Artistic Behavior in the Human Female Essay
The passage above comes from the content, “Artistic Patterns in the Man Female, ” by Blue jean Robertson (2003, p. 24). Robertson (2003) argued that female music artists define and interpret feminine sexuality in diverse and conflicting methods, and by employing different artistic strategies.
Robertson makes assumptions about the woman’s human body as a competitive terrain, where being a woman continues to be an interest of warmed debate. For him, just how female performers view themselves as females, and as performers, shape all their depiction of “femininity” and “female sexuality” in their artworks. One of the quotes that Robertson mentioned in the text comes from Simon de Beauvoir. In her seminal book, “The Second Love-making, ” the girl stressed that: “One can be not born a woman, however rather, becomes one. ” I want to think about de Beauvoir’s statement and Robertson’s belief about the woman’s human body.
I agree with de Beauvoir that sociable experiences and political conditions effect the construction of “being a female. ” Culture shapes just how women and men discover femininity and gender tasks through creating gender functions and expectations. An example is when a lady is “conditioned” by her mother to be a “woman, ” by telling her just how she will need to act as a “woman. Including educating her about the toys she can and simply cannot use, as well as the games the girl can and cannot play.
The girl understands that the girl should act and believe a certain method, in order to be “feminine. ” The lady learns that she cannot be boisterous or get involved in athletics, because that could be too “manly” for her. Her is the excellent example of “becoming” a woman. However, I as well agree that being a female is a biological and individual construct. A woman is a item of her biology, whether she enjoys it or not. That is why women can also be defined by way of a sexual internal organs.
Their biology also determines their love-making, as well as their gender. Furthermore, being a female is a product of specific desires and needs. Any female can determine her womanhood the way she also wants that to. Robertson indicated the existence of the pluralities of femininity. It is accurate that a woman’s body is a contested terrain, and for myself, what is wrong with this?
Is it certainly not also possible to have multiple femininities, instead of having just one approach to determine and to interpret what it means to become a woman? There may be nothing wrong, in my opinion, of obtaining different ways of being a woman, since to deny one way of womanhood undermines the very fact of being a no cost woman. Log entry two In “A conversation regarding race and class, ” Childers and Hooks (1990) argued that gender must be expanded to feature issues of race and class. Someone said that: “…we should begin to go to about how we experienced the struggle to challenge and broaden the category of gender” (pp.
61-62). For these people, people simply cannot understand sexuality in its complete sense, if perhaps racial and class concerns are overlooked in gender analysis. This reading challenged my perspective of male or female, by requesting me to view gender by using a much larger lens.
I use not regarded that sexuality issues as well intersect racial and class issues. On the other hand, Childers and Hooks (1990) compelled me to think about the politics of gender. This can be related to the discussions about gender as being a political object. The governmental policies of male or female demonstrate that you have hierarchies for the feminine sexuality that are skilled by many girls.
Power is additionally affected by one’s class and race. In the event white woman women think that there is a glass ceiling with the workplace, lower-class black and Hispanic women encounter a greater and heavier cup ceiling in society. Because of the class and race, they will feel and encounter multiple goblet ceilings- the ceiling of racial discrimination, the limit of class elegance, and the roof of sexuality discrimination.
These types of ceilings, on top of one another, symbolize something more than just a barrier to economic development, although resemble ceiling that are straight pressed in these women’s bodies. They will could hardly inhale and exhale, because there are just too many ceilings making it difficult to allow them to even make it through. Now, My spouse and i look gender as an amalgam of issues that women bring to sexuality discourse. Therefore, race and issue not only expand gender discourse, although considering all of them has also broadened my understanding of gender as well as its diverse conflicts. Journal entry 3 Once feminists talk about feminism, they will mostly begin to see the opposition between your feminine and the masculine- the yin plus the yang.
