Historically, men and women have different interactions with culture. This can obviously be seen in such things as traditional dress, mannerisms and roles in society. The question is, why did such things come about? Besides physical differences between genders, gender is defined by society. According to the book The Theory Toolbox by Jeffery T. Nealon and Susan Giroux, these biological differences do not actually mean anything until put into a social context. What this is saying is that gender, although determined at birth, is defined and shaped by culture. Thus the claim is not that there are not physical differences between genders, but that culture decides what the difference means.

My interest in the topic was spurred last night when I went to Subway with one of my female friends. I went through the line first ordering my sandwich, directly followed by my friend, who ordered her own sandwich. When I was about to pay, we realized that the cashier was about to charge me for both sandwiches, without even inquiring if our order was together. This led me to ponder a few things. Granted we walked in together, would the cashier have done the same if my friend went through the line before me? Also, where did his basis for social assumption originate from? (Meaning, how did his perception of social context form?)

Surely, every culture has perception of gender, and in fact, each is different. With some quick searching, I have found evidence of such formation of gender by culture in current news stories. The news stories in my last blog directly and simply apply to this situation, as it discussed how women of the culture of Islam were expected by their definition of female gender, to wear a head covering and abide by certain gender specific rules.

For this week I will look at gender in the workplace in two separate cultures, the United States and Jamaica.  This is not promoting any certain distribution of genders in the work environment, but rather a breakdown of how current situations and gender expectations come to be.

To begin with, the US Supreme court is currently hearing a case about a dissatisfied female UPS worker, who was denied a temporary light duty role because of her pregnancy. The law at question is the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, which says that effects of pregnancy should be treated the same as non-work related injury that causes temporary disability. The existence of this case points to two things. First, it shows that women in the US are consequently gaining rights in the workplace. However, it also demonstrates the fact that current US culture and legal system is working on emerging from a culture in which males were designated as the standard worker. By this I mean that the nature of the working culture is centered on the basis of a male gender as defined by society. Although the worker mentioned in the case is experiencing a biological factor of the female gender, she is being treated by the cultural factor of gender. Women such as this worker seek to disentangle their essential needs from the cultural expectations set by the cultural definition of the male gender.

The second current news story is the status of the working population and culture of Jamaica. According to recent labor studies, Jamaican women are rising in industry, but men are stagnating. Currently, Jamaica has the highest proportion of women bosses at 60%. In fact, their Prime minister is female. For comparison, the US has around 43% female bosses (which is highest out of first world nations). How does this have to do with culture defining gender? Jamaica is experiencing the consequences of a more liberated female gender in terms of education and household responsibilities, coupled by a male gender expectation of underachievement in the classroom. This is backed by testing and the first-hand account of Wayne Campbell, a Jamaican high school teacher. In this case, culture defined gender definition impacts the societal interaction and civic achievement of the populous as represented by the stratification of attainment by gender.

Gender, and its implications in society and specifically the workplace, is defined by culture. Without recognition of this fact, it may never be possible to reach the widely desired by consequently lofty goal of equality in the workplace. I say lofty not because it is a ridiculous want, but rather because it will require an appreciation of the fact that gender is defined by culture and thus social structure must be reconsidered to reach the goal; it requires more than just a simple acknowledgement of biological psychological and physical differences of genders.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2015/02/11/pkg-orig-historian-u-s-women-dont-care-if-they-are-raped.cnn/video/playlists/most-popular-domestic/

http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2025679408_apxcaribbeangendergap.html

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/fs-preg.cfm

The Theory Toolbox by  Nealon, and Giroux

For my first Civic Issue blog, I have chosen to discuss and compare two recent headlining news articles concerning women’s head covering with special consideration to the perspective of feminist theory. The first story is about a Muslim woman from Michigan who is suing the Dearborn police department because she was forced to remove her hijab (head covering) for a mug shot. She was arrested for driving with a suspended license and she also had two warrants for her arrest. The dilemma in this situation is the fact that the police were following protocol, but the woman should be protected to religious freedom according to the second amendment. The second story of interest stems from the Obama’s appearance at the late King Abdullah’s memorial service. The First Lady chose not to wear the traditional Saudi garb for women, a hijab, and she also shook the hand of new king Salman bin Abdulaziz. Both of these caused public outcry because Mrs. Obama did not uphold Saudi tradition. The catch to this story is that one, Mrs. Obama is not Muslim or from Saudi Arabia, and second, it takes two people to shake hands so the new king is equally at fault.

The first point I want to bring up is that my elementary definition of feminist theory is: both sexes should have equal political, cultural, social and economic rights. Although simplified, this will suffice for my analysis of the two issues.

The first conclusion I came to during this analysis is the fact that the modern practice of Islam indoctrinates subordination of women and is inherently in opposition to feminism. Although I am not an expert of the readings of the Koran, and I cannot attest whether or not the roots of the religion truly support a patriarchal society, the significant thing is that currently practitioners oppose the ideals of feminism. Current society that upholds the religion, such as Saudi Arabia, life in an extremely male dominated world, where women cannot drive, and cannot leave the house without male supervision. I only come to the conclusion that Islam religiosity is at odds with feminism to the extent that the religion dominates the sociocultural bounds of women’s lives. Specifically, it is the fact that certain women are forced to practice Islam that is anti-feminist and dehumanizing, because otherwise, she would choose freely to follow or refuse the lifestyle.

