I have a friend with two boys, five years apart in age. They are both rather well-adjusted, and completely different in nature. The younger of the two, currently six years old, in times of stress takes on a role rarely permitted to be seen in most homes, and even more rare in school settings where gender roles are reinforced with a multitude of examples where both adults and children guide an individual's choices toward the "right" one based on their genitals.
This boy, who visits my own home on occasion, comforts himself by nurturing a small baby doll. Though sometimes he refers to his baby as "she," he has informed me that his baby is a boy. He routinely comforts it, cradles it, and changes its clothes depending on the time of day (pajamas for bed, day clothes for going out). He will give it a pacifier when he thinks it is necessary.
When I agreed to babysit both boys for their parents' anniversary, I suggested he bring his baby. I knew he had been particularly emotionally raw of late, and had been carrying around my friend's house for a few days previous. He was delighted, and we even talked about how to make a sling so that if he wanted to carry his baby around hands-free, he could do so without worry. The morning after spending the night, he came down, and I asked him if he'd changed, and he said he had. Then I asked if he'd changed his baby, and he ran upstairs to make certain that the pajamas were exchanged for day clothes.
The level of care and nurturing he takes for his baby is unprecedented to me as a parent who's visited many preschools, daycares, and elementary schools. Literature on gender roles that assumes that such things are "natural" have never spent time in a daycare for toddlers where the teachers will remove certain toys from a boy's hands and give them something "more appropriate."
This is acculturation at work, neither good, nor bad. How else are children to learn societal norms and what is expected of them? However, we as participants in culture-making can choose to make different choices as my friends have.
Then again, our children may decide that our assumptions and culture don't work for them anymore. Take, for example, this blog post by Babeland about children bending the gender rules of Disney fairies. Children who use the web site circumvented the gender assumptions made by the company that only allowed for the creation of female fairies within the game by making their characters taller, more slender, and giving them shorter hair styles and androgynous names.
The company, recognizing that there was a demand for male characters within the game, created them, but out of some fear of referring to boys as "fairies" calls them "sparrow men," as though they were a race unto themselves. This not only speaks to an assumption of the roles males "should" play in our society, but also a fear of anything feminine being displayed within young men that might be construed as homosexual in nature. Given the derogatory nature of the word "fairy," I'm surprised that they did not use this opportunity to return its original meaning to those who wish to use it.
Sunday, May 02, 2010
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Authority and Pregnancy
Who has the authority to decide what is right for a woman and her potential children?
In most of my circles, my friends and colleagues would say the woman. However, we continue to see policies both direct and indirect, local and international, that give us pause.
Two recent articles both dealing with women and pregnancy struck me, both for their injustice, but also for the ways in which the rhetoric surrounding women's bodies continues to be framed in patriarchal, controlling tones.
I have a very visceral repulsion of the recent use and abuse of tasers by police officers. Where they might hesitate to pull a gun, too often, we see videos and news reports that show people given the authority to protect citizens, often abuses that power to intimidate or simply to get their way. Unfortunately, the courts frequently back up this behavior of the police officers, even when there was no perceived threat by the person on which it was used. A very disturbing example happened recently here in Seattle.
A woman seven months pregnant was pulled over for speeding in a school zone. She refused to sign the ticket, because she did not wish to admit guilt. Normally, as many commenters pointed out, this would lead to her being cited, sent a summons, and they would battle it out in court. However, the officer decided that her belligerence, within her vehicle, and with no threat of harm or any sign of a weapon, warranted Tasering. The threat to her unborn child, something that many people seem is a life sacrosanct at conception, a fetus now nearing its development in utero, wanted, and intended to be kept, was threatened because someone with a badge wanted to prove they were mighty.
I cannot imagine the horror she must have gone through at such an experience wondering if her child was harmed in such a way. There are no studies to show what effects Tasering has in the long-term on adults, let alone what it does to developing fetuses. Though reports say she gave birth to a healthy child, the mother is permanently scarred, and there is no way to be certain that long-term damage has yet to be seen within the child as it grows. For a non-lethal weapon, Tasering has a growing list of deaths associated with its use, and reports of abuses are piling up fast.
What does this have to do with policy, rhetoric, and pregnancy? I find it odd that in a country where people scream obscenities at women who choose to terminate pregnancies that more respect and consideration of the dangers acts like the one mentioned above would be sanctioned in a court of law. What does this say about our nation? Are we a schizophrenic people? Is it all hypocrisy? For some it must be a difficult case to process, especially if they happen to both adamantly support the right and authority of police to utilize whatever force they deem necessary, yet on the other hand vehemently oppose any danger or threat posed toward a fetus. I would ask that those who feel strongly toward both to please give insight how one deals with such a moral position. Was it right for the police officer to tase her? Or was doing so violating the duty to the protection of an unborn child?
