Blog 10- Wachowski Response

In Sydney, Australia, I finally came out to my family. When I told my mom what was going on, she jumped on a plane immediately. It was this big, tear-soaked baptism, and she confessed that she had been afraid to arrive and grieve the loss of her son. But when she arrived she found it wasn’t so much a death as it was a discovery. That there was this other part of me, an unseen part, and she felt it was like a gift because now she could get to know that part of me. [applause]

We went to dinner. I dressed as feminine as I could, wanting to be seen by strangers as Lana. Hoping that waiters would not call me “sir” or “he,” as if these people suddenly had the power to confirm or deny my existence. My mom is also a bit talkative. She always introduces herself to the waiter or waitress. And she’s like, “Hi, I’m Lynne. This is my daughter Lana.” And the waitress smiles and says, “Wow, she looks just like you.” [applause]

When my dad arrived he shrugged it off easier than accepting that his wife and daughter had once voted for Jane Byrne instead of Harold Washington [for Chicago mayor in 1983] -- a choice that still rankles him today. He said, “Look, if my kid wants to sit down and talk to me I’m a lucky man. What matters is that you’re alive, you seem happy, and that I can put my arms around you and give you a kiss.” [applause] Having good parents is just like the lottery. You’re just like, “Oh my god, I won the lottery! What the -- I didn’t do anything!”  (Wachowski, Lana. HRC Visiblity Ward Acceptance, 2012).

               I found this (very long) excerpt from the speech to be fascinating. Prior to encountering Lana in class I didn't knew a single thing about either her or her brother. Despite my lack of prior knowledge about her, I still found her speech to be both entertaining  and quite telling. This excerpt was particularly fascinating because it made me wonder how her parents found it within themselves to be so instantaneously accepting, at least externally. I would suspect that internally they may have still had to wrestle some of the emotions that such change in their daughter uncovered, but they still managed to be outstandingly supportive. From my limited experience with the topic of transgender experience, very few parents are as boldly and instantly accepting of their child's choice. Many parents never reach any level of  acceptance, no matter how many years pass. I was moved almost to tears at some parts of Lana's speech and the segment about her parents I found to be very moving.
            I particularly loved how Lana highlighted her father's greater frustration with her voting choices than her gender choices. This emphasis served to highlight that perhaps a gender choice is not quite as significant as it is often presented to be. Of course it is significant and important to an individual that is embracing an identity that is fitting for them; but another person's choice should not be so significant to the rest of us. Our entire understanding of who are person was, who a person is , and who a person can be, should never be  wrapped up in one word such as male or female.
                Perhaps it says something about my own acceptance of transgender individuals that I find the Wachowski parents' acceptance of their daughter so amazing; but I feel that put in the same situation it would be difficult to even attempt to put on such a supportive face. I consider myself an open minded an accepting person, but even thinking about being put in the same situation as Lana's parents puts questions into my mind about how supportive I could be. Put in the same situation I think that I would have so many questions, and that while I would still  love my child, my instinct would be to ask why, over and over again. I would also have to mourn the loss of a child who will never be quite as I imagined him or her to be. I'd like to think that after a brief adjustment period I would be a parent as good as Lana's mother or father. I also sincerely hope I'd choose a partner capable of doing the same thing. Lana noted that she felt like she had one the parent lottery, and that is a feeling that  I wish so many other children could experience.

Wachowski, Lana. "HRC Visibility Award Acceptance." Human Rights Campaign Annual Gala. Human Rights Campaign. Westin St. Francis, San Francisco. 20 Oct. 2012. Speech.

Blog 9- Berger Response

     "You painted a naked woman because you enjoyed looking at her, you put a mirror in her hand and called it the painting Vanity, thus morally condemning the woman whose nakedness you had depicted for your own pleasure." (Burger, p 51, 1972)

