Wednesday, December 2, 2015

Social Justice Event

For my second Social Justice Event I attended the screening of UnSlut. This was a documentary that discussed slut shaming and how young girls are affected by it and bullied in schools and how it must be stopped. The film director Emily Lindin started the UnSlut project after going through her own experience with slut shaming. She had been called a slut for I believe going to the third base with her boyfriend at the time in 6th grade. She had become very depressed from having the whole school calling her a slut and it really had a huge impact in her life. There were about 4 stories of girls who had been slut shamed and how it impacted them. One story was about a girl who had sent nudes to her boyfriend at the time and he had forwarded it to the whole school. As soon as she got to school the next day she was automatically called a slut, was harassed and judged. Nothing every happened to the boy who leaked the nudes. While she had to suffer in the school halls, became depressed and was even suicidal. There was another story of another high school girl who had gone to her friends house to sleepover and they ended up going to hang out with some boys down the street. They ended up drinking and while she was passed out drunk a group of boys brought her upstairs and gang raped her. She didn't recall anything until she woke up throwing up and banged her head on the window. These young boys took pictures of her and sent it all throughout the school out in the end she was called a slut and harassed. There were so many things wrong with this situation the boys were never bullied for doing this or called rapists, she was the victim and ended up being the "Bad" person. Unfortunately a year later after suffering through depression, changing schools and nothing working she killed herself. Her case is awaiting trial to see if the boys will be charged with rape, out of all of this the friend that was with her when this occurred claimed the girl gave consent to sex. Her definition of consent was that the girl wasn't fighting or kicking resisting while she was being raped. This lead realizing how little teenagers know about consent and sex in general. Most don't get proper training. There was one story of a woman who was raped and she was told that she was asking for it due to what she was wearing. Overall the documentary did stated that the problem can't be solved overnight but it starts with each person work on themselves and educating the younger generation. The goal is to take back the word slut to the point that it wont be an insult anymore. This reminds of the speaker that came to talk about sex positivity and showed the video of tea. That is a way in which you can teach students about consent and the other video of Amber Rose promoting sex positivity by being proud of the walk of shame instead of being ashamed. I also think of Generation M and how women are represented by the media and how we are portrayed as sexual objects and nothing else. It's a misogynistic society and it needs to be stopped.

Social Justice Event

For my first Social Justice Event I attended a talk hosted by the African Studies program. The title of the talk was "The Damnation of Black Women Critically Analyzing Policy's Treatment of Black Women", the speaker was Dr. Jordan-Zachery the Director of Black Studies at Providence College. This was such an informative talk. Her main focus was on how Black Women were disappearing from the academia and society itself. This talk of disappearance was also brought up by Rich when it came to Lesbians and this is what lead to Lesbian Existence. The fact that the academia is so selective with what they portray and allow others to learn is ridiculous. Lorde also discussed this problem and stated, "The same evasion of responsibility, the same copout, that keeps Black women's art out of women's exhibitions, Black women's work out of most feminist publications". She began with the incarceration of Black Women and the statistics, in 2001 1-19 black women are incarcerated, while 1-45 for Hispanic Women and 1-118 for White Women. As of 2001 Black Women were incarcerated 2.5 times the rate of white women. Most of these Black Women were in jail in regards to drugs and did the mandatory minimum. From this there's a chain reaction the black women does what she does to keep food on the table for her children but this then leads to her being incarcerated and her children in foster care; about half of the children in foster care are black. She then discussed pay equity, unemployment. One thing that stuck to me the most was that a Black Women whom is a High School graduate earns $30,450 while a White Male High School Dropout of 9th grade or less earns $32,675. This seemed ridiculous but accurate not only are we females we are black females which is the lowest of the low. Not even with more schooling do we get some sort of "equality". This brought me back to the article about the Land of Limitations which is true even with a High School degree she is still limited because of social class and the color of her skin.  In regards to us disappearing she talked about a study in which they showed pictures of different colored people and the black woman's face was not recognizable/remembered afterwards. For example they should a picture of a white girl a hispanic girl then a black girl in some order. They could list all but the black girl's face. According to this talk we are only visible when it comes to poverty, black people have the highest rate of poverty 25.1. Overall this was an eye-opening talk in which I left realizing how unjust our society really is (although I already knew this). I must fight or my own rights and for all the other Black Women. This is why I considered myself a black feminist. 

