fJasmine has 14 post(s)

In “Affective Economies” Sara Ahmed determines emotions, such as hate, as part of an economic model that have the ability to gather people together. Emotions do not reside within an object even a single person. Emotions are affected by the slightest detail that occurs in one’s surroundings. Often times emotions, like hate, are based of their counter emotions, love. For example, in the beginning of this excerpt Ahmed shines a light on the Aryan Nations Website. These groups of individual are embodying the emotion of hatred according to the minorities that the Aryan Nation protest against. Although the Aryan Nation participate and organize rallies and chants against minorities, they truthfully believe they are doing it for the well being of “their” country. They believe these sets of minorities are taking jobs, thus, devaluing their country. This in turn rallies together all “whites” who believe in this ideology and creates a community. Furthermore, Ahmed goes on to describe the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. The terrorists acted out of love of their religion and beliefs. The dedication and love they had for their religion and beliefs brought the terrorist of September 11 together. For the American people these acts were an act of hatred and provoked fear among the country. Likewise, Americans united themselves as a result of the terror attacks. Politicians and the media then used the U.S vulnerable state of fear as a chance to promote the war. The vulnerable state the American public was in allowed the war to receive positive feedback. The American public believed the terror attacks of September 11 needed to avenged. Furthermore, soon after the terrorist attacks the American public perceived anyone who appeared to be Middle Eastern, Arab or Muslim negatively. Again, fear was able to collect another group of individuals together to create a community but in this case a negative notion was created against them.

In “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving” Lila Abu-Lughod discuss the ethics concerning Americans perception on the War on Terror. She discusses the role the women of Afghanistan play in reasoning the War on Terror. She begins by analyzing First Lady Laura Bush’s address on November 17, 2001, just a few months after September 2001. Abu-Lughod highlights Bush’s use of muslim women in Afghanistan. Bush proclaimed that the women of Afghanistan were liberated, they were able to listen music and teach their children without the fear of being punished, largely due to the United State’s military gain. This in turn justified the United States’ involvement in Afghanistan. Yet, Bush neglects to discuss the malnutrition, poverty, poor health and unemployment the women of Afghanistan endure. Bush discussed the role and treatment of women in Afghanistan rather then bringing to light the U.S repressive history. Abu-Lughod then further critiques Bush’s perception of the Muslim women by discussing the burqa. The burqa has been perceived as a sign of oppression. When the Taliban took control many women began to wear burqas. This caused many to believed that the Taliban enforced all women of Afghanistan to wear burqas. This is not the case, the burqa represents the separation of men’s and women’s spheres –  it symbolizes modesty. The burqa allowed women to walk without a male companion as it protected them from interacting with men of the public. Many could not comprehend why the Afghan women did not abandoned the burqas when they were “liberated” due to the fact that many were not aware that the burqa actually allowed the Afghan women to be feel liberated. The burqa was transformed into a political and ethical problem when it reality is was not, it was a voluntary choice made by the Afghan women. Our perception is largely due to to our ignorance towards others culture. The Afghan women are not being saved by the mighty Americans invading their country. Frankly, we use their position in their communities towards our benefit. In this case, it was used to justify a war.