The occurrence in Michigan is an example of feminism being imposed on an individual who is not psychosocially willing to accept the notion. Although this is more of a religious rights dilemma, one can clearly identify the antifeminism conservatism undertones of the woman’s actions. The protocol of American society currently does not exempt women from removing headgear for legal booking photographs and therefore complies more with feminist theory than Islam society. However, one must take two precautionary notions to mind before relating this individual event to the general case. First, the woman could have acted in noncompliance with insincerity, simply to spite the legal system, without true regard for the implications of beholding religious cannons. Second, even if the woman did not feel distraught as the suite conveys, the fact that she was acting in accordance to the taught values of antifeminism represents the sociocultural indoctrination of antifeminism in Islam. The significance of this in relation to the entire story is that the two entities, the police and woman, were indoctrinated with different realities of feminism, and therefore systematically disagree since their belief systems do not align.

My personal, unemotional take on the issue is that the story can be related to something like an implicit contract. By living in United States (citizen or not) one must adhere to the legal (sociocultural reflecting) obligations of the land. In fact, by not obliging to legal and security standards of society, one directly offends and threatens the cultural and legal establishment, thereby compromising cooperative citizens’ beliefs in society.

The second story about the First Lady’s time in Saudi Arabia is almost precisely the opposite of the first story in terms of feminism. Representative stronger feminist individuals (the Obamas) found themselves in a practically antifeminist society. Saudis weren’t actively opposed to Mrs. Obama feminist actions of hand shaking and having an uncovered head to the extent that both were let happen shows at least some diplomatic respect from the leaders of antifeminist Saudi Arabia of the more feminist society of the United States. Of course extenuating circumstances like diplomacy and economics may explain the Saudi’s appeasement, it shows that they are not so attached in antifeminism to disrespect Mrs. Obama.

Although the US is definitely not an ideal feminist society, for the sake of convenience and practicality, it is a decent example of one for use as a comparison to Islam culture, specifically Saudi Arabia.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/wayne-county/2015/01/22/woman-sues-dearborn-heights-forced-hijab-removal/22162391/

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/27/politics/michelle-obama-shakes-hands-saudi-king/index.html?sr=fb012815michelleobamasaudi7aVODtopPHoto

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism

Live for Them

Why bother reusing a water bottle? Why trouble with holding a door for someone? Why take the chance and give someone a complement? I believe in living life in such a way that others can enjoy theirs. Small choices in life have the power to enable wellbeing for peers and posterity. One universal example is shared human environment. We all are connected through our physical situation on Earth and thus we have the opportunity to affect others’ lives.  My First Cousin twice removed, Sally, who lives in an agricultural community in Texas has a unique problem with municipal waste. If she or anyone in the community wants to throw away garbage, they must haul it 25 miles to the nearest landfill. For some time, an individual threw trash her front yard because they were lazy and had no regard for the property they were dirtying and the life they were inconveniencing. The perpetrators were directly making my relative’s life less enjoyable simply because they lacked the grit to do their own work. After several occasions, Sally dug through the trash and found a magazine with a home address and contacted authorities. Did the trash haulers know they were dumping on an 83 year old woman’s yard? Does it matter? One should consider how their action or inaction affects another’s life. What time spent in your life should be allocated unconditionally to others?

A low impact life in the shared human environment will likely not cause harm to others, but one can also selflessly pursue the satisfaction of others through such actions as charity and complements. I could give an example of something nice I’ve done, but I don’t think my example will reveal anything but immodesty. Simply put, an effective helping hand or generous kindness can potentially improve the sociological and physical experience of other’s lives.

This philosophy and one’s impact can transcend one’s own lifetime. A legacy left, good or bad, can impact others down the line. The idea that the human race should preserve our environment for our children’s children is nothing new. However it is still an essential part of this belief. Besides environmental protection, one can leave legacy politically, emotionally, physically, or otherwise. And so, one should contemplate how to leave an impact that is not unfavorable to future generations.

Why would one decide to believe in such a life? A mind attune to equality will value one’s own time on earth the same as each other’s. And so, one should attempt to value their time through its preservation and sweeting, just as one desires for their own life.

Passion blog topic:

For my passion blog this semester, I have decided to write about some of my experiences that I’ve had while working at my family’s business, Highland Orchards Inc. The business has three major sectors: farming/farm market, construction, and home repairs. I have worked there for approximately 5 years, and I have gained specific knowledge related to each part. Topics I will cover include: Water leak 101, How to change oil in your vehicle, electrical wiring, tractor driving, sewer backup, fiberglass work, chainsaw 101, Cantaloupe and watermelon cultivation, and how to safely and efficiently load a truck. I never know how to answer a person when they ask “what do you do?” because as you can see, my tasks are quite varied. I think this makes me enjoy the job even more because I get a chance to try my hand at so many different things so I don’t really get tired of doing anything. I chose this topic because my job is a very integral part of my life, and I find that it has helped to shape me into the person I am today. An interesting dynamic in my dad’s side of the family is the unspoken assumption that all the males in the family know about all these topics. This is perhaps why I felt inclined to learn them and subsequently want to share my skills. I hope at least a few of the topics are enjoyable for you all to read.

Civic Issue topic:

For my civic issues blog, I am going to attempt to apply critical theory to current political events. I am new to this topic (prof. Brooks suggested it) but in essence, I will choose a current event, and look at through the lens of an applicable theory. I will keep the same approach and structure each blog, but I will vary the political subject. A few examples of theories I will use include race theory, feminism, and Marxism. The first few will likely be very challenging, but I hope to improve my critical thinking ability in the political realm by the time I’m finished.