So, I'm finally getting around to posting my columns from the paper last semester. These are in no particular order, except I did put the government and media columns in order since they go together. Also, these do not seem to be all of my column articles, so I will have to post the rest whenever I can get them from my computer, which will probably not be this summer due to internet snafus at home. Anywho, here are the links:
6 Reasons Not to Finish That Pesky Math Homework - websites to waste your time on
Let's Keep it Civilized - disagreeing on religion
Cheap and Easy: Halloween Edition - costume ideas you can make yourself
Gender Identity: Normal or Disorder
Make Time for Things You Love
Can the Government Force You to be Healthy? - graphic images on cigarette packaging
We Need a Media Invasion - solutions to the growing problem of youth smoking (goes w/ above)
How to Love the Way You Look - loving your body the way it is
Changing Gender Stereotypes - male gender stereotypes
End of a Love Affair - how I fell out of love with politics
You Have the Right to Remain... Totally Confused - religious stereotyping
In other news, I'm starting a new blog about design, which will perhaps include clothing, shoes, and the like. I'll post the link when I've decided on a name!
Showing posts with label activism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label activism. Show all posts
Friday, May 6, 2011
Sunday, June 27, 2010
It's a Man's World... (Not)
'
Oh, so much to talk about, but where to start? We finally painted at our apartment yesterday, and the color looks great. We recently lost our kitty - I had planned to write about it, but felt it was somehow inappropriate to post on here. I'm still writing, but I haven't been making a lot of progress lately. I did add a new beginning. I've read several books since my last post (some very good ones, too) such as The Secret Life of Bees by Sue Monk Kidd, which I would recommend to anyone and everyone.
I also recently watched the controversial movie "Milk" which I thought was excellent. It stirred up a lot inside me, too. I suppose I'm one of those people who is only happy when they have a cause. I just don't like seeing people hated on or oppressed. All about the equality.
I was concerned with the lack of women in the movie, however. I feel like when we talk about gay rights, we just forget about women. One theory might be that lesbians are better accepted in our society, or another might be that there are less of them, or maybe men loving other men strikes people as much more of a problem. Maybe our society is just too male-centered. And I do believe that's true. It makes me angry. I will now commence my rant.
The problem here is that no matter how far our society or our culture has come, women are still not equal to men. Tons of people would scoff at that comment. Tons of people would also call me names for saying I'm a feminist. I don't care; bring it on! Women are paid 15% less than men, STILL! How is that even excusable in this day and age? It's ludicrous! I know women are part of the problem. Don't mistake me for a woman who hates all men, though sometimes it seems easier to just blame all the problems on them. I don't. Women are underachievers, as a sex. I know tons of hardworking women who have big dreams. But how many women do you know that settle for lesser jobs? Why a nurse and not a doctor? Why a kindergarten teacher and not a professor? Why a social worker and not a psychologist? Why not a firefighter, police officer, astronaut, scientist? So many women choose to sidestep these jobs for ones of lesser prestige. Is it because we're drawn to children in fields like teacher or pediatrician (as opposed to brain surgeon)? Do we put off these greater careers in order to get married and start families?
I for one will not put my dreams on the back burner. I may have been born a woman, but that does not mean I will settle for less than I am capable of. That is what makes me so angry. I know so many women who are capable of so much, but they still settle for less.
I had a lot of interesting ideas about why so many people are prejudiced against gay men. And why men are so obsessed with things like war and sports. It may be that men are being held back in this society even more than women. Our society casts men as strong providers, unemotional, logical and problem-solvers. They get things done, and they are manly doing it. Men don't cry. They don't feel weakness. They are tough and they protect their women (please! I say, dripping with sarcasm). Well, it's not as if men are born without feelings or fears. They aren't perfect. They make mistakes, they have needs. But society doesn't want them to get too close to each other. If a man has a close friend, people talk about them. They might be made fun of or called gay just for having a close friendship and caring for another man. Women do that all the time - it's expected. But the only real relationship in which it is okay for a man to be vulnerable is with a woman. That's all fine and good, but it sounds awfully lonely.
