on the individual's properties and that the background is in biosociology and feminist psychoanalysis. This chapter focuses on how the field of sociology views and then Risman points out weaknesses in these theories. The biggest problem with sex-role theory is polarizaion, that it leads to ignoring the individual differences and the downplay of the role of interaction.
In Structure vs. Personality Risman says there are differences between the genders. Structuralists deal with them by saying the differences are due to one's post in life (for more on this Risman recommends Epstein's 1988 work on the social structure explanation of gender). When everyone has the same priviledges then everyone will be able to have equal opportunity for the same positions in society (this is why I support Affirmative Action). She says that we must realize that gender, itself, is a structure in our society.
In Doing Gender:not who we are but what we do Risman says that we are held morally accountable to act as our gender. The very belief that there are essential differences exists to justify male dominance. This is interesting to me because I've seen women--again and again-- try and maintain expert status in some feminine thing, be it the kitchen or the laundry &c. Women may think that they are achieving dominance in some way by maintaining their expert position, but all it really does is lead towards male dominance in other realms.
In Gender as a Social Structure Risman say "Structuralist presume that social structure exists outside individual desires/motives and that structure can partially explain human actions." She asks how does social structure constrain? Why do people pick certain acts over others? Even though laws remove some gender stratification equality doesn't always happen.
In Expectations as a Cultural Component of Gender Risman says that gender expectation is a cognitive images that constrains action. They constrain negotiations and are incipient in conflict in relationships because there is no telling what the other individual might think about them.
In Feminist Marriage:conflct among images, institutions, and new selves Risman says gender structure pushes all--even feminist-- toward gender division of labor and towards male dominant relationship. On page 36 she lists some examples of this in terms of choices. She says, "When life options are tied to racial categories we call it racism at best and apartheid at worst. When life options are tied to gender categories we call it marriage." She points out that in egalitarian parents, the husband is often seen as wonderful and the wife is often seen as bad. She tells a story that illustrates that a woman may not even realize she's slipped into inequality. It was a scary section of the chapter because I can see those tendencies in myself.
Tuesday, October 14, 2003
Book:Gender Vertigo: American Families in Transition, by Barbara J. Risman
Chapter 1: Introduction
Barbara J. Risman
I'm reading this because I will be visiting NCSU's Sociology Graduate Program on Friday. I have been interested in Risman's work since we read some of her texts in my Feminist Theory class.
This is a good introduction to the work as I understand it. I think it would have been a bit more interesting had I not had a good idea of the subject matter beforehand. There were two sections that I really appreciated:
1- The discussion of essentialism, androcentrism, and gender polarization (2). Not that these are difficult concepts, but in my experiences scholars may address different aspects of these issues, and it was good to know where Risman stood before reading the book in its entirety.
2- Her "caveat" on page 11. She discusses (briefly) that she realizes that there are some women who are in better positions than some men and explains that this text is mean to address gender because in any given segment of the population men will be in a better position.
Monday, October 13, 2003
Book:Proverbs of Ashes: Violence, Redemptive Suffering, and the Search for What Saves Us, by Rita Nakashima Brock and Rebecca Ann Parker
Chapter 1: Away from the Fire
Rebecca Ann Parker
This chapter is a great introduction to the subject and a lot of what the UUFR sermon was about. Parker introduces the central idea of Christianity as self-sacrifice. She explains that this can be physically (to an abusive partner), psychologically (to a manipulative partner), or submissively (to another's will) and all these are acts of love. Parker suggests that when one sacrifices, the person thinks that their "holy" behavior will make the oppressor love them and see how wonderful they are. They believe that when their oppressor sees their misery they will want to fix it. Parker (rightly) says that even if that were the case, why bond through misery? Why is the only power that the oppressed can have manipulative? Why bind to someone through pain? She suggests that when people make the common claim that God has a purpose and one day you'll understand and give thanks people are buying into the need to suffer despite the fact that there is a good chance that one day you will be sorry that you accepted pain.
Christianity, as a religion, is filled with contradictions. Believers love Jesus, but also believe had to suffer a painful death. They hate those who murdered him (or at least the act of murdering him), but Jesus' violent death was necessary. Today people clearly articulate their hatred for terrorism, but Christians support the form of torture that was applied to Jesus, and therefore a form of terrorism. Believers have to accept that people who thought nothing of Jesus were right in their actions to kill him, and believers with correct support of Jesus would have been wrong to spare him.