In Turkey, a larger debate is taking place that leads those of us who are outside to wonder whether we have a right to interfere in the policies of a culture not our own. Women in Turkey are banned from seeking artificial insemination abroad, for the practice violates the country's laws. For a people who, as I understand it, value human life and increasing the chance of children, it seems a schism between policy and... something else, to imprison women should they seek to increase their chance at conceiving. Clearly, as the rest of the article would indicate, this is tied intrinsically into a deeper power play within the political arena of modern day Turkey; something to which I am woefully ignorant. However, this obsession with assuring that women bear children, but the right children seems far outside the realm of rationalization. For certainly, if there are women to prosecute for becoming inseminated, this means that there are Turkish citizens who think they should have the right to practice this form of conception.
For now, I shall be grateful that there are women like Ilkkaracan in Turkey fighting for the rights of women within the context of their own culture, but what if her voice and those like hers are silenced? Do women from the outside, especially we privileged women in the U.S. have any right to step in and fight on behalf of them? At what point does legislation of women's bodies cease to be something that governments continue to take authority over?
Certainly our own government continues to struggle with these issues to this day. Just look at the types of women's rights slippage introduced into the recent healthcare bill! I do not wish to say that all women are the same in every culture, the blanket feminism applied by Western scholars over the world's women has proved disastrous time and again, but I do wish to recognize that on some level, we are all fighting for similar goals; most notably to be treated as human beings. Everything else is details, and to that, I would say that we should support the culturally coherent goals of those fighting within their own societies for the rights they deem are appropriate to them. Just as I hope that should women within the U.S. ever find ourselves silenced, those outside our borders would support us in reclaiming our agency.
That being said, I must wonder, who is already silenced within our nation? As this blog has already proven, I have a few ideas thus far...
In most of my circles, my friends and colleagues would say the woman. However, we continue to see policies both direct and indirect, local and international, that give us pause.
Two recent articles both dealing with women and pregnancy struck me, both for their injustice, but also for the ways in which the rhetoric surrounding women's bodies continues to be framed in patriarchal, controlling tones.
I have a very visceral repulsion of the recent use and abuse of tasers by police officers. Where they might hesitate to pull a gun, too often, we see videos and news reports that show people given the authority to protect citizens, often abuses that power to intimidate or simply to get their way. Unfortunately, the courts frequently back up this behavior of the police officers, even when there was no perceived threat by the person on which it was used. A very disturbing example happened recently here in Seattle.
A woman seven months pregnant was pulled over for speeding in a school zone. She refused to sign the ticket, because she did not wish to admit guilt. Normally, as many commenters pointed out, this would lead to her being cited, sent a summons, and they would battle it out in court. However, the officer decided that her belligerence, within her vehicle, and with no threat of harm or any sign of a weapon, warranted Tasering. The threat to her unborn child, something that many people seem is a life sacrosanct at conception, a fetus now nearing its development in utero, wanted, and intended to be kept, was threatened because someone with a badge wanted to prove they were mighty.
I cannot imagine the horror she must have gone through at such an experience wondering if her child was harmed in such a way. There are no studies to show what effects Tasering has in the long-term on adults, let alone what it does to developing fetuses. Though reports say she gave birth to a healthy child, the mother is permanently scarred, and there is no way to be certain that long-term damage has yet to be seen within the child as it grows. For a non-lethal weapon, Tasering has a growing list of deaths associated with its use, and reports of abuses are piling up fast.
What does this have to do with policy, rhetoric, and pregnancy? I find it odd that in a country where people scream obscenities at women who choose to terminate pregnancies that more respect and consideration of the dangers acts like the one mentioned above would be sanctioned in a court of law. What does this say about our nation? Are we a schizophrenic people? Is it all hypocrisy? For some it must be a difficult case to process, especially if they happen to both adamantly support the right and authority of police to utilize whatever force they deem necessary, yet on the other hand vehemently oppose any danger or threat posed toward a fetus. I would ask that those who feel strongly toward both to please give insight how one deals with such a moral position. Was it right for the police officer to tase her? Or was doing so violating the duty to the protection of an unborn child?
In Turkey, a larger debate is taking place that leads those of us who are outside to wonder whether we have a right to interfere in the policies of a culture not our own. Women in Turkey are banned from seeking artificial insemination abroad, for the practice violates the country's laws. For a people who, as I understand it, value human life and increasing the chance of children, it seems a schism between policy and... something else, to imprison women should they seek to increase their chance at conceiving. Clearly, as the rest of the article would indicate, this is tied intrinsically into a deeper power play within the political arena of modern day Turkey; something to which I am woefully ignorant. However, this obsession with assuring that women bear children, but the right children seems far outside the realm of rationalization. For certainly, if there are women to prosecute for becoming inseminated, this means that there are Turkish citizens who think they should have the right to practice this form of conception.
But Pinar Ilkkaracan, a prominent women's rights campaigner in Turkey, said it would be a misinterpretation of a law intended to protect the inheritance rights of children. "This is completely against the philosophy of the reformed penal code," she told the BBC. "We spent years fighting to improve the law so that it would properly protect women's autonomy over their bodies and sexuality. "This government has slipped this regulation in without any debate in parliament."