About sports, and war. I've heard that they both give you a great high, something some people crave. But the most important thing about these two, and it's not just my own musings here, is that they provide brotherhood. This is one other situation in which it is okay for a man to depend on another man. To love another man and have a close connection to him without being seen as acting outside of his role. (Because somehow we've gotten so homophobic that a man can't show his feelings or admiration of other guys outside of certain restrictive boundaries.) No wonder guys crave these things. Everyone wants to feel wanted, to have close relationships with others. Sure, the whole brotherhood thing isn't the only reason men participate in war or sports. Maybe not even the main reason. I don't know. But I do think it is a reason. Men are stifled and weighed down in this culture. They are constantly being told they aren't good enough. Not good enough at their jobs, not good enough in bed, not good enough at being fathers.
And while we're talking about fathers, let me just touch on the epidemic of crappy fathers. I hear about them left and right. Men leaving their kids, cheating on their wives, abusing their families, just plain not caring. Maybe this is because men don't have very good role models of what a good father looks like. We need a movement toward more caring and loving fathers. And part of that process, which has already started, is that women need to let men take care of their children. We have a tendency to want things done a certain way and when the man doesn't do it perfectly, we just do it ourselves. Not only does this put more pressure on ourselves, but it leads to that apathetic quality seen in so many fathers today. They can't care about something they aren't allowed to participate in. And how much richer would their lives be if they could have more responsibility in the care of their children? How much more time would women have with some of that burden off their shoulders - time enough to fulfill those big dreams she maybe didn't think she would ever achieve. Maybe if we had more equitable roles, people would be more tolerant of those who choose alternative lifestyles to the traditional.
We all need to learn to be more tolerant of others. If you believe in god, good for you. Don't shove it down other people's throats. If you think being gay is wrong, fine. But don't hurt another person or discriminate against them because of it. Keep it to yourself. Respect others. Understand them and the fact that they did not up and choose a lifestyle they somehow "knew" was "wrong," but they are simply being who they are. And they deserve that right. Thousands of young LGBT kids contemplate suicide, lots of them do kill themselves - all because we can't be more accepting of them. We are all human. We all get afraid, we all care what others think, we all need encouragement and support. If your intolerance is leading to loss of life, maybe you should rethink what you believe, or at least how you deal with others who you deem 'in the wrong.' All the stupid jokes you made as a kid, every time you say 'that's gay' or call someone a name, just think about how different things would be if their struggles were your own.
I wish I could solve all the world's problems. I want to be active, but this is a time of inactivity. I know I just need to have the courage to start what needs to be started: a new way of thinking about the world and the people around us. Tolerance. Love. Acceptance. Respect. I hope when I leave this world, I'll have left it just a little bit better than when I arrived. And I really mean that.
Oh, so much to talk about, but where to start? We finally painted at our apartment yesterday, and the color looks great. We recently lost our kitty - I had planned to write about it, but felt it was somehow inappropriate to post on here. I'm still writing, but I haven't been making a lot of progress lately. I did add a new beginning. I've read several books since my last post (some very good ones, too) such as The Secret Life of Bees by Sue Monk Kidd, which I would recommend to anyone and everyone.
I also recently watched the controversial movie "Milk" which I thought was excellent. It stirred up a lot inside me, too. I suppose I'm one of those people who is only happy when they have a cause. I just don't like seeing people hated on or oppressed. All about the equality. I was concerned with the lack of women in the movie, however. I feel like when we talk about gay rights, we just forget about women. One theory might be that lesbians are better accepted in our society, or another might be that there are less of them, or maybe men loving other men strikes people as much more of a problem. Maybe our society is just too male-centered. And I do believe that's true. It makes me angry. I will now commence my rant.
