Thursday, September 6, 2007

One point that I thought was very interesting in Body Matters was Segal’s statement that “the vagina has served as a condensed symbol of all that is secret, shameful, and unspeakable in our culture.” The statement seems extreme but in many respects it is true. I can see how the vagina might be seen as a representation of things that are secret to our culture being that the vagina is within the body hidden from sight. As Simone de Beauvoir sees it, the vagina also evokes mysteriousness even to women themselves. Due to its role in intercourse, the vagina is clearly a symbol for sex and all things dealing with it. Sex in our culture is often viewed as something shameful, and definitely taboo, at least for a woman. We saw from the Viagra and Lyriana commercials that this is true. As we discussed, the woman in the Lyriana commercial is alone indicating female sexual dysfunction is something private or embarrassing whereas the Viagra commercial is happier and the condition seems to be more accepted. Can anyone else think of other examples of things that the vagina symbolizes or do you even agree with this statement at all?

Before reading Taxonomy for Human Beings I had never given much thought to the origin of the word Mammalia, so it was interesting to read Schiebinger’s argument that the political and scientific beliefs of the time were what influenced Linnaeus’s decision. I found society’s hypocrisy toward the breast to be upsetting. Schiebinger points out from mythology of how the breast represents “generation, regeneration, and renewal.” Yet with all these remarkable powers, society deems that the woman’s place resides in the domestic realm or worse yet that a woman resembles more of a beast than a man does.

2 comments:

Monkey said...

"Schiebinger points out from mythology of how the breast represents “generation, regeneration, and renewal.” Yet with all these remarkable powers, society deems that the woman’s place resides in the domestic realm or worse yet that a woman resembles more of a beast than a man does."

I agree with your ambiguity. It is the same one I tried to confront while reading this article. On one hand, it is almost flattering that across species what resides with women is the determining, important factor. On the other, this is all women are seen as. The naming of Mammalia almost suggests that in every species, while lactation and breasts are the linking factors, it means that women must be subordinate. It was also dissapointing to read that even if Mammalia is a celebration of women, that when viewing breasts of different cultures the physiology is seen as something disgusting, barbaric, and wild. The discrepencies that exist here with female physiology only proves that even if this taxonomy is a celebration of women's biology, it is by no means a step towards equality or even truth in the female biology.

Monkey said...

ambivalence*