In “Between Love and Money: Sex, Tourism, and Citizenship in Cuba and the Dominican Republic” Amalia L. Cabezas discusses the effects tourism has in countries such as Cuba and the Dominican Republic. Cabezas establishes mass adjustments both countries had to make due to the changes in both their political and economic order. Both countries had extensive economic and social outcomes. One change includes tourism which aided the economic system, this change brought about sex tourism. Women and men both offered their bodies in exchange for gifts like clothing, jewelry, and meals. Many of these men and women work in hotel workers that work in maintenance, administration, entertainment, reception and even food services. Their position as hotel workers allows them direct contact with tourists. Those who engage in sexual acts do not just want money in exchange for sex. They hope the initial encounter will, in turn, establish stability. This stability of regular payments or regular phone calls will lead to marriage and ideally migration. Although both men and women seek the same goal it is not perceived uniformly throughout gender and skin color. For example, darker skinned women who seek relationships with foreigners are immediately identified as sex workers and prostitutes, both terms are associated with labor and paid work. This is negatively received in the Carribean. On the other hand, their lighter-skinned counterparts are given the leisure to label their relationships as purely romantical and do not endure harassment from law enforcement. Cabeza shares Mari’s, a twenty-three-year-old woman from Santo Domingo, experience with law enforcement. Mari recalls being slapped and even given a black eye from police officers for “bothering tourists”. This reasoning demonstrates the economic need for tourism in their countries. “Bothering tourists would never be a valid reason for arrest in economically thriving regions such as the United States and Western Europe. Additionally, men and women are not equally recognized in their roles of seducing foreigners. Men are observed as “national heroes” who conquer the body of the foreigner while the women are seen as deviant and of poor values.

In Global Care Crisis: A Problem of Capital, Care Chain or Commons? authors Lise Widding Isaksen, Sambasivan Uma Devi and Arlie Russel Hochschild  discuss the driving force of South to North migration. This South to North migration primarily refers to women. Women take on roles of maids, nannies, nurse aides, nurses and doctors (2008:405) in their home countries which are usually third world countries with weak economies. They then use their skill to tend to families within a country with a stronger economy, this country usually being the United States. This migration is a direct result of capitalism. These women are often mothers who leave behind their children and partners for financial reasons. This then leads to the concept of global care chain. Global care chains are links among people based on paid and unpaid care.  Often times the migrating woman leaves her own children behind in their home countries which requires a relative to look after and care for her children. This relative could be the migrating woman’s mother or her eldest daughter regardless this is often unpaid care. The woman then migrates to obtain the paid labor of caring for the children of others. The care chain has a tremendous effect on the third world country child. This child is able to obtain the benefits that money is able to provide but the child does not have the opportunity to grow alongside their mother. Thus, the child is emotionally and mentally deprived of nurture that a mother is able to provide. Global care chains are linked to commons. Commons are essentially anything that is shared within a community. In order for there to be an exchange or share there must first be a community. The formation of a community is negatively effected when the mother must leave to financially provide for a better life.

Growing up, I remember my classrooms consisting of predominately white children. Throughout high school there were a few incidences where I was the only person of color in my class. My school district primarily consisted of the white upper middle class so naturally I have felt like an outsider on multiple occasions. Although my school district consisted of largely white children there would usually be around 2-5 “outsiders” in a class. The first occasion in which I truly felt like an outsider was in second grade. In the mornings there would be ESL and speech instructors as well as math tutors who would go from classroom to classroom to pick up their students for a quick sessions before the  actual school day commenced. On one day I had a substitute teacher who was not aware of the group of kids who were assigned to go. As the ESL, speech and math instructors left my classroom I had gotten up to sharpen my pencil, when I returned to my seat the teacher asked me in front of all my classmates, “Don’t you have to go?”. I said no and carried on with my work. Throughout the day, I was confused I did not understand why he singled me out – I felt embarrassed. I later realized that I was the only non white person in the classroom after the assigned students had left. Before this day I was not fully aware that my external appearance could form preconceived notions about me. I became conscious. According to Collins this is a vital role in order to self define and self valuate. Once one becomes aware that they are being discriminated or oppressed they are able to determine form their true selves. This true self must establish “their analytical, emotional and ethical perspective of themselves and their place in society …” (1986:23). This meaning that one must know where they place themselves on the hierarchy in order and where others place them. This ignites action against it and promotes activism to fight oppression.