All of this leads to an acceptance and embrace of sacrifice to abuse. This is evident in the way that women are socialized, and we see it most with that sector of the population. We see it in battered women and in psychological damage. Parker's answer is that "As valuable as social gospel theology is, it does not hold that all religion needs to be able to hold. It fails to take into account that in women's lives the central sin may not be selfishness. It may be just the opposite: a lack of a sense of self." She suggests that instead of sacrificing self to the abuser, speaking out about their own divinity. She says that "We need a God who delights in revolutionary disobedience and spirited protest. Was not Jesus one such as this-- a prophet who comfort injustices and risked opposition rather than conform to an empire than enforced its oppressive will through violence?"
Julie (in her sermon) said that we are a Christian nation (the only people I have ever heard disagree with this are extreme right wing Christians). She says that the implications of a self-sacrificing gospel is that our society values that as well. It's so engrained that we don't even realize it.
I like to consider myself pretty enlightened. I know John is. Yet, when he got home I told him I found a recipe for mushroom soup, and that it would be really good to make. HE had to remind me that he is the one that likes mushrooms, not me. And he questioned why I would recommend an entire meal of the fungus. I have to admit, I hadn't realized it, but I thought that it would let him know how much I was thinking of him (since he knew that I wasn't too fond of the food) and made me realize how much I need to read this book.
Book:Proverbs of Ashes: Violence, Redemptive Suffering, and the Search for What Saves Us, by Rita Nakashima Brock and Rebecca Ann Parker
Prelude
Rita Nakashima Brock
Rebecca Ann Parker
I decided to read this after a strange combination of events. First, (at the fantastic UU Fellowship of Raleigh) Julie gave a sermon on The Search for What Saves Us which utilized feminist theology and focused on many issues discussed in Proverbs of Ashes. Then, John and I watched a special with his mom called A Crisis in Faith: The American Dilemma which focused on things that appealed to all of us: Susan liked the issues with Art, John liked the discussion of spirituality and the Benjamin Franklin Scholars approach to technology. I appreciated the feminist epistemology (despite the lack of women's voices). But most of all, this program reminded me that there are some fundamental similarities between religion and philosophy and inspired me to check out this book.
What I most appreciated in the Prelude was the description of reality. Brock explains that "East Asians and Anglo-Americans tend to see reality differently. For example, in describing an aquarium, white Americans ordinarily will focus on the largest fish. East Asians are more likely to describe the colors, quality of water, and the overall environment. This holistic way of seeing gives priority to relationships among things, rather than the things themselves. What may appear as directness or clarity in a Western view may appear as narrowness or inaccuracy from an Asian perspective. Indirectness is a mode of communication that allows for more information to be held in a whole." What a clear and concise way of saying what many feminist texts try to get across. Perhaps this is why many of the left-leaning people I know tend to describe reality as Brock suggests East Asian people do.
Tuesday, September 30, 2003
Book:Twenty-First Century Feminist Classrooms:Pedagogies of Identity and Difference, edited by Amie A. Macdonald and Susan Sanchez-Casal
Chapter Two:
Unleashing the Demons of History: White Resistance in the U. S. Latino Studies Classroom
Susan Sanchez-Casal
Sanchez-Casal's article is a refection of feminist teaching in her Latino/a literature course. She primarily discusses the issues that arise in an anti-racist course, the lessons can easily be applied to feminist courses.
She starts by saying that many people believe (due to cultural teachings) that social advantages are natural or merit based. Anti-racists assume that some people have unearned advantages and others (because of race, class, gender, sexuality, etc) have unearned disadvantages. This basic opposition affects how students in the Latina/o literature course are affected by the curriculum. Sanchez-Casal quotes Harding, "one's social situation enables and sets limits on what one can know; some social situations--critically unexamined, dominant ones--are more limiting in their inability to generate the most critical questions about received belief."
She continues that there is a tendency among white students to consider people of color as nonobjective. These white students will call people of Collier emotional, subjective, &c. Sanchez-Casal uses the term "chiquitafication" to explain this trivializaiton of Latino/a culture. In her course she reverses the binary, and makes the voice of people of color authoritative which renders the white voice as subjective.
I prefer less binary thinking, this categorizes everyone into either "white" or "person of color." What about people who do not appear to be of color, but they are? What about anti-racist white people and racist people of color? What about white people brought up in Latina/o culture? I tend to think more in terms of a spectrum, where people are too complex to put in one side of a binary opposition. I also tend to think (in this case) that there are many truths that exist. There is the white "truth" that we all learned in school. There is definitely a Latino/a "truth" that we should have learned in school. There are also African American, Asian, American, women, men, GLBT, &c "truths" that should be told as well. But enough of standpoint theory.
Sanchez-Casal says that the education focused on truth from white people's perspectives have prepared students to reject what they learn in anti-racist, feminist classroom as "leftist 'propaganda.'" She organizes her Latina/o course around "a radical critique of white imperialist history," which many students consider to be "white bashing." Sanchez-Casal says that early on she would preach to her class about white privilege and other truths, but found that preaching doesn't work. It merely furthers dyadic tension and people tend to tune out what they haven't signed up for.