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Blog Post #12

Andrea Ayvazian "Interrupting the Cycle of Oppression: The Role of Allies as Agents of Change" and Fletcher A. Blanchard "Combatting Intentional Bigotry and Inadvertently Racist Acts"


      Andrea Ayazian argues that allies are needed in our society to help fight oppression. In the paper she discussed who an ally is and how they can help. She provided various examples to show how diverse and interconnected an ally can be. One that that she was very hopeful towards was that it would help with violence in our society. According to her, "because members of the dominant group are conferred with considerable social power and privilege, they carry significant authority when confronting perpetrators of violence in their own group" (Ayvazian, 600). This seems logical but does it really work? There has been article that I have read in the past and one that I actually hyperlinked in one of my blogs discussing this topic; it mainly had to do with white people owning up to their privilege and starting to understand racism once they hear it from another white person. I remember reading that in a way they got to connect to the white person speaking of the oppression and how they are the oppressors then they actually look in the mirror. I guess in this way this is what she is getting at that they will "stop" and do better since it's coming from their "own" people. Overall this article was very hopeful in trying to change our society and making it a better place. Another thing she said that made sense and connects to her argument was, "it is hard for young people to grow up and fight racism if they have never met anyone who does". In this generation I have realized that most of us are afraid to fight for our rights and fight against racism. If it doesn't affect them directly they could care less, especially if people around them aren't either. It's sad but true in a sense. Allies could be a good thing and I have seen a couple great ones but I don't know if that's all it takes to fix our society.

     Fletcher Blanchard argues the lack of knowledge in regards to racism and the illusion that racism on campus isn't as bad anymore now that it's being taken care of with school policies. This paper was written in 1992 but is still so relevant now just to show what he is arguing about. One study he had done on his college campus showed that when it comes to race people follow the "trend" whether good or bad; "After hearing someone else condemn racism, college students expressed anti-racist sentiments much more strongly than those who heard someone express equivocal views. However, students who first heard someone condone racism then voiced views that reflected strong acceptance of racism" (Blanchard 605). When it came to racism the students were completely oblivious. He talks about how many white students are inexperienced and aren't around black students or other people of color until college. This then leads to the people of color suffering and there not being sufficient consequences. One of the main problems with all of this is how people of color are underrepresented in colleges. We are then harassed and traumatized and feel alone with nowhere to go to discuss these problems and stabilize ourselves. I agree with his suggestion to conquer this problem, "until inexperienced students master the behaviors that reflect their egalitarian commitments. we must maintain havens for minority students that protect them from intentional harassment and naive disrespect, including cultural centers and organizations for particular minority groups" (Blanchard 608). The least the school can do is have a place where we can go and see people like us and feel like we belong.

How do you guys feel about allies? How can we help end racism on campus?

Sunday, November 15, 2015

Blog Post #10

Ann Ferguson, Sex War: The Debate between Radical and Liberation Feminists


When I first read this article I was trying to figure out which feminist "group" I fell under the Radical or Libertarian. As I read the article more in depth I realized that I was neither one and that the author's argument is just that. Ann Ferguson stated, "Both sides are working with a number of philosophical assumptions about the nature of sexuality, power and freedom that have never been properly developed and defended". This makes sense it can't be a valid argument if all they are relying on are assumptions. As I read why they felt so strongly about their views on sexual privilege I realized that I agreed with a little bit of both. So where would I stand if I am in between? By saying "feminists should be free to choose between basic and risky practices without fear of moral condemnation from other feminists." This makes more sense and helps people like me who agree, "the ideal sexual relationship is between fully consenting equal partners who negotiate to maximize one another's sexual pleasure and satisfaction by any means they choose". I believe that we should embrace our sexuality and our sexual urges. She claims that both feminist groups are arguing things that aren't mutually exclusive. In the reading she proposes a "solution" to the problem between the Radical and Liberation Feminists, "I argue instead, that we should develop feminist erotica and sex education that aims to make people conscious of these contradictions in order to encourage new forms of feminist fantasy production". I don't really know what she means by "feminist fantasy production". I would like to know what it means to try to understand her "solution" to this problem.

What does sex positivity mean to you?

