This shit scares me

It is scary to think that we are actually this close as a nation to approving such a thing as fetal person-hood.
It is scary that my rights as a woman, are not guaranteed.
It is scary that this decision can be made for me.
Woah.

Tangled and Twisted Marketing Schemes

Speaking of Disney movies, here is a trailer for the newest one to come

I read this analysis of the trailer, which pointed out how Disney movies have been masculinized over the years in order to attract more little boys to their movies, and since we all know that masculine equals neutral, there was no loss of the little girl audience! Very interesting.

p.s. Look how white they are!
p.p.s. How in the world would her hair be that silky clean/brushed looking?!

Epistemical Warzone

In "Privileged Standpoints/Reliable Processes" by Kourken Michaelian, I felt like I was being turned around in circles. For example, page 77 states that "only this sort of self-reflexive research, research in which the researchers focus a microscope on themselves, can provide us with a means of determining which biases are epistemically good and which are not." So I get that we should use more self-reflexivity to determine good methods, but in the end what we determine as good methods comes from our social location and morals, but then Michaelian goes on to discuss "epistemically good biases," but again, who determines if they are good? The author goes on to say, "Epistemically good biases, in other words, are biases that will tend to produce not simply knowledge, but knowledge that is (useful) for the marginalized." But who determines what is useful or even best for anyone? This all seems very objective in the end, where it relies on you as the researcher, yet somehow we can concur on general good or bad methods that are or aren't useful for a larger marginalized group...as you can see, I am lost in a theoretical and philosophical minefield.

My Hesitancies with Biology

Reflecting on "Gut Feminism," and how Feminists seem to shy away from biological explanations for gendered differences, I can totally understand this. I too feel myself recoil when a "scientific" study is put in front of me showing how one gender is more something than the other.

My first main attraction to feminism, was that is suddenly brought the light to my eyes (to be totes Platonic) how everything I had ever been told about my innate gender characteristics, could be just socialized norms. This knowledge really empowered me, because suddenly a lot of restrictions were gone as far as who I could be.

As I progress in my studies, it is indeed becoming more difficult to lift the blinders I have put on -- refusing to accept biology as a reason for gender differences. I think that a part of me does not want to relinquish my new-found abilities. As long as gender is still something that is socialized, I still can be whatever I choose. But I am also realizing that some things might be just how they are (given the exception of modern medical marvels).
Another part of me wants to refuse this biology explanation because given an inch, a mile will be taken. For example, there is this study that women can recognize their babies by smell a lot more accurately than men can, given this inch, the mile might be WOMEN ARE BETTER FOR BEING MOMMIES. Then, hey, let's not keep pushing for policies that will support women at work and at home, because hey, they are just better at home anyway. Now this might seem extreme, but almost any biological explanation seems, like it can be taken to this extreme.
And so my question is, how do we navigate such solid scientific reports on gender and biology, while staying focused (both ourselves and policy) on justice and equality? Also, how do we keep the attitude of "I can do and be anything," and should it be changed from despite my gender to because of my gender?

Some more catchy tunes

I Love My Hair

This is that video, "I Love My Hair" that I was talking about. It is really catchy.

We want enthusiastic consent!

Both Halse & Honey (Unraveling Ethics: Illuminating the Moral Dilemmas of Research Ethics) and Kirsch (Friendship, Friendliness, and Feminist Fieldwork) mentioned changing the way we think of informed consent. H & H used "ongoing consensual decision-making" (2152) while Kirsch used "confirming consent" (2168). I have never thought about this aspect of the ethics review board (etc.) part of research, and had just marveled about how it was a good idea to get informed consent to begin with, but I really like this framing of the issue of consent. Right now I am reading all about sexuality and such (see previous post), and when discussing rape culture consent comes up fairly often. The issues revolve around, well, if she doesn't say no, that must mean yes, or, she said yes at the beginning, so that means she meant yes to everything that is to follow (no backsies). And it can be sort of infuriating when you hear these sorts of arguments about why it definitely was not rape, and so, why not use this framework with research? It makes such good sense now!

We should be looking for enthusiastic "yeses" all the time. How unfair is it to say to a research participant, well, I know you don't want me to publish that really intimate thing you said, but you already said yes before saying it, so...no backsies! I suppose, these are the joys of feminist research, since you can use your judgment (and feelings) in the end to empathize with your participant instead of being research focused (must get the scoop!). It is really, very smart of these researchers to introduce this new version of informed consent, because in the end, it winds up being a comprehensive informed consent, where one is informed of everything that they agreed to, and what their role is, was, and will be.

As far as Kirsch's take-away message, it reminded me a lot of what we have discussed in class, how we have to give ourselves a break, we cannot be perfect and ethically congruent with everything we do or should believe in all the time. I feel, that as women, we feel compelled to build and frame these research related relationships as friendships, to make ourselves feel better, but then when we fall through on what a friend should be or do, we give ourselves a hard time. We need to give ourselves a break! We do not have to be friends nor carry the guilt of trying to be a "real" friend. And, it is not our job to make all of our research participants (or students!) like us. As a woman, I feel challenged all the time to give myself a break when it comes to trying to consider everyone's feelings and being friendly (so as not be construed as a "bitch"). Time to start taking that break.