The problem here is that no matter how far our society or our culture has come, women are still not equal to men. Tons of people would scoff at that comment. Tons of people would also call me names for saying I'm a feminist. I don't care; bring it on! Women are paid 15% less than men, STILL! How is that even excusable in this day and age? It's ludicrous! I know women are part of the problem. Don't mistake me for a woman who hates all men, though sometimes it seems easier to just blame all the problems on them. I don't. Women are underachievers, as a sex. I know tons of hardworking women who have big dreams. But how many women do you know that settle for lesser jobs? Why a nurse and not a doctor? Why a kindergarten teacher and not a professor? Why a social worker and not a psychologist? Why not a firefighter, police officer, astronaut, scientist? So many women choose to sidestep these jobs for ones of lesser prestige. Is it because we're drawn to children in fields like teacher or pediatrician (as opposed to brain surgeon)? Do we put off these greater careers in order to get married and start families?
I for one will not put my dreams on the back burner. I may have been born a woman, but that does not mean I will settle for less than I am capable of. That is what makes me so angry. I know so many women who are capable of so much, but they still settle for less.
I had a lot of interesting ideas about why so many people are prejudiced against gay men. And why men are so obsessed with things like war and sports. It may be that men are being held back in this society even more than women. Our society casts men as strong providers, unemotional, logical and problem-solvers. They get things done, and they are manly doing it. Men don't cry. They don't feel weakness. They are tough and they protect their women (please! I say, dripping with sarcasm). Well, it's not as if men are born without feelings or fears. They aren't perfect. They make mistakes, they have needs. But society doesn't want them to get too close to each other. If a man has a close friend, people talk about them. They might be made fun of or called gay just for having a close friendship and caring for another man. Women do that all the time - it's expected. But the only real relationship in which it is okay for a man to be vulnerable is with a woman. That's all fine and good, but it sounds awfully lonely.
About sports, and war. I've heard that they both give you a great high, something some people crave. But the most important thing about these two, and it's not just my own musings here, is that they provide brotherhood. This is one other situation in which it is okay for a man to depend on another man. To love another man and have a close connection to him without being seen as acting outside of his role. (Because somehow we've gotten so homophobic that a man can't show his feelings or admiration of other guys outside of certain restrictive boundaries.) No wonder guys crave these things. Everyone wants to feel wanted, to have close relationships with others. Sure, the whole brotherhood thing isn't the only reason men participate in war or sports. Maybe not even the main reason. I don't know. But I do think it is a reason. Men are stifled and weighed down in this culture. They are constantly being told they aren't good enough. Not good enough at their jobs, not good enough in bed, not good enough at being fathers.
And while we're talking about fathers, let me just touch on the epidemic of crappy fathers. I hear about them left and right. Men leaving their kids, cheating on their wives, abusing their families, just plain not caring. Maybe this is because men don't have very good role models of what a good father looks like. We need a movement toward more caring and loving fathers. And part of that process, which has already started, is that women need to let men take care of their children. We have a tendency to want things done a certain way and when the man doesn't do it perfectly, we just do it ourselves. Not only does this put more pressure on ourselves, but it leads to that apathetic quality seen in so many fathers today. They can't care about something they aren't allowed to participate in. And how much richer would their lives be if they could have more responsibility in the care of their children? How much more time would women have with some of that burden off their shoulders - time enough to fulfill those big dreams she maybe didn't think she would ever achieve. Maybe if we had more equitable roles, people would be more tolerant of those who choose alternative lifestyles to the traditional.
