Ma Vie en Rose...?

The title of this film is very ironic. Because of its similarity to the phrase "rose colored glasses," the title first calls to mind an inference a long the lines of a perpetual state of sweet contentment. Ludovic's life, however, is anything but sweet or content. The child had the misfortune of what many psychologists call (I am pretty sure they call it) "gender displacement syndrome."

Media either completely ignores or makes such issues a joke. A Will and Grace episode that aired over the summer showed the other gay character attempting to revert to "normalcy" by going to a meeting intended to "straighten out" gay people. One couple there that declared themselves a success consisted of a stereotypically "butch" ex-lesbian and a stereotypically effeminate ex-gay man. I did not watch the whole episode, but such things on T.V. is one of the reasons people hold negative feelings against and stigmatize LBGT individuals. While the concept was good, their attempt to expose the ridicolousness of the idea of trying to change people's sexuality only trivialized a little acknowledged topic. While people speak out against the stigma, the battle is still far from reaching a middle ground. This is made obvious in the language used by people that do so by announcing their own membership in the LGBT group: "coming out." As I mentioned in a blog about Creed's article, it is worse to try to blend in to an accepted group knowing that you do not meet society's standards for the group, get away with it for a while, and get found out. People do not like being deceived (according to their standards) and Ludo soon discovers what societies standards are and the truth in the statement.

It makes you wonder what you would do if you were Ludovic or any of his other relatives. It is one thing to say liberal things but what would we honestly do if we had a child that was LGBT? What are the possible ways Ludo could end up when he gets older? What can we do to try to make sure people like him can live successful, sweetly content lives?

Not Just Passing

Women who pass as men are not necessarily products of oppression. Instead “It is passing that is a product of oppression,” according to Leslie Feinberg in her book Transgender Warriors. The idea of oppression in relation to the transgender community is one that I had not fully considered until reading this chapter by Feinberg. Regardless of how much I understand or empathize with issues of transgender, I see no reasoning for the injustice with which these men and women, these people, have been treated. I didn’t realize, until reading this article, how largely they have been persecuted in the past. I see no such mass murdering and abuse in my world today. In Atlanta, it is not public policy to drag a crossdresser in an open cart through streets of angry mobs to be hanged, as it was in seventeenth century England. However, I can see this oppression’s continuation in the fear and hostility with which the transgender community is confronted socially.

It is important, though, how we process the issue of hostility, especially hostility of women. Feinberg is right, it is tempting to see women who’ve passed as men as products of oppression. Such a thought is tempting because it seems right. It isn’t an adverse way of thinking, it provides reasoning, and it sympathizes with these women. Nevertheless, it robs the person of even further integrity than the supposed economic and social inequality they’re escaping has. It is seeing them as weak, an escapee. It is seeing them as someone faking their true identity in order to profit socially and financially, rather than seeing that person as the stronger for their passing. Seeing them as making the difficult decision to be who they truly feel they are, which in light of the possible punishment, in fact, shows a lot of strength in that person, opposed to the usual weakness.

Feinberg goes on to destruct this claim that women who pass as men are not products of oppression, with various arguments and examples from history. Understanding transgenders’ responses to oppression and understanding from the right perspective, is essential in seeing each of them as individual, whole, people.

