You probably know all about Sandra Fluke, Rush Limbaugh, and the media storm over his description of her as a “slut.” Google it if you want.
Meanwhile, talking with my wife and her mother, I got on my soap box about this Bucknellian article about “Protection from Sexual Assault.” Look, I am sure the author, Sarah Morris, is being practical and trying to be helpful. Still, my reaction was that this is simply an update of the attitude that if women are sexually abused or misused, it is their fault. Like the recent comment in the media that in the old days,
women’s I mean girl’s contraception was “an aspirin between the knees.” Google it. Where are men individually or “manhood” as a category in her analysis?
My self-described feminist relations both said I was over reacting and that it just made sense, the article.
Fine. I still think it is messed up that whatever amount of sexuality a women (or man) adopts somehow becomes sufficient for her to reasonably EXPECT to be coerced. I tried to rile them up by saying they are no better than the infamous women on rape jury trials who are MORE likely than men to say “she had it coming.” Look, women often enforce these gender stereotypes. Ask most straight men: we could care less about 95% of make-up, clothes, and body type. We are usually very simple creatures.
So, this morning, in regards the Sandra Fluke-Rush Limbaugh news, my ma-in-law sends me this article from Slate that had the argument that some activists want to reclaim slut as their own term so that they can have “sexuality without judgement.”
She said I was “ahead of the curve.” Natch. Score one for me.
Pan Am is in the midst of its first season on ABC. The show is named after the famous Pan American World Airways, and the show is about the relationships between the stewardesses, the pilots, their customers, and the places that they fly to. It takes place in the 1960s at the start of the jet age – where flying, and particularly flying Pan Am, was a classy and glorified experience. Pan Am created an elitist and glamorous culture surrounding the nature of flying.
The show often displays the objectification of Pan Am stewardesses, and how they are utilized as sex objects to “sell” Pan Am to its customers. In the scene below, one of the more outspoken stewardesses defends herself against an aggressive passenger.
As a history junkie, I jumped on the opportunity to explore one of our class’s big thinkers more in-depth. As a double major in history, my interest is more narrowly focused on the women’s rights movement, more specifically during the 1960s. Nevertheless, the evolution of women’s roles in society, the formation of gender expectations and the origins of feminism has always absorbed me, and I was fascinated to learn that John Stuart Mill was one of the earliest proponents of women’s rights. Although we often associate Mill with the philosophical ideology of utilitarianism, his 1869 essay entitle The Subjection of Women, advocates for perfect equality between men and women and that subjugating women was the greatest form of oppression that plagued Great Britain. He stressed that women had the intellectual abilities to be exposed to higher education and should have equal access, while also possessing the capability to occupy roles in the political and professional domains. Additionally, Mill commented on the status and sanctity of marriage, emphasizing that the union between a man and a woman should be equal and that parity should be recognized both within the home and within a social setting.
In regards to the education of women, he believed that the people of Britain ultimately perpetuated certain gender roles within society because the education system was designed to bind women to a sphere of domesticity. By only enlightening and informing women about their responsibilities as mothers, wives and caretakers, men ultimately forced women to become reliant on the dominant paternal figures in their lives. What I found particularly interesting about Mill’s support for women’s liberation was not only did he put his thoughts into writing, but he also put his words into action. As a member of Parliament, he supported the Reform Bill of 1867, while also pushed for an amendment to the bill that would have secured women’s suffrage in Britain. It was no surprised that the amendment to grant a woman’s right to vote failed (Britain would grant temporary voting rights to women in 1918 and full suffrage in 1928).
Mill’s support of women’s rights ultimately correlated with his ideas of utilitarianism, which preach that, “the best actions and policies are defined as those that promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people” (ABC-CLIO, 2012). By securing their right to vote, escaping tyranny and patriarchy, and recognizing that their self-interests were different from their male counter-parts, women would be able to secure and redefine their meaning of happiness. At the same time however, despite the fact that Mill’s believed in gender equality, he could not escape the ubiquity of prejudices that existed at the time and the importance of conformity to gender roles. For example, Mill wrote that, “Like a man when he chooses a profession, so when a woman marries, it may in general be understood that she makes a choice of the management of a household, it may in general be understood that she makes a choice of the management of a household, and the brining up of a family, as the first calls upon he exertions” (Subjection of Women, Chapter 2). This assertion contradicted his belief that women should break from gender stereotypes, and that men and women should maintain equality within the home. This statement underlined women’s inferiority to men, which challenges Mill’s support of women’s liberation and suffrage. Despite the fact that Mill succumbed to societal pressures, made evident by some of his statements, his ideas as a man were ultimately radical for his time in regards to women’s progress within society, and her desire to break from the shackles of domesticity and have equal opportunity in the public sphere.