In chapter four, “Periodization”, Foucault discusses the “technology” of sex. These “technologies” can be defined as medicine, education and demography which restricted sex and transformed it into a public matter. In past, the sixteenth and seventeenth century, sex was seen as a private matter that should be confined to the home and never mentioned in public. The topic of sexuality was then altered, it was then discussed in confusion as a Catholic church belief. During the nineteenth century sex was converted into a public matter. Many believed sex  to be of “biological responsibility” (1978:118) meaning homosexuality must be due to one’s genetics, designating as hereditary and declaring it an illness. This reasoning caused the public, more importantly the bourgeois, to fear for the future generations that could harm their standing in society. This encouraged the practice of eugenics, which enforced sterilization. Although this theory placed reforms it was never scientifically proven. This ideology turned sex from a spiritual and religious matter to a physical health concern that could effect the public, more specifically the bourgeoise. Foucault does not believe in the repressive theory. He argues that this theory could not possibly be true because if its intentions were economic, there would be strict restrictions placed upon young men who were the leading force in the working class. The restrictions were most stringent upon the bourgeoise as it was implemented to preserve their status and “eliteness”. Foucault exclaims, “The bourgeoisie’s “blood” was its sex” (1978:124). This reinforces the notion that the elite class believed sex to be heavily influential to their overall health. Although their intentions were to place restrictions on themselves to keep a healthy sexuality, their beliefs extended to the working class. This expansion lead the bourgeoisie to assert their dominance over the proletariats. The “technologies” are just methods or tools that were used to control sex.

Micheal Foucault’s History of Sexuality explores the relationship between society and sexuality. Foucault begins his discussion by exposing the negative stance we have on sex or anything sexual in nature. During the early 1600s sex was a casual matter that was not forbidden or looked down upon. The shift from an accepted perception on sex to a public matter occurred during the 1800s. The Victorian regime brought about the bourgeoisie who in turn molded sex to become this “mute” and hidden topic. Any activity that was purely for pleasure or amusement was frowned upon. This ideology lead sex to be confined to only the home. Sex was now considered taboo, it was not to be discussed. The topic became a private matter. Its sole purpose was to reproduce and bring about a new generation of laborers. Moreover, sex in conversation completely dissipated. Children were not educated on the subject as they were perceived as innocent and did not have sex. Those who conversed about sex were in mental institutions or in brothels. These civilians were labeled as the “Other Victorians” by Steve Marcus. Foucault then discussed the role capitalism played in controlling the way we perceive sex. During this time sex was not for pleasure it was simply a means of reproduction. This then confines sex to only married couples. Foucault labels the restrictions on sex as the “repressive hypothesis”.   Furthermore, in the twentieth century Sigmund Freud explored sexuality. Although Freud’s attempts made the public a bit more curious about the subject it was still a matter confined to psychiatry. This would benefit the realm academically but would never transform sex into a topic that could be discussed without shame or embarrassment. Although Foucault is aware that sex is still to this day a taboo subject to this day his interest is in the “how” and the “why”.

Questions

Does the repression of sex during the past  play a part in rape culture today?

Were men AND women both limited to treating sex as taboo? If so did capitalism play a part ?

Bell Hooks’ “Eating the Other:  Desire and Resistance” describes the relationship between white persons and the “Other”. The “Other” is anyone racially or sexually different. This includes minorities ranging from Native Americans and Africans to Asians and Hispanics. Hooks describes the relationship between whites and the “Others” as pure fascination. The others are seen as different and rare – as unexplored grounds . Hooks describes an encounter where young white males discussed their intentions to have sex with as many  girls as they could before graduation – but they had to be other ethnic groups. Non-white girls were seen to be more experienced and sexual based on the sole factor of being non-white. These young women added a sense of excitement and deficiency to white adolescents life. This admiration on the surface seems productive and legitimate as they are breaking “social norms” and integrating and associating themselves with people of color. They see themselves progressing from their ancestors practices of discrimination and white supremacy. In their perspective they are rebelling against the wishes of their past generations that longed to be superior. This desire prevented them from ever willingly integrating or involving themselves in interracial relationships.  They do not recognize that their want and sexually desire for the “Others” is only perpetuating racism. These women of color are seen as trophies to add onto the white mans showcase. The youthful boys do not want a long lasting relationship with the girls, the just merely want sex.  The white males attraction could be seen as productive as they are, in a sense, “equating” themselves to the women of color by having intimate relationships with them.  These young men are not aware that their ideology is withholding the women from truly advancing.  They are oblivious to their desire to only want colored women to advance their own agenda of sexual experience.