The Power of Society

I found Fausto-Sterlings' "Dueling Dualisms" quite intriguing and interesting. I'm glad she provided a thorough example to illustrate her purpose for the article. Her example of Mary Patrino's situation clearly demonstrated the difficulty of placing intersex people into polished categories of gender. I was horrified by how Patrino's situation was handled---she had been completely stripped of her athletic career and social respect because she had been born intersex and did not even know it. These type of situations reflect the power society has on identity. The concepts of 'natural' and 'normal' are conflicting words, which society plays on frequently. Our society defines 'normal' as male and female---nothing else. Yet, what science and medicine has shown us is that 'natural' people aren't always male or female, regardless of society's depictions. It is imperative to educate society about 'natural' beings and their existence in society, so those people do not have to fall into a category that doesn't define them.
In Creed's "Lesbian Bodies: Tribades, Tomboys, and Tarts" Creed discussed a series of misconceptions many people have about lesbians. Throughout our media, lesbians are portrayed as sexy models, who perform sexual acts with each other to satisfy a man's pleasure. Even with Professor Bailey's google search of "lesbians", the results with only pornographic pictures confirmed these stereotypes. I'm glad that Creed corrected these stereotypes by examining lesbian women in a detailed manner.
These two issues connect to a broader issues lingering in our society. One, the problem with intersex is that it is not exposed in our culture. People need to learn about this issue to understand its existence and to accept it. I know that a few shows, such as Grey's Anatomy have tackled intersex issues, which is very positive. In addition, our media must stop labeling lesbians as sexy, wild women. As long as our media allows these type of depictions, the stereotypes will never be eradicated.

Pink and Blue

K.I.S.S., keep it simple stupid. Things should be straightforward and need not be complex, what you see should be what you get. If the child is a girl, she must like pretty colors, play dress up, be very emotional, and grow up to want to marry her prince charming. If it is a boy, he must love sports, all things rough, and grow up to be a tough strong man. If the child is born with both male and female genitals, then is makes more sense to simply make the child a female because she will have better reproductive capabilities.
Congratulations ma’am you have given birth to a________. It is so interesting how the word inserted in that blanks affects so many factors. From the onset there are also minute things which already show a privileging of a particular gender. Boys are given bricks, toy truck and other geometrically stimulating toys. So when they perform better in math and sciences, it is assumed they do better because males have that innate ability and boy’s and girl’s brains develop extremely differently.
Unfortunately, we run into problems and complexities which result from trying to lump things into simple categories. There is such a discomfort with the unknown or ambiguous that we search for answers in science, something we perceive to be infallible, concrete; yet science is also influenced by culture which is anything but infallible. So the reasons provided for how to understand intersex individuals, different sexual orientation and sexual expression is not as definite as they seem.

Lesbian Bodies: Tribades, Tomboys, and Tarts

I found Barbara Creed's article Lesbian Bodies: Tribades, Tomboys, and Tarts to be extremely interesting. It showed me a perspective on the topic that I had never even thought of. From the ideas presented in the reading, I was able to see the difficulty society has in accepting a female sexual relationship. For instance, when speaking of Freud explanation as to why two women may be attracted to one another, I could not help but wonder why the world needed this answer. Why does there need to be a clear cut reason for why this type of relationship occurs? I understand that times are changing; however, I feel like in order for us to excel, the first step that we need to take is to accept what is occurring in present times. By questioning why such relationships occur, we are only hindering our progress.
The perspective of a male on a lesbian relationship is another point of this article that really demonstrated the views of society. I feel that men are not only threatened by the lesbian relationship because it may affect how they are viewed in society, but moreover because they feel they are not in control. It seems that in many of the articles that we have read, the role of women is to cater to men, to please them. This assumption, in my opinion, signifies that belief that men are the more dominant race; it is not important how a woman may feel, she is merely the object that will allow a man to feel a certain way. Furthermore, I think that men are threatened by a lesbian relationship, because they fear women sexuality. For instance, there are images that are seem as dangerous that relate to the sexuality of a female, such as the image of Medusa's Head.