            I had read this particular Berger piece once before for a prior class, and I distinctly remembered this quote as soon as I reopened the chapter. It struck me because it seemed to be a blatant indictment against a cultural idea that has permeated popular culture. Day in and day out women are made to be put on display; they are portrayed in television, in print, in tabloids, and even in well reputed news publications as objects to be on display. Female newscasters are only ever presented with hair perfectly done, makeup in place, and a perfectly coordinated outfit. The media industry portrays women not as entire human beings but rather as breasts, thighs, necks, legs; all of these pieces are bought and sold like any other commodity. Many times, in music videos and commercials, women are portrayed as a series of body shots that never show their face. Women become diminished to the parts that make up their whole for the pleasure of the consumer that is not interested in knowing anything else.
         Many times, even the most intelligent and supposedly well respected women are siphoned down into only the cut of a dress rather than a three dimensional, living, breathing individual. In 2007, Senator Hillary Clinton's black v-neck shirt precipitated a Washington Post article of over 700 words. When Michelle Obama toured Yellowstone National Park wearing a pair of shorts, the Washington Post style section again published an extensive article about the length of the shorts and the manner in which they inappropriately showcased the first lady's well toned legs.I found this to be absurd. Had a stylist or a male photographer dressed these women in such outfits, Clinton may have been applauded for adding some variety to her wardrobe. Obama would have been lauded for her well toned figure. Yet when these women chose to dress themselves this way, they became the objects of intense scrutiny.
      While Berger addresses the way in which the mirror is placed to call a painting vanity, I also think it is important to note that within the art he discusses, there is also the assumption that no woman should take pleasure in their own appearance, the way Obama or Clinton may have. It is only when the nakedness suits the male viewer that it is acceptable. That when a woman derives any pleasure or pride in her appearance she is vain, silly, selfish. Calling a woman vain for appreciating her own beauty, for even daring to look at that beauty usurps a woman of her power to claim her own body and to be proud of it. This can have long-lasting and damaging effects.

Berger, John. "Chapter 3." Ways of seeing: based on the BBC television series with John Berger. London: British Broadcasting Corp. ;1977. 45-64. Print.

Blog 8- Hughes Response

"When one encounters prejudice in behavior or attitude, one's impaired body 'dys-appears'. The body of a person with speech impairment 'dysappears' when faced with (socially produced) embodied norms of communication.Since these norms largely reflect the carnal information of non-disabled people, the relationship of disabled people to them is one of distinct disadvantage. The dys-appearance of the impaired body is structured by this disadvantage." (Hughes, Paterson, p. 603, 1999).

         Prior to this reading I had never encountered the concept of 'dys-appearance' in the way that it was discussed and defined by Paterson and Hughes in the reading. I initially misunderstood the true meaning of the word, despite reading the entire article. I interpreted it to mean the sensation of a person being lost behind their impairments. I didn't, or couldn't quite unify the idea of "disappearance" as I know it, with the sensation of becoming hyper aware of your body. After class, and after reading the article for a second time, I began to understand the experience of dysappearance. I correlated the term to experiences in my own life; times where I had become super aware of the limitations of my body. I am not what anyone would call disabled, but I certainly was never picked first for any sports team. I lack any semblance of hand-eye coordination. I have been made aware of my lack of coordination on many occasions, and it it always followed by a period during which I am hyper-conscious about my body and its capabilities. Yet this is nothing to what it must be like for an individual to be forced to constantly encounter and acknowledge the limitations of their own body.
       I took some time as I went about my day to investigate how it is that our society is formed to the carnal information of non disabled people, people largely like myself. My dorm bed is high off the ground, and being short, even I require a step stool to get into bed. An individual with difficultly climbing, walking, or holding their own body weight would be unable to sleep in my bed. My shower is built to be wheelchair accessible, but my apartment itself is accessible only by stairs, and I don't think the door to the bathroom is wide enough to let a wheelchair enter. On a day to day basis I am required to utilize the internet to read, write, analyze and access assignments. I am able to do this because I have no difficulties remaining seated for a long period of time, and have the dexterity to complete many hours of writing and typing. I take a bus several times a day, that while in theory is handicapped accessible, rarely functions in that capacity. I rarely think about it, but the majority of my life would be inaccessible to people with a variety of impairments. Prior to reading this article I don't think I'd ever thought of myself as advantaged by virtue of the capabilities of my body. Now I see that the structures that provide others with a disadvantage in society, clearly provide me with an advantage in society. I have always presumed to be on a level playing field, but it is abundantly clear that the presumption is inaccurate, and that many societal infrastructures that I perceive to be innocuous serve as structures that enable the dys-appearance of a disabled body.

Paterson, Kevin, and Bill Hughes. "Disability Studies and Phenomenology: The carnal politics of everyday life."Disability and Society 14.5 (1999): 597-610. Print.