We all need to learn to be more tolerant of others. If you believe in god, good for you. Don't shove it down other people's throats. If you think being gay is wrong, fine. But don't hurt another person or discriminate against them because of it. Keep it to yourself. Respect others. Understand them and the fact that they did not up and choose a lifestyle they somehow "knew" was "wrong," but they are simply being who they are. And they deserve that right. Thousands of young LGBT kids contemplate suicide, lots of them do kill themselves - all because we can't be more accepting of them. We are all human. We all get afraid, we all care what others think, we all need encouragement and support. If your intolerance is leading to loss of life, maybe you should rethink what you believe, or at least how you deal with others who you deem 'in the wrong.' All the stupid jokes you made as a kid, every time you say 'that's gay' or call someone a name, just think about how different things would be if their struggles were your own. I wish I could solve all the world's problems. I want to be active, but this is a time of inactivity. I know I just need to have the courage to start what needs to be started: a new way of thinking about the world and the people around us. Tolerance. Love. Acceptance. Respect. I hope when I leave this world, I'll have left it just a little bit better than when I arrived. And I really mean that.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
May 4th
``
Today is May 4th, which happens to be the 40th anniversary of the Kent State shootings. I don't know how many people know what happened that day. Before I came here, I didn't have a good idea of what took place. Before I read the article in the Stater today, I didn't have a good handle on the specifics, either. (And this is all coming from the Kent Stater from yesterday and today). Let me fill you in, then:
On May 4th, it was a sunny, beautiful spring day. More protests were planned on campus, with students gathering at the Victory Bell to hear speeches by their peers. 2,000 students gathered on nearby Blanket Hill, chanting things like "Pigs off campus" and "Hell no, we won't go." Guardsmen in an army jeep yelled through a bullhorn, telling students to disperse and reading them the riot act. The students laughed back - their peaceful chanting was nothing close to a riot. Then the guardsmen advanced toward the students on foot, throwing tear gas canisters into the crowd, once again. Some students threw them back, but most ran up the hill around to the other side of Taylor Hall. The Guardsmen continued marching forward, confusion and cacophony ensued, and some rocks were thrown on both sides. A kind of stalemate seemed to happen and the tear gas stopped. Students began celebrating, chanting, "they're out of gas, they're out of gas," and laughing. But the Guardsmen knelt and took aim at the students. A few students came toward them with flags in hand, but the Guardsmen huddled up and then seemed to retreat back up the hill. Students clapped and chanted, "They're leaving, they're going, we've won." But, out of 76, 28 of the Guards suddenly turned and fired on the students. For 13 seconds, the pop of gunfire was heard all around Taylor Hall and the nearby parking lot. 13 students were hit, from 60 to 750 feet away from the shooters. Four young college students lost their lives: William Shroeder, Jeffrey Miller, Allison Krause, and Sandy Scheuer. Three of the four students killed were in the parking lot, several hundred feet from the Guardsmen who opened fire.
It was very emotional, reading that story today. Hearing the account of the shootings from the students' point of view was moving. It really hit my heart to finally hear how the events of that night played out.
This year, Kent State remembered May 4th with a candlelight vigil last night, and several speakers, as well as cancelled classes today. Several of those who were wounded and many witnesses spoke today on Blanket Hill, sharing their stories with the next generation. Even though the blood that stained the grass on the hill that day is dead and new grass has sprung up to cover the ground where the slain and wounded students lay, they will not be forgotten.
Please check out the interactive map chronicling the events of May 4th, 1970 at KentWired.com. Also, check out the article from today's Stater which tells the story of May 4th from the students' point of view.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Let Our Voices Echo
`
Here in Kent, May 4, 1970 is still in the hearts and minds of all who live or work or learn here. There have been several news stories in the past few months chronicling the events of that day, and the days leading up to it. One of the important things that I've learned from these accounts is that protesting really defined that generation. Students were angry - outraged even - and they weren't afraid to let their government know it. Even though some protests definitely got out of hand, it's inspiring to see that kind of unification under a common concern among so many young people.
What will define our generation? Is it perhaps the fact that young people today have more social interactions through text than face-to-face? Is it our growing apathy toward our own education and futures? Is it divorce numbers over 50%? (But, as a side note, they do seem to be falling now.)
What do you want our generation to be defined by? There are certainly enough social issues brewing today. What about advances in civil rights, finally allowing the gay and lesbian communities the right to marriage. What about advances in health care that allow all Americans to have an equal chance at a long, fulfilling life?
We need to speak up - let our voices be heard on the important issues that face us today. Let's leave our legacy as a generation, stand up for what we believe in - no matter what that is. We need something that the future will remember us for. So let's sound our voices in the night and let the echoes ring for generations to come.