Ma vie en rose: My life in pink

I just finished watching the movie “Ma vie en rose.” The end of this movie has left me with mixed-feelings. Although Ludovic is eventually accepted by his mother and family, he is openly shunned by the neighbors and society. It is a brilliant move for director Carole Scotta to set the movie in France where the stereotypical roles of gender are prevalent. In fact, there are many instances in the film where these roles are illustrated. For example, the dad is expected to provide for the family while the mother is expected to cook. Clearly, these gender roles are enforced at a young age. At the children’s show and tell day, the girls bring dolls and the boys bring trucks. When Ludo brings dolls to class, his teacher asks him, “But you want to be like Ben (the male doll), right?” As Ludo reveals his desires to be a girl more and more, these gentle suggestions turn into harsh attempts to “normalize” him. Ludo’s parents take him to see a psychologist and the neighbors sign a petition to kick him out of school. Even Ludo’s mother cracks under the pressure of society’s revulsion of her son, telling him, “it’s all your fault.”
Ludo’s experience is similar to Maria Patino’s ostracization after she was found to be a man by an Olympic committee. Like Ludo, Maria felt her loved-ones dessert her after she broke the mold of “normal.” Like “Dueling Dualism” and many of the other articles that we have read, the film explains that there is no normal. One of the neighbors says that her husband is not like Hanna’s husband; everyone is different; every family is different. One family may have one child and the next family may have four. Clearly, no set definition of “normalcy” can be given. This message is made concrete when Ludo meets Chris, or Christine, one of his female neighbors who enjoys activities that are traditionally enjoyed by males such as sling-shooting and dressing up as a cowboy. After this idea of “normal” is deconstructed, Ludo’s mother comes to a realization of her own. She realizes that no matter what, Ludo is still her child. A child. Not a little boy or a little girl, but a little child.

Ma Vie En Rose

While watching Ma Vie En Rose in the multimedia library I tried not to cry and make too many sniffling noises.  The movie was profound and did an amazing job of depicting the life of a young boy who struggled with his identity and sexuality.  The readings of the intersex that we read during this class became animated throughout this movie and made a lasting impression on me.  Throughout the movie, Ludovic is convinced that he will one day become a girl and be able to marry his best friend.  His parents, friends, and entire neighborhood disapprove of his feelings and desire to be a girl.  His family is almost completely torn apart until the end of the movie when he is accepted by their new neighborhood.  It was hard to watch a young boy not be able to understand why others thought he was wrong, including his parents.  His biological condition did not seem abnormal to him until others pointed out that this was the case.  

It was upsetting to see Ludovic's father try to force him to act more masculine in hopes of quickly fixing his "problem."  Ludovic's family and friends avoided the emotions that he felt in hopes of making him "normal."  Had his parents by the end of the movie continued to make him hide who he was, I think that Ludovic would have had more problems psychologically as he developed.  I wish that the movie had jumped to when Ludovic was mature in order to highlight his acceptance into society and allow viewers to realize it is much easier to accept everyone than condemn them.  The only person who truly tried to shed light on the situation was his teacher who wanted all of the students to accept each other despite their differences, since as she said: they were all different.  It is idyllic to think that everyone is capable of dealing with and accepting different sexualities and genders, but why can't this be possible?  

Lesbian Bodies: Tribades, Tomboys, and Tarts

This article by Barbara Creed introduced me to a topic that I had never before considered, the different stereotypes associated with the lesbian body. Before, this article I was only aware of one stereotype associated with lesbian women and that was the masculine or "butch" depiction of lesbian woman. Creed talks about this masculine body stereotype in a mainly historical perspective. She mentioned the historical trials that took place in France and Holland to determine the fate of tribades; these women who were blurring the gender lines were dealt with as Creed mentions in one of three ways: legal, surgical, or lethal. All of these methods preserve traditional gender lines. 

Another interesting topic brought up by Creed is the one-sex model versus the two-sex model. Earlier on in history the woman body was viewed as an inverted male body. This point of view is what allowed some women to be pardoned for their homosexual behavior because it was believed they were actually men. However, later on when the two-sex model triumphed in popular opinion the woman body was now viewed as an inadequate and essentially incomplete version of the male body. This model led Freud to develop his theory on female homosexuality. He proposed that it arrived from "penis envy", the desire of the women to be a man. 