Blog 7- Miller Response

"People everywhere enjoy dividing the population into distinct categories. In Greece, Hippocrates (406-377?BC) classified people as sanguine, phlegmatic, melancholic, and choleric on the basis of body fluids or “humors.” These days the Internet serves as a source for all kinds of information on personality types with Web pages devoted to classifying human and even canine characters. Japanese women’s magazines reflect a similar fascination with individual traits and characteristics, featuring 
an amazing variety of methods for ascertaining taipu or “types” in 
almost any issue." (Miller, 1997, p. 143). 

               I found this article interesting because while its scope was largely limited to the human (particularly female) archetypes described and quantified in Japanese women's magazines, the content of the surveys that Miller discussed did not seem foreign at all. In fact, the bizarre survey topics ranging from eyebrow shape to blood type seemed all too familiar American magazines, especially the magazines targeted at young women contain many surveys of this sort. A quick glance at the Seventeen Magazine website reveals that at any moment young girls can take a quiz that will provide a "party personality" or a quiz that will delineate your true "perfume personality." For those more interested in love, quizzes can be taken to determine "If he really likes me," or "Does your guy flirt too much?" My natural comfort and familiarity with the quizzes discussed in the article caused me too question if perhaps I am too comfortable being labeled and pushed into bizarre and seemingly unnatural categories; or if I am far too comfortable labeling others utilizing an arbitrary set of guidelines.. I took a quiz to discover my "Halloween Candy Personality" and discovered that I am a "Smartie" personality. Seventeen claimed that:

 "You’re clever, focused, and always on your game. You see everything as a chance to learn something new or be creative, and you’re always striving to do your best. And just like your candy alter-ego, you’re like a sugar rush personified: When people get one taste of your energy, they can’t help but coming back for more!"

        Upon reading the description, I started to draw correlations between the description and what I know and believe to be true about myself. I read it jokingly to a friend sitting next to me, and soon she said, "I wonder what type I am?!" While we were doing the quizzes all in good fun, we all too quickly got sucked up into the possibility of having our true personalities discovered by our favorite candy choices. While I have faith that I can remove myself from having the label of "Smartie" define my life, I began to wonder how deep some of the classifications can run in an individuals life. While there is some merit, and perhaps more importantly, some inherent comfort in the ability to classify ourselves and  in turn, classify others, I think that such classifications can be as stifling as they are beneficial. Such would be the case if an individual lacks the ability or the support to see themselves beyond the strictures of the category. This could also be the case when an individual lacks the resources to define themselves in other ways. Alternatively, such classifications may leave an individual who is provided with a bevy of contrasting personality types feeling fractured, and spending ever more time researching their possible personality types in the depths of the internet.

Miller, L. (1997), People Types: Personality Classification in Japanese Women's Magazines. The Journal of Popular Culture, 31: 143–159.

Blog Entry 6- Jolie Response

“For any woman reading this, I hope it helps you to know you have options. I want to encourage every woman, especially if you have a family history of breast or ovarian cancer, to seek out the information and medical experts who can help you through this aspect of your life, and to make your own informed choices.” (Jolie, 2012)

    This article was particularly interesting to me because I have a close family connection to the BRCA genes. When my great aunt died of breast cancer, my grandmother (who is my great aunt’s twin sister), and my own mother were offered the opportunity to be tested for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. While my grandmother accepted, my mother did not, because she didn’t feel a particular need to know. My mother felt that she was proactive about her health, and that spending time worrying about if and when a disease could strike, was counterproductive to her health. Life is stressful enough without worrying about something that could happen. I was unsure how I felt about the situation, as I felt that I wanted to know if there was a chance that I could have inherited the gene. My mother’s decision was supported when my grandmother tested negative for the gene, meaning that the chances my mother or I could have the defect are very low.