Here in Kent, May 4, 1970 is still in the hearts and minds of all who live or work or learn here. There have been several news stories in the past few months chronicling the events of that day, and the days leading up to it. One of the important things that I've learned from these accounts is that protesting really defined that generation. Students were angry - outraged even - and they weren't afraid to let their government know it. Even though some protests definitely got out of hand, it's inspiring to see that kind of unification under a common concern among so many young people.
What will define our generation? Is it perhaps the fact that young people today have more social interactions through text than face-to-face? Is it our growing apathy toward our own education and futures? Is it divorce numbers over 50%? (But, as a side note, they do seem to be falling now.) What do you want our generation to be defined by? There are certainly enough social issues brewing today. What about advances in civil rights, finally allowing the gay and lesbian communities the right to marriage. What about advances in health care that allow all Americans to have an equal chance at a long, fulfilling life?
We need to speak up - let our voices be heard on the important issues that face us today. Let's leave our legacy as a generation, stand up for what we believe in - no matter what that is. We need something that the future will remember us for. So let's sound our voices in the night and let the echoes ring for generations to come.
Friday, April 30, 2010
A Civilized Discussion
`
I've been thinking lately about how a lot of liberal people accuse religious people of being narrow minded and just following along with what they're told. Although this can sometimes be the case, I think it's important for everyone, regardless of our political or religious leanings, to check ourselves and make sure we aren't just following along.
Liberal ideas about gay marriage and abortion are popular right now, especially with young people. And I really believe that's great - people should always be fighting for human rights and social equality. The problem is, that sometimes we can get caught up in popular opinion without thinking through our positions carefully first.
My example here is my position on abortion. I guess I got the impression that most liberal people thought all abortion was okay. Now, I don't know if that's really the case, but I kind of just went along with it for a while. But when I stopped and thought about it really deeply, I realized it wasn't quite as cut and dry as I had been thinking.
I am a strong believer in women's rights. It is a passion of mine. I think women should have the right to decide when and if they get pregnant and have a child. I also believe in more comprehensive sex education, advances in birth control, adoption, and just not being a promiscuous person. But what if a woman is raped? What if her life is threatened by the baby? What if another problem like these arises and she just needs other options? She should have the right to decide when or if she will have a child and the right not to be forced into the role of mother by society.
On the other hand, we are responsible for protecting the lives of all human beings. Where is the line here? No one knows, and we should all keep that in mind. There really isn't an answer. I'm tired of people saying they have all the answers because it shuts down communication, healthy debate, and the quest for real answers to this problem.
The current cut off for abortions at 22 weeks - which is the age at which a fetus could survive outside of the womb on its own - seems like a reasonable solution. But lets not let party lines or pre-set moral guidelines determine the answers to these questions. Let's think for ourselves and not be afraid to think outside of the boxes we put ourselves in. Christians, dare to consider abortion as a valid solution. Liberals, dare to mull over the implications of abortion on the human right to life.
If I could say one thing tonight, it would be to think for yourself. Let go of all the things that tie you to a certain way of thinking or a certain belief system. And just listen to your own voice. Listen to what it's saying. Not a god or a politician, an old book or a liberal talk show host (or for that matter, a conservative one). Just think for yourself. Consider all sides of the issue. Consider our right to life, our right to choose, our right to love freely, our responsibility for those who cannot care for themselves. And lets start a real dialogue. Not one marred by dogma or prejudice or hatred or close-mindedness. But an honest discussion of what we can do as humans together to solve this common problem. Because it is a common problem. And we all need to be present in this discussion in order to come to a real solution that works for everyone. Let the discussion begin!
I've been thinking lately about how a lot of liberal people accuse religious people of being narrow minded and just following along with what they're told. Although this can sometimes be the case, I think it's important for everyone, regardless of our political or religious leanings, to check ourselves and make sure we aren't just following along.