We also discussed the binary opposition in class, which heightened my knowledge of how ladies are decreased to the reduced spectrum in the opposition. The binary competitors also exists in differentiating mothers via fathers. Mothers are placed in pedestals, while fathers will be forgotten and scorned. Laqueur (1990) complained about this binary opposition in “The Facts of Fatherhood. ” This is certainly an interesting article that asserted about the repression with the history of fatherhood. Laqueur (1990) posited that although women loved being the “natural” father or mother, fathers were regarded as pure providers, or even as a backdrop to the friends and family.
He stressed that it is moment for fathers to reclaim their particular right to participate in the parenting history, wherein their input to the formation of world are identified and respected. This polemical content amuses and interests myself significantly. That amuses me because in the back of my mind, My spouse and i felt sexuality discrimination backwards.
I believe that mothers have specials bonds with their children, but this belief, however , is marked by sexism. Do not fathers also share special you possess with their children? Laqueur (1990) challenged the notion of motherhood, because it eroded the importance of fatherhood.
To my way of thinking, it is better not to differentiate moms from dads, which is similar to stopping themselves from distinguishing women and men. Women and men have their very own strengths and weaknesses and non-e is somewhat more superior. In the same distinctive line of thought, mothers and fathers are also equal.
Let us just call motherhood and fatherhood as parenthood and give dads their rightful place in a brief history and the practice of nurturing human culture. Furthermore, also this is an interesting article, because it questioned me to speak about being a woman in relation to like a man. Like a woman features its multiplicities, and now, becoming a man has its pluralism too. For me personally, these multiplicities, acknowledged as a part of gender evaluation, render two steps ahead for true gender equality.
Journal entrance 4 In “Criticizing Feminist Criticism, ” Gallop, Hirsch, and Burns (1990) discussed on the purposes and progress feminine criticism. Their primary point is that feminist criticism writers have gone to the serious, by pulverizing each other’s feminist landscapes. They believe this process is definitely futile understand and enhancing the development of sexuality discourse and feminism. They asserted that feminism could be criticized towards a more comprehensive method, wherein there is absolutely no right or wrong feminism. I chose this article because it posts on hypersensitive issues, where the personal versus the collective idea of feminism dissension.
Feminists will vary worldviews about gender jobs, sexuality, and femininity, and in addition they criticize the other person in different techniques. I have never thought that feminist criticism is now too unconstructive. This is not my own idea of criticism at all. I think about my very own criticism of feminist critique and I are not able to help but agree that criticism is definitely not about “thrashing” feminist theories (p. 350).
Criticism is also regarding adding a thing to existing theories, in manners that can advantage the comprehension of what it means as a woman and how different understandings contribute to an array of feminism task. I seriously believe also that feminists are not able to define feminism in one way or many ways exclusively. Feminism ought to be viewed as a big mess of ideas and values, distinct and particular to women and groups, who also fight for also because of different problems.
Yes, it is just a mess fine, because becoming a woman is a dynamic process that is also a part of for being an individual and being a person in one’s race, class, and so on. Being a girl cannot at any time be a tidy place, in which women think the same and act the same. I would rather have it being a mess- where women have time to think and re-think feminism, in relation to their particular personal activities and principles. References Childers, M. & Hooks, B. (1990). A conversation about race and class.
In M. Hirsch & At the. F. Keller (Eds. ), Conflicts in feminism (pp. 60-81). Nyc, NY: Routledge. Gallop, M., Hirsch, Meters., & Callier, N. E. (1990). Criticizing feminist criticism. In M. Hirsch & E. Farrenheit. Keller (Eds. ), Conflicts in feminism (pp. 349-369). New York, NY: Routledge. Laqueur, T. T. (1990). The reality of fatherhood. In M. Hirsch & E. Farrenheit. Keller (Eds. ), Clashes in feminism (pp. 205-221). New York, NYC: Routledge. Robertson, J. (2003). Artistic behavior in the individual female.
In B. Stirratt & C. Johnson (Eds. ), Feminine persuasion: art and works on libido (pp. 23-38). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.