Monday, November 9, 2015

Blog Post #9

Michael Kimmel, "What are little boys made of?"
Jackson Katz, Tough Guise 2

      Issues of men and masculinity are feminist issues because as feminists we believe that men are also being misunderstood and unjust by society. One quote by Kimmel which can explain why issues of masculinity are a feminist issues is, "Feminists imagine, and demand, that men (and boys) can do better. Feminism offers the possibility of a new boyhood and a new masculinity based on a passion for justice, a love of equality, and the expression of a full range of feelings". Feminists don't blame it on biology they believe that our young boys are raised in this society in which masculinity in enforced upon them. The definition of masculinity by our society are guys who are tough "macho" do not show emotion or fear, are violent and straight. One example in the movie of this type of masculinity was when talking about the wrestlers and superhero's bodies. Now the wrestlers bodies are very muscular and they don't really look "normal" and the superheros compared to the originals in the 40's/50's are "ripped" as well very muscular. Kimmel stated, "If it's all biological, why is the slightest deviation from expected manly behavior so cruelly punished? Why aren't Norwegian or French or Swiss boys as violent, homophobic, and misogynist as many are in the U.S?" I was once told by my professor that America's problem is that it censors sex more than it does violence as opposed to Europe which censors violence more than sex and it makes a difference. As the this quote suggests boys in Europe are far less violent, homophobic and misogynist than boys in the U.S, the video games and shows play a role in this. In certain countries in Europe they ban video games if too violent they don't do that here. I am not saying it's all the video game's fault but as mentioned in the film there are taught behaviors. They talked about the impact of violence in the media on children in the film and it's all taught behavior which makes sense. The film shows a scene from Full Metal Jacket to tie into this sense of masculinity , "we must contend with the "culture of cruelty" that forces a boy to deny emotional neediness, "routinely disguise his feelings" and end up emotionally isolated." In the film he talks about "tough guise" and how boys must learn to become this way and not show any emotion. It's not known or obvious how to be a "man" but you must act like it and figure it out.

Sunday, November 8, 2015

Blog Post #8

Peggy Orenstein, Cinderella Ate My Daughter


       As soon as I read the title I knew this would be an article I would love. Growing up I was in love with everything pink. I loved all the disney princesses but Cinderella and Ariel were my favorite ones. In high school is when I was first exposed to the "hidden truth" behind the princess stories and how wrong the messages are to young girls. This leads to my first quote which is based on a conversation between the Author and Andy Mooney a representative of Disney about the hidden messages in the princess stories. On page 16, "He had a point. I have never seen a study proving that playing princess specifically damages girls' self-esteem or dampens other aspirations. There is, however, ample evidence that the more mainstream media girls consume, the more importance they place on being pretty and sexy." Her point being that all the princesses are valued for their beauty and nothing else. Their whole story is based on their looks and the need to wait for prince charming to rescue them. By little girls watching this they believe to think that is all that matters, they just need to be a pretty princess and they will live happily ever after with their prince. Another quote that ties in with this quote focuses on female bonding, "Let's review: princesses avoid female bonding. Their goals are to be saved by a prince, get married and be taken care of for the rest of their lives. Their value derives largely from their appearance." In the text she links this to an argument her daughther had with one of her friends that there can only be one princess. It is true in this sense because there is no female bonding there aren't princesses that are bff's and hang out. They are usualy on their own, Cinderalla her step sisters didn't like her so there was no bonding, as for Snow White her step mother hated her so no bonding there either. We are never taught how to help each other but instead how to compete against one another. The last quote that stuck out to me was another conversation but this time between the author and a sales rep at a Toy Fair in New York; "'Is al this pink really necessary?' I asked a bored-looking sales rep hawking something called Cast and Paint Princess Party. 'Only if you want to make money,' he said chuckling. Then he shrugged. 'I guess girls are born loving pink.'" It's weird to think that pink was enforced on girls as a business sheme. I loved pink growing up and it makes sense now, all my toys were pink most of my clothes were pink my diary was pink, my playing table was pink. There was pink all around me so it makes sense as to how we love pink so much.

Thursday, October 29, 2015

Blog Post #4

Nicholas Kristof, U.S.A Land of Limitations

Why/how is economic inequity a feminist issue?