Liberal ideas about gay marriage and abortion are popular right now, especially with young people. And I really believe that's great - people should always be fighting for human rights and social equality. The problem is, that sometimes we can get caught up in popular opinion without thinking through our positions carefully first. My example here is my position on abortion. I guess I got the impression that most liberal people thought all abortion was okay. Now, I don't know if that's really the case, but I kind of just went along with it for a while. But when I stopped and thought about it really deeply, I realized it wasn't quite as cut and dry as I had been thinking.
I am a strong believer in women's rights. It is a passion of mine. I think women should have the right to decide when and if they get pregnant and have a child. I also believe in more comprehensive sex education, advances in birth control, adoption, and just not being a promiscuous person. But what if a woman is raped? What if her life is threatened by the baby? What if another problem like these arises and she just needs other options? She should have the right to decide when or if she will have a child and the right not to be forced into the role of mother by society.
On the other hand, we are responsible for protecting the lives of all human beings. Where is the line here? No one knows, and we should all keep that in mind. There really isn't an answer. I'm tired of people saying they have all the answers because it shuts down communication, healthy debate, and the quest for real answers to this problem.
The current cut off for abortions at 22 weeks - which is the age at which a fetus could survive outside of the womb on its own - seems like a reasonable solution. But lets not let party lines or pre-set moral guidelines determine the answers to these questions. Let's think for ourselves and not be afraid to think outside of the boxes we put ourselves in. Christians, dare to consider abortion as a valid solution. Liberals, dare to mull over the implications of abortion on the human right to life.
If I could say one thing tonight, it would be to think for yourself. Let go of all the things that tie you to a certain way of thinking or a certain belief system. And just listen to your own voice. Listen to what it's saying. Not a god or a politician, an old book or a liberal talk show host (or for that matter, a conservative one). Just think for yourself. Consider all sides of the issue. Consider our right to life, our right to choose, our right to love freely, our responsibility for those who cannot care for themselves. And lets start a real dialogue. Not one marred by dogma or prejudice or hatred or close-mindedness. But an honest discussion of what we can do as humans together to solve this common problem. Because it is a common problem. And we all need to be present in this discussion in order to come to a real solution that works for everyone. Let the discussion begin!
Monday, April 26, 2010
A Social Struggle
`
Today I was finishing up The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan, which is an absolutely amazing book that everyone should take the time to read. It was life-changing - and I'm not just saying that. I finished up the book by reading the "Twenty Years After" essay at the beginning, which talked about her amazing journey after the book, and the revolution (or evolution as she puts it) in women's rights it rekindled.
Women's issues are really becoming a passion of mine. I made a small list today of issues facing modern women today, such as rape, cervical and breast cancer, unequal pay, the subtle discrimination still present in the workplace, lack of child care services for working women, maternity leave, and decreasing abortion rights. I think this is something I really want to pursue as part of my career. I hope I can find a grad school with faculty members who have done research in this area because I think I'm passionate enough about it to want to pursue it for the rest of my life.
Anyway, today I'm going to talk about the issue of abortion. This is a hot issue today that often finds its way onto the political platforms of major candidates. It was hotly debated in the 2008 election and it is a topic some feel so strongly about that they will vote based on this issue alone.
But the point I really want to make today is that this is one of the major dilemmas that face our society today. As humans, we are faced with the responsibility to protect all life, as well as the responsibility to ensure equal rights for all people, and this is an issue especially for women.
The basis behind the pro-choice position, as I see it, is that women have fought long and hard for rights in a lot of arenas. One of these is reproduction rights. We won a great victory with advances in birth control that let us decide when and if we as women wanted to have a child. Abortion goes along with this because it ensures that women still have that right, even if birth control fails. Another facet of the pro-choice position is that some women are raped and become pregnant and shouldn't be forced to have the child of their rapist. Also, when problems arise with the pregnancy that threaten the life of the mother, even abortions in the later months should be allowed to save the mother's life. Basically, it comes down to whether or not you will force a woman to have a child she doesn't want.