The animalistic female body is a stereotype that I had never heard before. The connection between homosexuality and bestiality seems to be just another way to explain homosexuality in unfavorable terms and to make it socially unacceptable. The last stereotype Creed talks about is the narcissistic lesbian body. According to this theory the lesbian woman is totally vain and self-involved; her female partner is often depicted as a mirror image of herself. So the lesbian relationship according to this stereotype is a way to further express the self-absorption of the women involved. In each of these theories it seems that men are always trying to find a way to express female homosexuality in a way that still puts men first. For the tribade stereotype women homosexuality is explained as women wanting to be men. The other stereotypes also display homosexuality as wrong or as in the narcissistic stereotype selfish. Men are probably threatened by female homosexuality because it threatens their traditional role in society.

American Issues with Normalcy

In reading Chase and Kessler's articles on transgender genital reconstruction, I am faced with a question which I have never considered. As is noted in both articles, this minority is often silent, and the transgender condition is associated with embarrassment. I think that an aspect of American society is the desire to be "normal," and this desire is clearly reflected in the practice of cosmetic surgery on abnormal genitalia of infants.

As Chase pointed out, parents are usually eager to "fix" their child's problem quickly and early. It is generally accepted that without a clear, fixed gender, a child will not be able to function normally in society. However, as her personal experience goes to show, the surgical option is not really the solution to the problem. In fact, her life was more negatively affected by the attempts to fix the "problem" than the actual problem itself.

Kessler delves more into the concept of the desire to be "normal" in her discussion of elective cosmetic surgery. Through giving individuals the chance to look "normal," the concept of normal has changed. Kessler even claims that the "distinction between 'normal' and 'ideal' has collapsed." I definitely agree that the more our society relies on surgery to conform to social norms, this concept will become skewed. In a society where fitting in is idealized, it is definitely problematic to have a constantly shrinking perception of what is accepted as "normal."

How to determine sex?!

In her "Sexing the body : Dueling Dualisms," Anne Fausto-Sterling suggests an interesting example on sexual dichotomy. Discussing the case of an athlete Maria Patino, who had female physique but also possessed Y chromosome, the author asks "why should these (genetic materials, looks and strength) should be the deciding factors?" According to Fausto-Sterling, When a child is born with two X chromosomes along with both male and female organs, doctors tend to decide the baby to be a girl, "because of her potential to give birth." (5). She argues that deciding one's sex is role of the society not science. As I hope to pursue my career in clinical medicine, the author's argument poses a challenge. Is the determination of sex really a social matter? If so, how is our biological indicators of sex relevant to gender?

One of the Grey's Anatomy episodes deals with a "girl" who is born with both ovaries and testis. She came to the hospital to remove tumor on her ovaries. However, the tumor turns out to be on her testis instead and the girl and her parents face a dilemma. The parents tell the surgeon to remove testis during the operation without telling their daughter, but the doctor refuses to do so, saying that it is unethical to lie and it is the girl's decision not the doctors. When this hermaphroditic features are found at birth, if not the doctor, who makes the decision of determining the sex of the baby? Certainly, the baby is too young to make decision at that point. Then is it better to leave the decision making until the baby grows enough to make decisions? Fausto-Sterling seems to suggest that labeling a person as either male/female is wrong, and we need to allow more terms to describe one's sex or gender. At this point, I don't have a clear answer. I want to ask the rest of the class, what should you do if you if you are a doctor or a parent of the child born with both male and female sexual organs, how do you make the decision??

Feminism and Science--- I Would Have Never Guessed

As I read through the two articles, "Body Matters: Cultural Inscriptions" by Lynne Segal and "The Importance of Feminist Critique for Contemporary Cell Biology" I began to realize I had failed to recognize an important concept that was always in front of me. The concept of feminism has always been essential to my being, mainly due to the reason I am a woman, but I never imagined there could be a trace of feminism in the world of science. The articles provided an insight to this intriguing combination, which left me questioning the facts I consumed in the beginning of my science education. "The Importance of Feminist Critique for Contemporary Cell Biology" discusses the interaction between the egg and sperm, which clearly demonstrates the biases found in science. It justifies that a scientist's personal beliefs are reflected in his or her's scientific thought. These type of influences dismiss science's factuality, because people's thoughts are constantly being shaped by the society around them. In addition, Segal points out some very engaging topics throughout her article. Her discussion about the clitoris and vagina with their distinct characteristics defined a very compelling argument against the penis. I'm sure most people do not daunt on the fact that a male can engage in reproduction and pleasure in one step, while women are stuck with two.