At first it took me a while to understand this as to why it is a feminist issue but after class I got it. In the article Kristof talks about how the "American Dream" is all lies and the USA is really made up for the only the rich to succeed. As to why it is a feminist issue it goes hand and hand the main thing we are fighting for is equality and "justice". We fight for those who aren't equal those who are below and have no power or no say. In the article he states, "A child born in the bottom quintile of incomes in the United States has only a 4 percent chance of rising to the top quintile, according to a Pew study. A separate (somewhat dated) study found that in Britain, such a boy has about a 12 percent chance". Doesn't this seems ridiculous? Well it's the truth. The system is made that those who are the bottom are trapped at the bottom. I mean as an individualistic you might say "Oh that's ridiculous, I know someone who made it out and so will I" well good for you however as a country and for the other 96% of those at the bottom quintile that's not the reality. He then begins talking about his friend who, “What distinguished Rick wasn’t primarily bad choices, but intelligence, hard work and lack of opportunity." Rick was someone in school who had and attention deficit disorder and was suspended which then lead to him dropping out. It was unfortunate because his mother had died young and he basically had to take care of himself and his siblings. He had to deal with plenty of economic inequity due to the fact that he was a dropout because no one cared about his learning impairment. He eventually died due to a disease and not taking his medication for it because he couldn't afford health care but also because he had given the money to help his ex wife. This is why he says, “They grow up not in a “land of opportunity,” but in the kind of socially rigid hierarchies that our ancestors fled, the kind of society in which your outcome is largely determined by your beginning.” Rick was just an example of a lot of Amercians who are just "stuck" in the system.




Lisa Maria Hogeland

"Fear of Feminisim, Why Young Women Get The Willies"

This essay focused on the younger generation's fear of feminism and tried to justify it. One of the first quotes is when she explains her motif, "This essay is an attempt to trace out what that "of course" really means; much of it is based on my experience with college students, but many of the observations apply to other young women as well". She has to define her meaning of "of course" because that was her response when her former students told her their students were afraid of feminism. To her it makes sense and throughout the essay she has reasonable facts one which was, "young women may believe that a feminist identity puts them out of the pool for many men"; she means that in this generation the definition of a feminist isn't as clear and those who aren't educated just assume that we are man haters/anti-men which is not true. The point is to fight the inequality between genders not bash the opposing gender. Another quote which basically says its okay to be afraid and I understand why you are. On the last page she says, “Women have real reasons to fear feminism, and we do young women no service if we suggest to them that feminism itself is safe… to stand opposed to your culture, to be critical of institutions, behaviors, discourses- when it is so clearly not in your immediate interest to do so-asks a lot of a young person…”. This is true not everyone is up for the movement and change is scary. However one thing she doesn't do is say they shouldn't be feminists she encourages them by saying the good things of feminism. The whole essay she explains a woman's struggle of identity, political place, etc. Then she explains the benefits of feminism and how it is intimidating but worth it.

Although I am very late with this post I agree with the author it's tough trying to be a feminist in this generation when you aren't educated on the subject or when you are in a society when its hard to find yourself. However I don't think it should discourage the younger generation to be part of the movement.

Sunday, October 18, 2015

Blog Post #6

Gloria Anzaldua, "La conciencia de la mestiza: Towards a new consciousness"


This was a very hard reading for me due to the fact that she would mix in spanish, which would throw me off a bit. But overall this reading focused on mestiza, which is a woman of mixed race especially Latin American and Native American. The first quote I would like to talk about explains a mestiza; on page 377 she states, "... la mestiza is a  product of the transfer of the cultural and spiritual values of one group to another... the mestiza face the dilemma of the mixed breed: which collectivity does the daughter of a darkskinned mother listen to?" The author is talking about herself she is mixed her mother is native american (darkskinned as referred to the quote) and her father is spanish. These are two different cultures that she is torn between. Late on she goes more into depth about her dilemma and the different views the cultures have and opinions she gets. She does explain a common denominator though which is the white culture, because both mexicans and native americans have been attacked by the whites and devalued. The next quote I would like to discuss relates to the white culture owning up to what it's done rather than ignoring it. On page 384, "We need to say to white society: we need you to accept the fact that Chicanos are different, to acknowledge your rejection and negation of us. We need you to own the fact that you looked upon us as less than human, that you stole our lands, our personhood, our self-respect." There is a lot more that goes along with this quote but it is basically saying that whites should accept that everyone cant be like them and respect other cultures rather than trying to colonizing them and make them indifferent and devalue them. By saying this she believes that by owning up to this it will help educate them and help this world. By being ignorant to the situation no one is benefiting from it but the whites so by educating them and making it relevant it will help the Mexicans regain their dignity and self esteem to prosper and be prideful in their culture. She then says that we must also become aware of other cultures and their history which will help us in becoming united. According to her, "awareness of our situation must come before inner changes, which in turn come before changes in society. Nothing happens in the "real" world unless it first happens in the images in our heads" (pg. 385).  For there to be a change we must first rationalize our problems and realize what is going on then by doing this we make it a real problem and change it. Overall her what I got from this text was her struggles as a mixed lesbian woman and ways in which we can change it. Although I didn't use any quotes discussing her sexual orientation she does discuss it and how that also makes her feel out of place on top of being mixed but also part of something because every race has lesbians.