The way pro-life proponents paint the picture of abortion seems a little unfair. First, though, I do agree that it's not okay to take the life of a fetus for no reason - i.e. that if you are just irresponsible or don't like wearing condoms, that isn't a reason to get an abortion. Now we have Plan B, so abortions for failed birth control should be less of a problem. I feel uncomfortable with some arguments about when a fetus is considered human. I am really not sure what I think about that. But the current cut-off for abortions at 22 weeks, when a fetus could survive outside of the mother's womb, is being challenged in some states (I read this in USA Today this morning) which want to replace it with 20 weeks, making the argument that the fetuses feel pain. But a lot of pro-life supporters make it seem like those who consider abortions are murderers who have indiscriminate sex and don't care if they get pregnant because they'll just use abortion as an easy solution. That is certainly not the case. It seems that a lot of women who get them feel a certain amount of guilt afterwards - marking a decision they didn't take lightly. And most abortions are probably used for teenagers, life-threatening complications, rapes, or birth control failure in couples who are not ready to have a baby but are otherwise perfectly able to support one.
I'm sure there's more to both sides, but I think the basic dilemma here is between a woman's choice of when to have a child (as opposed to her complete absence of choice in the past when she just had to deal with being pregnant if her husband wanted to get her pregnant or if she were raped) and a human's right to life. The decision seems impossible, and I think that it most likely is. People still get fired up about it, though. We waste a lot more energy on arguing about it than trying to find solutions to the problem.
I'm sure women who are for abortion or who have gotten one struggle with the implications - are they taking a human life? And pro-life supporters should struggle with taking away a woman's choice to be pregnant when she wants to be pregnant, and not against her will. What we need to do as adults is consider each side carefully and thoroughly, putting any opinion-tainting factors on the back-burner in the process. This is society's problem; something we all deal with as human beings. So let us consider it peacefully and with the mind to solve it, without all the bickering and divisiveness! Because it is everyone's problem and everyone's job to try to fix it, without pointing the finger of accusation in the process.
Today I was finishing up The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan, which is an absolutely amazing book that everyone should take the time to read. It was life-changing - and I'm not just saying that. I finished up the book by reading the "Twenty Years After" essay at the beginning, which talked about her amazing journey after the book, and the revolution (or evolution as she puts it) in women's rights it rekindled.Women's issues are really becoming a passion of mine. I made a small list today of issues facing modern women today, such as rape, cervical and breast cancer, unequal pay, the subtle discrimination still present in the workplace, lack of child care services for working women, maternity leave, and decreasing abortion rights. I think this is something I really want to pursue as part of my career. I hope I can find a grad school with faculty members who have done research in this area because I think I'm passionate enough about it to want to pursue it for the rest of my life.
Anyway, today I'm going to talk about the issue of abortion. This is a hot issue today that often finds its way onto the political platforms of major candidates. It was hotly debated in the 2008 election and it is a topic some feel so strongly about that they will vote based on this issue alone.
But the point I really want to make today is that this is one of the major dilemmas that face our society today. As humans, we are faced with the responsibility to protect all life, as well as the responsibility to ensure equal rights for all people, and this is an issue especially for women.
The basis behind the pro-choice position, as I see it, is that women have fought long and hard for rights in a lot of arenas. One of these is reproduction rights. We won a great victory with advances in birth control that let us decide when and if we as women wanted to have a child. Abortion goes along with this because it ensures that women still have that right, even if birth control fails. Another facet of the pro-choice position is that some women are raped and become pregnant and shouldn't be forced to have the child of their rapist. Also, when problems arise with the pregnancy that threaten the life of the mother, even abortions in the later months should be allowed to save the mother's life. Basically, it comes down to whether or not you will force a woman to have a child she doesn't want.