While my family and I had the options to look further into the possibility of our exposure to the BRCA genes, I think that it’s important to note that not everyone has access to those options. While I know Angelina Jolie is well acquainted with the disparities in health care and treatment that plague the world, probably far better acquainted than I am, I found that her article neglected to address the untold number of individuals who will never have the options that Jolie had due to their socioeconomic status. While she addressed the cost of the gene testing being an obstacle for many women, she did not take it any farther than that. Many women are restricted from taking action beyond testing, due to the current infrastructure of our healthcare system. Many surgeons are hesitant, if not downright resistant, to performing a completely preventative double mastectomy. If the doctor consents, it can be an entirely different battle to get the insurance company to consent. While many other countries base their healthcare systems on preventative medicine, the United States does not. The United States current model of healthcare operates like a business that capitalizes when individuals fall ill, but not a business in which all people are free to purchase the services they feel that they require.

              Only individuals with a large amount of disposable income would be able to even consider taking the time off of work to undergo the surgery. Only a very few individuals would be able to afford not only a mastectomy, but the reconstructive surgery that follows,  and the follow up visits with the physician. Some may argue that a reconstructive surgery is not necessary but I would argue that it is very much a part of a whole healing process. For individuals that live alone there would be costs to factor in such as someone to take care of the chores, someone to help them to the bathroom, someone to do all the things they cannot do for themselves in the early stages of recovery. While many people have families that can do these things for them, not all people do. Not everyone’s family can simply wait by their side as they recover,  the same way the Jolie described Brad Pitt doing.

              I respect and applaud Jolie for the decision that she made to rid both her own mind and her children’s mind of the fear of losing a fight with a disease as deadly as breast cancer. However, I found her piece to neglect many of the issues surrounding breast cancer. While some women will have the options that Jolie presents in her piece available to them, a large percentage of women will not have the same opportunities. It is these women I find are neglected in the piece, and in much literature surrounding breast cancer. Many of these women do not wish to be uninformed, they are not trying to hide from their own health care responsibilities, they simply do not have options available.

Jolie, Angelina. "My Medical Choice." New York Times 14 May 2013: A25. Print.

Blog Entry 5- Schalet Response

"...No country forms a more stark contrast for comparison with the United States than does the Netherlands: Dutch teenagers are far less likely to either become pregnant or contract an STD than aretheir American peers. [4,5] American teenage girls are 3 times as likely to have an abortion,

and 8 times as likely to give birth, as are their Dutch counterparts. Moreover, the sexual maturation of teenagers does not inspire the same fears among parents, providers, and policy-makers in the Netherlands as it does in the United States. Public policies do admonish young people to understand the responsibilities that come with having relationships and sex -- most notably, the responsibility to use contraception effectively..." (Schalet, 2004, p. 3).

             I found this entire article to be very interesting, and chose this quote because it seemed to provide a good overview of what Schalet discusses throughout the piece. As a young woman coming of age just in the time period that Schalet has made the focus of her research, it was interesting to see a bit more of an outside and fairly objective summation of the current views on teenage sexuality. I was particularly intrigued by the discussion that the sexual maturation of teenagers in the Netherlands does not cause the same epidemic fear that is so prominent in the Americas. When I as a freshman in high school, my mom made me sit and watch an Oprah special with her. For two hours, Oprah and a variety of other experts discussed the dangers of a sexual relationship with two fourteen year-olds, Pierce and Courtney. My mother didn't say one word the entire time; except to tell me that I couldn't go hang out with my friends until the show was over.  I had to sit and watch the entire thing. It seemed to drag on for far longer than two hours. At the time I was just uncomfortable in the silence, now I can understand that perhaps she was afraid that she would say the wrong thing, or afraid to acknowledge the fact that I was growing older.  It was clear that she wanted some message to get across to me, but more conversation, rather than silent staring at a television screen may have been more productive. In fact, any conversation to date would be better for me than the current policy in my household that we just don't talk about sex. Perhaps that policy exists in my house because my grandparents never made sex a discussion at home either, but I still wish that it was different. Making sex a safe topic to discuss in my own home is something I can do for my children when I become a parent. 