I chose this link because  although it isn't necessarily talking about this piece it is talking another one of Anzaldua's pieces which is discussing the same concept and it goes hand and hand with this article.

I understand the struggle of being torn because of being a mixed race, I'm cape verdean which is a mix of African and European descent however I claim that I'm solely African because that's the one which I can relate to the most since my country is in Africa. It is a struggle because of how light skin I am when I say to others that I'm black.

Tuesday, October 13, 2015

Blog Post #5

Adrienne Rich, Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence

   When I first started reading the text I was confused because she kept mentioning compulsory heterosexuality I wasn't quite sure what she meant. When she stated, "... to encourage heterosexual feminists to examine heterosexuality as a political institution which disempowers women- and to change it." I began to get an idea what it could mean. She kept mentioning heterosexuality as a political institution and that is what I think she means by compulsory heterosexuality. One example that made me understand compulsory heterosxuality was when she said, "Compulsory heterosxuality simplifies the task of the procurer and pimp in worldwide prostitution rings and "eros centers", while, in the privacy of the home, it leads the daughter to "accept" incest/rape by her father, the mother to deny that it is happening, the battered wife to stay on with an abusive husband". It is "the way" it should be, heterosexuality is the only sexuality while homosexuality is "deviant". With that quote it just goes to show how the girls are brought up that men are in control and that they must please them. This leads into lesbian existence which is, "... both the fact of the historical presence of lesbians and our continuing creation of the meaning of that existence" (pg. 90). It is to talk about the existence of lesbians from the very beginning. It isn't just a "phase" that just started lesbians have been around for a very long time but as stated in the article it has been erased, made into something bad and abnormal in this society. When Rich talks about women resisting men to show proof of lesbian existence she links it to love connection between women and women. On page 91 she says, "... central to lesbian existence" the erotic sensuality which has been, precisely, the most violently erased fact of female experience". Which is just an example of compulsory heterosexuality and showing how mandatory it is.

Saturday, September 26, 2015

Talking Point #3

Generation M: misogyny in media and culture
Directed by Thomas Keith


        This film focused on misogyny which is the hatred of women. There were a couple of things that the interviewees said that stood out to me. The topic discussed was "Female Empowerment" and Nancy Grover stated "teen girls are bombarded by messages saying there is only one way to experience sexuality ... to be powerful is to exert some sexual power over men". This stood out to me because by society standards its true. We are taught that we can "control" men with sex and that sex is their weakness; which leads to the only way we can be in power is by hitting their weak point. One thing that sticks out the most to mean is the saying "pussy is power". I feel weird just saying it but its what is constantly repeated in the music I listen to and on social media. It is stuck with us females from a young age. We shouldn't be taught that we are only powerful when we are sexual, we should be raised that you gain power from using your brain, being smart not from sex just like the males are taught. Another quote from the film that stood out to me was when Palmer a famous plastic surgeon was being interviewed about cosmetic surgery and who he thinks influences women do it and he said "... it's not guys but fashion ... it's not attractive to men". I disagree with him maybe for that time being it wasn't attractive for men but in today's society it is. He says that the women see famous celebrities that way and therefore they want to become just like them. Why is that? Because they are liked and desired for what they look like which is fake like their big boobs and fat ass, men like that. So I believe it is influenced by men because they want to look "sexier" and beilieve by having big boobs its sexy or a fat ass. All over social media you can see this men retweeting all these models who have unrealistic bodies. The models have really tiny waists weigh like 100 pound but are like a DD and its clear that it's fake. Of course we shouldn't be doing things to please men especially when it comes to physically changing our bodies to please them but that's it's purpose. We are taught at a young age to please a man and that are looks are what define us. That's where it comes from and it's all connects back to pleasing the men. I'm not trying to bash men but this is a clear explain of misogyny in our society. Another quote that goes along with misogyny in our society is what JEan Kilbourne says when explaining the human qualities that as humans we are taught that are "feminine" only, "qualities that are considered feminine are compassion, empathy, nurturance, sensitivity, passivity, dependence, powerlessness". She goes on to explain that by telling girls that they are suppose to be dependant, passive and sensitive that we are like stuck in how we should act. But these qualities are just found in women but in men as well they are human qualities not gender specific. Our society praises masculinity and makes sure that there is an obvious contrast between what should be "girly" and what should be "tough". This society just can not accept women as equal to men and this film tried to point out these problems and educate us so we can try to fix it.

