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.