It was interesting to see the contrast between the two commercials. The Viagra commercial displayed a joyous sense of erectile dysfunction, which shaped the problem into a "fun guys out." The commercial shadowed the problem by approaching the conflict with confidence and happiness. In addition, the commercial never directly addressed the problem. As for the Lyriana commercial, it was dull and depressing. The woman in despair reflected a message of shame and remorse. These type of commercials contribute to the sexist stereotypes of society, which affect the way people think. After viewing these commercials, I recalled my high school days as a pharmacy technician, where I dispensed these drugs. I remember when women would bring their prescriptions for sexually-related medications, they would be embarrassed. On the other hand, when men would bring their Viagra or Cialis prescriptions, their faces would be lit with excitement or masculine confidence.

It is eye opening for me to realize that not even science can be objective. Yet, I believe it is imperative to have feminist critiques to create a balance of scientific thought and to eliminate the biases in science, because science is crucial to our academic society.

Sexuality and Science

The two readings, “Body Matters: Cultural Inscriptions” and “The Importance of Feminist Critique for Contemporary Cell Biology” both pose interesting insights into society’s bias regarding sexuality and science. In the article “Body Matters,” Segal illuminates female sexuality which is often confused with reproduction. Although many times the birth canal or vagina become the defining characteristic of females, Segal points out that women also have a clitoris whose function is only to create sexual pleasure. This distinction is not made in a commercial for FSD. This commercial focuses on relief for problems with the vagina, no mention is given to the clitoris. Thus, the commercial does not emphasize the improvement of female enjoyment during sex rather the health of the female reproductive organ. On the other hand, Segal also explores the representation of the male penis as both the reproductive and sexual-enjoyment organ that is always erect and ready for sex. This issue is well illustrated in a Viagra commercial in which a group of men celebrate their future as sexual beings with the aid of Viagra. Thus, Segal’s message that sexuality is influenced by societal assumptions is well supported by real-world applications such as commercials.
Similarly, the report, “The Importance of Feminist Critique” exposes societal biases in the field of science. This group gives several illustrations that are clearly influenced by the societal stereotypes of the roles of men and women. For example, one textbook describes cytoplasm (representing the female) as passive and helpless, waiting to be fertilized by the active and aggressive nucleus (representing the male). Additionally, the group gives several examples of how scientists’ relationship with wives or lovers affects their interpretation of the ovum and sperm relationship. One scientist who was a dominant husband again described the sperm as the active and dominant partner compared to the lazy and inactive ovum. Clearly, the group exposes bias in the scientific community. Both articles leave the reader with the message to be aware of biases everywhere.