At the end by saying that we become the product and give into to this misogynistic society by buying certain magazines or video games that are demeaning to women it made me see it in another way. Although I don't agree with any of it all by playing GTA I guess I'm agreeing with it. So my question is how do we fix these type of things and make it be known how bad the problem is?

Saturday, September 19, 2015

Talking Point #2

Allan G. Johnson, Privilege, Power, and Difference


       Johnson argues that people who are privileged aren't necessarily aware of the struggles people who aren't privileged go through or how their privilege affects other. The whole article which is from his book explains privilege and the power of certain words like "sexism", "white", "racist". As stated in his introduction, "... my primary goal is to change how people think about issues of difference and privilege" (Johnson). As a white heterosexual man with privileges he could talk about and own up to how wrong it is and how it affects people of color, women, and homosexuals. He wanted to raise awareness of the white supremacy and hope that by raising awareness to it the problem could be addressed and possibly be changed. He discusses how primarily white people try to redefine or delete words like "racism" and "sexism" and by doing this they are ignoring the actual problem. They get offended and are apparently put in uncomfortable situations because they automatically think it's a personal attack when in reality it's a global issue that needs to be addressed. Johnson also spoke about his own experience with these words and being told to explain certain issues without the use of the keywords, he described this situation as "... a doctor trying to help a patient without ever mentioning the body or naming what's wrong. We can't get anywhere that way - and we haven't been".
This is so true, it's stupid to even think of doing that. In this article he brings up the late Rodney King's question "Can't we all just get along?" and tries to explain why we haven't been getting along. It has to do with our social status and privileges. According to Johnson the only way to solve the problem if for people of privileged mainly white people is for them to empathize with those who aren't privileged and according to this system will never be. By empathizing they can see it from a different perspective and stop the hate and segregation that has been in us from generation to generation. He hopes that it will not carry on into the next generation.

I wonder how it would be if people knew they were privileged and how it affected others. Is being aware of it all that it takes to end this hate? I think that there is more to it for equality. Empathizing is only the beginning of the solution.

Tuesday, September 15, 2015

Kristen Rowe-Finkbeiner, The F-Word Feminisim in Jeoparday

Extended Comments,

As I read Verrie's blog post I began nodding my head immediately. I agree with her when it comes to race in feminism. This article was from a white women's view on feminism and how her family has contributed to it from generations, however I don't think it was stressed enough how difficult it was for black women fighting for the same rights and the urge for equality in all ways. They had to deal with racism and sexism. As Verrie talked about in her blog Brownmiller's response to the question "Do you think women of color were excluded in the second wave?" pissed me off. Of course I knew that she would try to defend the movement, especially since she was considered "a prominent white second-wave leader"; however what she stated just proved how oblivious she was to the actual problem. On page 27 she states "... we are often rebuffed because there was still the sentiment that black women should be working with black men on civil rights issues- they were torn" which wasn't the case they shouldn't have to pick either or when it comes down to both issues affecting them equally. By saying they were torn to me is making it seem as if they were devastated and didn't know whether being treated as an equal race was more important than being treated as an equal when it came to gender when in reality we should be equal in all ways, once again just like Verrie states what the definition of feminism is and equality is all it's about.

There was another quote that stood out to me when it came to race in feminism it was on page 27 Rowe-Finkbeiner said , "... women of color and white women often worked for change alongside one another, instead of as part of the same overall movement". What is it that keeps two groups fighting for the same thing apart from fighting together? Doesn't it make more sense that the more people fighting for the same thing together be better than two different groups fighting on their own for the same thing? Racism kept them apart, especially since the second wave happened in 60's-80's although the Civil Right's act was passed during this time doesn't mean racism was over. Towards the end of the article when she talks about the third wave it had more to do with my generation and I do agree that the fight isn't as strong anymore and the main point is getting lost but I believe we more of us becoming educated we can make sure it continues.

Monday, September 7, 2015

A little intro ...

Hey guys,
My name is Romira. I'm a Junior at Rhode Island College. I'm a Psychology major, but also double minoring in Neuro Behavioral Science and Gender & Women Studies. I'm taking this class for my minor and also because I would like to learn more about feminism since I believe I'm a feminist. Hopefully after this class I will be educated and a legitimate feminist. Over the summer I made sure I went to the beach at least once a week. I tanned as much as I could and I feel accomplished. When I am not in class i'm working like I did for the rest of the summer. If Im not working I'm in my room lounging or trying to workout at the gym. Other than that I don't do much. Well that is it for my first post.