        The article, along with the reflection it caused me to have, also made me wonder when we all shift from the teenagers that are capable of love and deep emotional connections, into the adults that think that teenagers can't get involved in deep and meaningful relationships; into the adults that undermine a teenagers feelings as frivolous and fleeting. My current boyfriend and I had a discussion about this topic recently. When talking about his younger sister who is just starting to show an interest in boys, I said that she really seemed to like one young man who we had seen a lot of. He offhandedly said that she was too young to really like somebody anyway. We sat for a minute, and he reminded himself, out loud, how he had loved a  girl at fourteen. Or had thought so. Even if that love was different from a love he could feel when he was older, it was love, and love that should be valued, nonetheless. I wanted to disagree at first, but then I realized that perhaps I shouldn't, particularly because I am sure there are older individuals who shake off the importance of my own relationship.
        We all think that teenagers are capable of loving their parents, of loving their aunts and uncles, grandmothers and grandfathers, of loving their friends; why not of loving a romantic partner? If believing in that love, and fostering it to the best of our ability, despite some discomfort, as many Dutch parents have, has the power to eliminate the need for many abortions that American teen have every year;  isn't it worth valuing? If a belief and support in that teenage love potentially has the power to dramatically cut the rates of STD infection in our country, is it not something that should at least be considered? I am not suggesting that all parents should open up the bedrooms of their sons and daughters for a free for all, but there should be at least some consideration given to what the positive impacts may be of fostering healthy and successful teen relationships. American parents may find that as they support their teenagers, while still admonishing them to do the right things (as Schalet mentions the Dutch do), they will find better outcomes for their children. I know that healthier children and healthier families is something that all families, Dutch or American strive to have.

Schalet, Amy. "Must We Fear Adolescent Sexuality?" Medscape General Medicine 6(4), 2004.

Blog Entry 4- McWhorter Response

“Yet despite its having no biological, genetic, or even clear morphological or social reference, race is a significant part of contemporary Western reality. It functions in social institutions- both officially, as a means for distributing goods and determining representation, as in affirmative action law, and the US census, and unofficially as a means of identification, discrimination, and affiliation. It does not so much mean  (that is direct or attention to a given object) as  operate ( that is, create divisions that enable systems of control to maintain themselves).”  (McWhorter, 2004 p. 52-53)

I always choose to write my blog entries after a reading has been discussed in class, not in hopes of plagiarizing what was spoken about, but because the class lectures always cause me to draw the reading into a different light than I would have done on my own. McWhorter’s piece is no different. I found it interesting, but also a bit dense in its construction. I struggled with understanding exactly how she felt the construction of sex  related to the construction of race, and how that was influential on our culture today. After class I feel that I have a much greater appreciation for her article. I was intrigued by the way in which McWhorter presents race as essentially an entity unto itself that serves to maintain control of the population and to uphold the current social order. It is not natural, instead it is a manifestation of our desire to control and subjugate one another, to empower some people and to demoralize others . It allows us to categorize and sort individuals in ways that make each person easy to identify; both on an institutional and governmental level, and also in our day to day lives.

I had previously thought of race as a characteristic of people, something that is a part of a person. After reading McWhorter’s article, I now think that instead, it is the people who are made to be a part of a race. This seems like a small difference in phrasing, but I think that it is a critical one. It is not individuals that inherently have a race, but it is that they are cast into a race due to external characteristics far beyond their control. It is just that the casting is so latent, that most of us neglect to notice it taking place; particularly when our race provides us with an advantage over other individuals.This leads us to believe that race has always, and will always be a part of life. In this way we all are acted upon by the power of the institution of race, and allow it to continue to divide, subjugate and categorize us. This new view on raise now causes me to wonder what could happen if we could get a large portion of society to buy into the idea that race is not an inevitable construction, but rather one that has been created for a very specific person. In part, I think that some of the population would demand that we uproot race as an institution. On the other hand, I think that while perhaps we could eliminate "race" as it is today, that another form of categorization would arise to take its place.

McWhorter, Ladelle . "Sex, Race, and Biopower: A Foucauldian Genealogy." Hypatia 19.3 (2004): 38-62. Print.

Blog Entry 3- Dreger Response

“Among those advocating prenatal dexamethasone, New seems to have been particularly concerned that CAH-affected girls may fail to grow up to be heterosexual wives and mothers. Speaking to a group of parents of children with CAH in 2001 at a meeting organized by the CARES Foundation, New showed a photo of a girl with ambiguous genitalia and said:

‘The challenge here…to see what could be done to restore this baby to normal female appearance which would be compatible with her parents presenting her as a girl, with her eventually becoming somebody’s wife, and having normal sexual development, and becoming a mother. And she has all the machinery for motherhood, and therefore nothing should stop that, if we can repair her surgically and help her psychologically to continue to grow and develop as a girl (New 2001a)’” (Dreger et al, p. 61)