Intersexuality

In ""Cultural Practice" or "Reconstructive Surgery"?", Cheryl Chase combined both political, social, personal, and ethical issues to create such an interesting piece. Chase, at first, described a bit about the social and medical views of normative bodies and intersexuality in America, but compared it to practices that take place in other places of the world. In her description of hermaphrodites she clearly redefines what many Americans see as being normal in terms of sexuality. Many times people simplify sexuality into two categories, male and female, and Chase clearly states that this binary of physical sex can no longer be distinguished as easily. The idea of sex and sexuality, along with gender, it certainly changing, and Chase does a good job in describing the sentiment behind the reality of intersex children and adults.
I was most interested by Chase's discussion of medical doctors and professionals who share a very unique, and often prestigious, opinion of themselves, their work, and status in society. While Chase seems almost offended by the ease with which they make determinations and recommend surgeries, many of these doctors view themselves as saviors for both the intersexual child and its parent(s). Chase largely places blame on the doctors since they are the ones continually reinforcing the inclinations for these surgeries and policing the boundaries that determine what exactly makes a male and/or a female. Additionally, I was compelled by Chase's discussion concerning female genital mutilation versus intersexual genital mutilation, and her way of trying to recognize the lack of feminist critique. I had never really realized that doctors choose to surgically redefine intersexual children as females, as opposed to males. Once I made this realization I, too, was simply surprised that IGM has not received more attention in the US. I almost felt as though Chase was pointing out to the victimization of females and, although, we have only been in the class for a short time, we have clearly already seen this. We saw how females were almost victimized in the Lyriana commercial for their sexual problems and most definitely victimized in Schiebinger's discussion of the evolution of ideas concerning the sperm, egg, and respective roles.
I would be interested in learning more about the ISNA towards the end of the semester to see what kind of progress they are making in trying to change the treatment of intersex infants and the evolution of this new culture of support.

Male Dominated Biology (take 2--sorry)

After taking biology both semesters of my freshman year, I never would have thought that what was written in my textbook would have any sort of bias towards male dominance.  You could say that I was naive and believed that what was written was the truth.  As suggested by the second reading, I never considered biology as the oppressor of women and the victim of male social assumption.  Although I understand that personal lives as well as socio/cultural factors influence the scientists (as suggested by the Standpoint Theory), it did not occur to me that this would blind them from the truth of their findings or disregard other suggestions of what the truth could be.  After working in different labs I have never found this to be the case, or maybe subconsciously I just avoided it or didn't notice (who knows).  I now understand through our class discussion that science is not as objective as I thought it was.  Through feminist critique, I think that it is important to show where these assumptions take place concerning gender bias, especially in terms of fertilization.

The process of fertilization is incredibly romanticized when previous science suggests that the egg awaits the aggressive/heroic sperm, similar to the journey in the Odyssey and the Aeneid.  As theories became more modernized and the egg was characterized as energetic as opposed to passive, scientists showed that the male and female are equally responsible in contributing to the union.  These two gametes are equally essential in allowing fertilization to occur since the sperm acts as the activation agent, while the egg supplies the form and structure.  Even acknowledging that this is the case, scientists were able to continue showing male dominance saying that the sperm provides the nucleus (the most important part, holding the master molecule: DNA) while the egg donates to the cytoplasm of the cell.  As stated in the second article, it is ridiculous that the cell is sexualized as different parts of the cell are "genderized."  I am definitely looking forward to see how feminist critique attacks these sort of problems in biomedicine throughout the rest of the class.

Male Dominated Biology

Reaction Week 1

After reading both of the articles, I was surprised that I had never noticed the influence of sexuality and gender on how scientific findings are presented to the world. Although I understood the basic concepts of fertilization (the joining of sperm and egg), I never took notice of the wording in which the subject matter was taught. After reading Segal's Body Matters: Cultural Inscriptions, it was much easier to see how the perspective of a male may affect the manner in which this topic is presented. In my opinion, it is somewhat surprising that science, a topic that we hope to be seen in an objective view, is not. It makes me wonder what else is said to be "fact" when in reality, is just a representation of a phenomena that has been skewed from social and cultural influences as well as from personal experiences.

I also found the commercials we viewed in class to be eye-opening. The stark difference between the two emphasizes how society today separates the male from the female. Whereas the commercial for Lyriana targeted how female sexual problems is more of a personal issue that should not be disclosed, the advertisement for Viagra highlighted male sexual problems in a more glorious manner. For the women, the commercial focused on the problem, and for the men, it focused on achieving the end result. Perhaps this different approach stems from the fact that Viagra is more of an advertised product than Lyriana? Either way, I feel that this variation demonstrates how differently both genders are viewed in society.