C.J Pascoe discusses the influences of students, teachers and administrators have on influencing the gender and sexuality norms. She beings Dude You’re a Fag by describing in great detail a skit created by Brent and Greg. Both of the “most popular” senior boys put on a “nerd” persona that obviously did not resemble them. This allowed audience know it was humorous and fine to laugh at them throughout the performance. When the two boys let out a feminine squeal or displayed frustration when lifting barbells- the audience immediately roared with laughter. Notably, when the female coach lifted the barbells with ease the audience rooted and cheered for her. The skit reinforces the idea that boys must be masculine and girls must be feminine. If boys seem feminine or if girls seem masculine the action was instantly seen as comical. The Mr. Cougar assembly was approved by administration indicating that they deemed the skits harmless. Furthermore, River High’s dress code reiterated gender differentiation as they set out different policies for boys and girls. The distinction allowed for boys to show off their midriff and girls could “sag” their pants (Pascoe, 2007: 30). The dress code was reviewed and approved by administration and not a single overseer had thought of the conflicting technicality. Additionally, teachers like Mr.Ford and Mr. Kellogg fed into the notion that boys must act masculine and girls must act feminine. Huey was an outcast who refused to dress like his male peers. He preferred to sport a more unique style that mad him vulnerable to homophobic insults. When Huey flipped Mr. Ford off,  Mr. Ford then further validated their taunts by exclaiming that Huey should be having sexual relations with girls instead of flipping him off. He even added that he is not even sure if Huey knows what that means yet. This was humorous to Mr. Ford and Mr. Kellogg as they strictly believed that heterosexual men should being having sex with girls. These gender norms do not allow for girls to be masculine or boys to be feminine and compel us to believe that femininity and masculinity must coincide with sex. C.J Pascoe highlights that those qualities should be determined by actions not sex.

Throughout history the black woman has been depicted as a strong able woman who could endure laborious hours as oppose to her white counterpart. This is portrayed in both Morgan’s and Federici’s works. Morgan describes European settlers traveling to Africa and describing the women with breasts hanging below their Navels  (Morgan, 1997:14). In the European’s perspective, the women’s hanging breasts predetermined them to a life of labor. This narrative was used to justify their enslavement, as they were seen as inferior and could only be used to benefit the white man’s growing authority in the capitalistic society. The black woman’s physical characteristics were used again and again to predispose them to labor. This ideology was later turned widespread as their beliefs were published in dozens of pieces of literature. Federici’s publication focuses more so on the troubles women faced due to limitations. Prior to land privatization women were able to fend for themselves alongside their male counterparts. After the creation of land enclosures women were not able to compare themselves to men. It limited women to domestic labors such as cooking, cleaning and caring for. Reproductive work was paid, for limited time, at low costs. Throughout the years reproductive labor was no longer compensated in capital but was expected and became a “natural vocation” (Federici, 2004:86). Although Federici focused her piece on the European woman of the sixteen hundreds the degradation resembled that of the African woman during the Exploration era. In Europe the men had control over women’s reproduction, they were able to regulate their capital and image. The woman was yet again diminished into a second class citizen, who was forced to settle with the limits put upon them. European women were not in control of their socioeconomic state in the growing capitalistic world. The African women was limited to image fixed upon them as they were seen as masculine meaning they could endure both manual labor and reproductive labor. Both the European and African women were seen as inferior to the white man and were exposed to labors that European men dictated.