            Maria New is a well-known, well respected physician, who even the article’s authors recognize as having done a great deal of good for the medical community at large. Given her status as a physician she is also clearly well educated. Given all of this, it is almost shocking to see the way in which New is so concerned with the notion that all girls must grow up to be heterosexual wives and mothers. It seems there can be no higher accomplishment for an individual with XX chromosomes than to successfully utilize the machinery provided by nature to produce more offspring. Juxtaposed with all of the modern medical technology presented in the article it seems to be an archaic notion from another time that has somehow persisted until now. I found New’s phrasing in her speech at the CAH meeting to be particularly striking, especially as she is addressing parents of children with CAH. She treats the children born with CAH as if they are broken individuals. They must be restored, helped, and repaired so that they can function. Such phrasing almost incites parents to take action, to begin a dexamethasone treatment the next time they are pregnant, or to warn their friends about the dangers of CAH. New robs the parents of the opportunity to see their children as individuals who have developed differently from other individuals, rather than damaged goods.

            The phrasing New uses also likely allows her in a way to dehumanize the infants she is working with. It may be more difficult to tinker with bodies of infants who house minds, and eventually will house dreams and hopes; but it is far easier to tinker with a body who must be fixed in order to properly utilize its machinery. The body becomes one that instead of housing hopes and dreams, houses eggs, fallopian tubes, and a uterus. I would also feel remiss not to mention that perhaps this child’s dreams would not include a life path compatible with New’s ideals. Perhaps some parents also do not feel that their child would have to conform to such a path. This infant may have grown up never wanting to be somebody’s wife or somebody’s mother. Yet their choice to lead such a life becomes much more difficult when New and other doctors like her make a decision to alter the anatomy or physiology of the child. This very specific type of phrasing may also make it easier to brush off many of the consequences that can come with the administration of dexamethasone; they become unfortunate side effects of the work required to fix a larger problem.

 

Dreger, Alice, Ellen Feder, and Anne Tamar-Mattis. "Prenatal Dexamethasone for Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia." Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 9.3 (2012): 277-294. Print.

Blog Entry 2- DePaulo Response

“There’s something wrong with the set of ‘truths’ we hold to be self evident. The mythology of marriage and singlehood does not square with the actual lives of people who are married and people who are single.” (DePaulo, 2006 p. 61)

               I was grabbed by the way that DePaulo referred to the current cultural view on marriage as the “mythology” of marriage. I tend to associate myths with fantastical images of Medusa with snakes for hair, or of Jack climbing the Giant Beanstalk. Myth is not what I associate with something I encounter in my daily life. The very specific phrasing caused me to reevaluate my preconceived notions about marriage and singlehood, and compare these ideas to the information presented by DePaulo. If that was DePaulo’s intent, which I suspect that it was, it was a very smart word choice.

            I can admit that I am guilty of believing that the large majority of married people are happier than their single counterparts. Much like the college students surveyed, I tend to perceive married individuals as happier. They have found their one true love, they always have a partner to support them, and they are never alone. I watch Say Yes to the Dress with my mom and have on one occasion or another wasted a few hours daydreaming about married life. However, given the number of divorced people that I know, I wonder why I have always thought that married people are the happier ones. My parents are married, but both sets of grandparents are divorced, my aunts and uncles are all divorced, even my boyfriend’s parents are divorced. At every point in my life, I have had a friend, or two, or three who had parents going through divorce. The large majority of people I know ultimately decided that marriage did not, in fact, make them happier. Instead, they decided that divorce and singlehood, or at least some state of being unwed was a better option. I even know many people who have lived their entire adult lives as single, and these are often the people I envy most! These are usually the individuals who have the opportunity to travel across the globe, or to pick up and move somewhere when a great job offer comes along.

            Despite the evidence to the contrary, perhaps I accept the standard cultural view on marriage because as DePaulo says, it is presented to me as a self-evident truth. The superiority of marriage is presented as something that does not require evidence, rather it just is. While women, in particular, can achieve a great deal in life, they are always looked down upon if they are unmarried. As if to say that accomplishments in life are valuable, but not as valuable as being in a traditional marriage. For it is important to note that not only is the superiority of marriage the valued cultural standard, but it is really the superiority of heterosexual marriage that is championed above all else. I am interested to read DePaulo’s book on my own, and watch as she unravels each myth that surrounds the happiness of married and single individuals. I may ultimately find that I still want to get married- which I think that I do- but I will be relieved of the societal pressure to do so.