She uses the term wound in the classroom to explain the different perspective of those who inflicted or felt it. The student's perception of the optimism or pessimism of class rests in their location to the wound. She goes on to say that feminist teachers need to consider how emotions of students and themselves are affected by radical curriculums. These courses are often stressful and painful for all involved. She says that progressive teachers are taking part in the process of teaching an oppositional worldview that reveals white privilege.
She tries to keep in mind that she is teaching to marginalized, but remember that those who don't see or understand their own privilege are struggling. Though feminist classrooms have often been considered "safe" places, where students don't have to worry about embarrassment or arguments, Sanchez-Casal says that there should be some struggle. It's a paradigm shift that affects not only course material, but all aspects of the student's lives. They many not get it the first time, and they don't need to.
Sanchez-Casal finishes with a discussion of the importance of recognizing the successes in the classroom. For her that is the knowledge that Latino/a students pride and acknowlegement.
That's interesting to me, because women's' studies courses don't tend to be optimistic. Women don't often feel that pride and acknowledgement as a result of a women's studies course, they feel anger. I believe this can be attributed to having been part of the system which oppresses women. Women are in an interesting position. Many are so blinded to the patriarchal system that they do not realize it exists. When they begin to have a view of it, it is upsetting, because they had been active participants in its maintenance.
Thursday, September 25, 2003
Book:Twenty-First Century Feminist Classrooms:Pedagogies of Identity and Difference, edited by Amie A. Macdonald and Susan Sanchez-Casal
Chapter One:
Toward a Pedagogy of Coalition
Betty Sasaki
Sasaki asks us to consider where is the "critical and dissenting voice" within our institutions of education? She starts her chapter with a story about campus administration ignoring race issues and explains that this ignorance comes from reliance on a "paradigm of consensus."
The concept of multiculturalism tends towards the meltingpot metaphor whereas "multi" is defined by the dominant culture. The many become one, and differences within this "multi" are eliminated. (This makes me think of The Second Sex, which I still need to read.) Like multiculturalism, consensus appears to be part of a liberal mindset, but really shouldn't be because it eliminates marginalized perspectives. For this reason, Sasaki suggests that educators should move towards a paradigm of "coalition" that allows for and cultivates conflict.
She says that consensus leads to self-censorship because people don't want to dissent and cause conflict. This self-censorship leads to an "unspoken knowledge" amongst participants. We use consensus as the method of fulfilling desire for community, but there are negative effects that occur when we create an "ideal citizen subject."
Consensus leads to an idea of a big family with similar ways of seeing the world. Sasaki says that our metaphor of one big tribe or family is harmful. In this viewpoint, we are all seen as one big happy family. It follows, then, that we share the same views, values, desires, and family history. The tribe construct and paradigm of consensus leads us to "dehistoricize any understanding of social change." The majority may then ignore the past in which exclusionary practices have happened. It gives the impression that the tribe has evolved to a good model of society.
Consensus reinforces the stability of the majority's knowledge about the world. To embrace difference and accept it into the existing structure we must define what is acceptable as knowledge. We chose to change the value of certain truths. (For example, a college that is historically white but now accepts other races may say that their race history isn't too bad, but is improving. The minority students might say the record was horrible. The truth that is accepted and considered legitimate would be the existing white truth.)
Educating utilizing a coalition instead of consensus means identifying and how narratives are "legitimated, normalized, and internalized." Students need a place where they can realize the multiplicity of their subjectivity, but consensus tries to erase that. Coalition building is hard, one must be engaged with the process, with oneself, and with others. The individual must show self for what one's subjectivity is.
Sasaki says that the "pedagogical project of coalition" occurs on two levels:
1. externally: the system of hierarchies
2. internally: how the system of hierarchies affect individuals
She gives an example of a classroom discussion that goes from a specific example to the general concept. The concept becomes a binary opposition that ignores all the area in between. A coalition would allow for some exploration of this space in between, where many students are located.
As a philosophy major, I think that part of this need to go to the general level is because students need to clarify what it is that they have an opinion of. For example, everyone may agree that racism is bad, but not everyone in the classroom agrees on what a racist comment is. Sure, coalition is good to encompass where everyone is on the spectrum, but traditionally consensus classrooms could do this as well if there were terms people could utilize (or if everyone agreed on what "racist" is).
Sasaki ends her chapter saying that coalitions are useful for the real world, and through they are difficult, they are worthwhile.
Overall, I think this article is about where the Women and Gender Studies program at NC State left me. I am glad to have seen it articulated in this form, and to have it as a reference, but it is information that I agreed with anyway. It does make me understand Dr. Mykyta's classroom a bit better, though.