The way pro-life proponents paint the picture of abortion seems a little unfair. First, though, I do agree that it's not okay to take the life of a fetus for no reason - i.e. that if you are just irresponsible or don't like wearing condoms, that isn't a reason to get an abortion. Now we have Plan B, so abortions for failed birth control should be less of a problem. I feel uncomfortable with some arguments about when a fetus is considered human. I am really not sure what I think about that. But the current cut-off for abortions at 22 weeks, when a fetus could survive outside of the mother's womb, is being challenged in some states (I read this in USA Today this morning) which want to replace it with 20 weeks, making the argument that the fetuses feel pain. But a lot of pro-life supporters make it seem like those who consider abortions are murderers who have indiscriminate sex and don't care if they get pregnant because they'll just use abortion as an easy solution. That is certainly not the case. It seems that a lot of women who get them feel a certain amount of guilt afterwards - marking a decision they didn't take lightly. And most abortions are probably used for teenagers, life-threatening complications, rapes, or birth control failure in couples who are not ready to have a baby but are otherwise perfectly able to support one.
I'm sure there's more to both sides, but I think the basic dilemma here is between a woman's choice of when to have a child (as opposed to her complete absence of choice in the past when she just had to deal with being pregnant if her husband wanted to get her pregnant or if she were raped) and a human's right to life. The decision seems impossible, and I think that it most likely is. People still get fired up about it, though. We waste a lot more energy on arguing about it than trying to find solutions to the problem.
I'm sure women who are for abortion or who have gotten one struggle with the implications - are they taking a human life? And pro-life supporters should struggle with taking away a woman's choice to be pregnant when she wants to be pregnant, and not against her will. What we need to do as adults is consider each side carefully and thoroughly, putting any opinion-tainting factors on the back-burner in the process. This is society's problem; something we all deal with as human beings. So let us consider it peacefully and with the mind to solve it, without all the bickering and divisiveness! Because it is everyone's problem and everyone's job to try to fix it, without pointing the finger of accusation in the process.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
A New Mystique?
Alright everyone! Here's the sample column I submitted with my application. Let me know what you think of it! And wish me luck!!
Last semester, my RA gave everyone on my hall a survey to fill out and post next to our doors. It had the standard get-to-know you type questions, but it also asked, “What are your hopes for the future?” I gave this a lot of thought and answered, “To become a Clinical Psychologist, run my own business, and publish my writing.”Over the next few weeks, I noticed that most other girls wrote variations of “I hope to marry a hot guy and have kids.” I was amazed that the majority of the 60 girls on my hall seemed to have no hopes for the future besides marriage and children. I’m not saying that these are unworthy aspirations for a young woman – but they are certainly not ambitions.
This trend makes me a little dubious. Are many young women still coming to college just to find a husband? This is the 21st century! We are way past the tight-laced Victorian era, the fight for women’s suffrage, the “Holly Homemakers” of the 50’s, the era of the Feminine Mystique! Yet many young women still don’t have well-defined ambitions for the future.
Maybe I’m wrong that their only wish is to get married and have kids, but this trend at least brings to light a surprising lack of goals for the future among young college girls. After all those years of fighting for women’s rights as equals in the workplace and in the political arena, a lot of women still show ambivalence at best toward the idea of committing to a career. And this commitment plays a vital role in forming our identities as individuals moving in the larger world.
Feminism is becoming a dirty word again, but ladies, we still have a long way to go. When I attended Susan Faludi’s talk on feminism earlier this semester, she explained that women today still earn 15% less than men doing the same work, and they still work the same top 10 jobs as 30 years ago, most of which are not full-commitment careers.
I want to see more young women aspiring to be doctors, lawyers, scientists, businesswomen. I want to see more women breaking into male-dominated fields. I want to see more women pushing themselves to stretch their boundaries and test their intelligence through challenging careers. Yes, more and more women are achieving this, but many people today ignore the fact that we still have more progress to make.
We live in a time in which having a family and investing ourselves into challenging careers don’t have to be mutually exclusive. So let’s break free of the stereotypes and let ourselves become immersed in an exciting and fulfilling career, too.
Let’s cast aside the fear of failure, ignore the people who say we can’t, and take hold of our futures, push our boundaries, expand our minds, and enter that crazy, scary, exciting world of work with our heads held high – because we are women, and nothing can stop us, not even ourselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)