 

DePaulo, Bella. "Science and the Single Person." Singled Out: How Singles are Stereotyped, Stigmatized and Ignored, and Still Live Happily Ever After. New York: St. Martin's Griffin, 2006. 28-61. Print.

Blog Entry 1- Nussbaum Response

“Radical changes are occurring in what democratic societies teach the young, and these changes have not been well thought through. Thirsty for national profit, nations, and their systems of education, are heedlessly discarding skills that are needed to keep democracies alive. If this trend continues, nations all over the world will soon be producing generations of useful machines, rather than complete citizens who can think for themselves, criti­cize tradition, and understand the significance of another person’s sufferings and achievements. The future of the world’s democra­cies hangs in the balance.” (Nussbaum, 2010 p. 2)

                     My educational career has long been dominated by a conversation centered on the loss of the arts in the classroom. Parents would discuss it at PTA meetings or while all the kids were on the swings. Teachers would talk about how they couldn't do a certain club, or teach a certain thing the way they used to. Starting in third or fourth grade, I began to notice commercials on television talking about how important music and art were in the classroom. The Save the Arts Foundation had a number of celebrities to speak on their behalf in between the cartoons on Nickelodeon. I was not fond of playing my recorder, and I was not good at painting in art class; I didn’t understand the importance of any of the classes that I thought were my ‘art’ classes. However, I did love to read, to explore the vast unknown of the world through the pages of a book. In fact, I still do. One of the best college application essays I ever wrote began, “Our relationship may have begun tumultuously, but reading was undoubtedly my first true love.” My parents encouraged me to read, and read to me any time that they could. My love of reading was fostered through the Drop Everything And Read (DEAR) program, and was multiplied by my Gifted and Talented (REACH) program. Twice a week, from second grade on, I was pulled from my regular classes and put into the wonderful classroom of Mr. Bowman.  I don’t know how he ended up in an elementary school, he is one of the most intelligent people I have ever met, but I’m grateful he did.

Our very first class, he introduced us to what he called the process of critical thinking. It is a process that has stuck with me to this very day. He encouraged us to ponder things, to explore the implications that our decisions could have on the future. I created an ancient alien society complete with artifacts like the handmade paper my mom and I created. I analyzed the relevance of laws, such as the one that begins, “Pickles must bounce!” I read a version of Cinderella from every culture. The Yiddish one is still my favorite. While my other classes taught me to read, to write, to memorize and regurgitate information, in REACH I learned how to apply those skills for more than spitting back the right answer on a test. The skills I gained through a education with a broader scope, have empowered me in the classroom, to ask questions, to get answers wrong, and to think a bit outside of the box. I would like to consider myself on the path to becoming a well-rounded citizen, and not just a cog that will serve the industrial machine of our country well. I was one of only a few students exposed to this class; it is one of the many specialty humanities centered classes that is being eliminated as budget cuts seek to streamline education. While it remains at my elementary school for now, I fear that it may go the way of so many other classes that have disappeared from the curriculum.

Given my experience, the changes that Nussbaum presents are frightening to me, and I feel lucky to have perhaps narrowly escaped them. Even if I only escaped them by the virtue of the school my parents put me in. However, while I am grateful for my education, I am also worried about the future. I was lucky to gain access to all of the resources I had during my elementary school years, and continue to be lucky as I am able to pursue more liberal arts subjects in conjunction with my pre-med courses. Yet I still feel wholly unprepared to tackle the complex issues that are facing my generation. I fear that students who are not allowed to explore complex issues within the safety of a classroom will not only lack the ability to do so in the real world, but will also fear taking on the responsibility difficult problems can present. This is what leaves the very essence of democracy hanging in the balance. Empowered citizens seek to hold the reigns of their future and demand democracies; citizens afraid that they will be unable to handle the challenges of their time are the citizens more vulnerable to the loss of democracy. It will suddenly sound comforting to allow another individual, or another organization to handle making the difficult choices.

Nussbaum, Martha. "The Silent Crisis." Not For Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010. 1-11. Print.

I also found this quote to be fitting. It is from the film Detachment starring Adrien Grenier.