For now, I shall be grateful that there are women like Ilkkaracan in Turkey fighting for the rights of women within the context of their own culture, but what if her voice and those like hers are silenced? Do women from the outside, especially we privileged women in the U.S. have any right to step in and fight on behalf of them? At what point does legislation of women's bodies cease to be something that governments continue to take authority over?
Certainly our own government continues to struggle with these issues to this day. Just look at the types of women's rights slippage introduced into the recent healthcare bill! I do not wish to say that all women are the same in every culture, the blanket feminism applied by Western scholars over the world's women has proved disastrous time and again, but I do wish to recognize that on some level, we are all fighting for similar goals; most notably to be treated as human beings. Everything else is details, and to that, I would say that we should support the culturally coherent goals of those fighting within their own societies for the rights they deem are appropriate to them. Just as I hope that should women within the U.S. ever find ourselves silenced, those outside our borders would support us in reclaiming our agency.
That being said, I must wonder, who is already silenced within our nation? As this blog has already proven, I have a few ideas thus far...
Overblown Charges
(Click the picture to see full size in a new window.)
At a time in our nation when it's ok for strangers to view you naked at the airport without your consent (and I find a 74% positive response suspect; what were the questions? How random was this sample of the population?), and includes scanning of and photographs of nude children in the name of "national security" (I know I feel more secure that they can see me naked), we continue to swing just as widely to the extreme when it comes to children and any form of sexualization.
(Click the picture to see full size in a new window.)
In March, a couple in Utah were arrested for sexual abuse of their infant son when pictures were processed at a local drug store revealing the father kissing the nude baby all over, which based on established, cultural norms is a sign of pride and affection from a father to a son. The store employee who processed the photographs overreacted to the photos out of context and contacted authorities. However, even as the charges of abuse were dropped, the couple remained in custody as illegal aliens.
(Click the picture to see full size in a new window.)
And in other over-the-top charges, Andrew Buck, a 27 year old middle school teacher and a golf coach at a high school, was arrested for having sexual contact with an 18 year old girl. Faced with a class D felony with up to 5 years in prison... and for what? Sex with a legal adult? The reporters haven't said much about this case since, but not one mentioned any contact between Buck and the alleged victim before she reached age of consent. The only concern is that she is a student at the high school where he coached golf. Not one mention was made as to whether he was in a position of authority over her, his full-time teaching status was at the local middle school.
Even if, somehow, their relationship crossed the bounds of his contract with the school, suspension or resignation would make more sense than five years in prison for screwing an 18 year old. Now this man will be marked a sexual predator for the rest of his life, serve hard time, and likely be unable to ever gain employment in any profession for which he was trained. For having sex with an adult. Whom is this protecting? Whom do these laws serve to protect?
Recent cases of true concern include the following:
Although it concerns me that authorities would consider prosecuting the underage teens as well, a 19 year old man brought underage girls and their friends over to his house to have sex while he watched through a hole. This is one of those times when one must consider the poor judgment and lack of warnings given to those crossing over the threshold into "adulthood" who still may be socially involved with (and find easy to seduce), those younger than them. Clearly, though, as a legal adult, the 19 year old should be tried, however, the grey area comes when we discuss those who engaged in sex between the ages of 11-14. When we have taken away the legal right and ability of those under 18 to consent, how can we then speak to any of them consenting to have sex with one another? Let us hope, though, that should these activities have been through some form of willing experimentation, none of the minors are permanently labeled criminals for their curiosity.
While the reports are coming in decades too late, at least those former singers of the Vienna Boys' Choir are now coming forward to speak out against those priests who abused their positions of power over them. Despite my distaste for the overzealous use of sex abuse laws where they are not needed, the awareness of such crimes, and the clear path for discourse has allowed many people to step forward and shed light on similar abuses. As for comments by Merkel and the Pope... Perhaps I shall let my politics lie here for the moment, and be grateful to the agency that final is giving voice to survivors of real abuse.
Sunday, March 07, 2010
Quick Links for Future Reference
Washington State Institute for Public Policy's list of juvenile civil justice.
The Ruth Dykeman Children's Center, which includes residential treatment programs for both survivors of and perpetrators of sexual assault.
HB 1473, a bill currently in the Washington state legislature that would require additional information be given to students receiving sex education to understand the laws surrounding adolescent sexuality and the potential consequences should they be caught breaking those laws.
Invisible Children blog provides a modest proposal for the end of criminalization of children in all forms, and seeks to create a dialogue about assisting and supporting our youth rather than impoverishing and punishing them. Also on that blog is a call for civil justice along the same lines. (Links found through one of my LinkedIn groups.)
Blogger Greta Christina writes about sex and the off-label use of our bodies, arguing for a different perspective on the non-procreative sex acts that humans engage in across the world. While the whole of her entry is inspiring and eloquent, the heart of it lies here:
Off-label uses of body parts and biological functions aren’t just acceptable and morally neutral. They are some of the most beautiful, honorable, and deeply treasured parts of the human experience. Human beings took our animal need for palatable food . . . and turned it into chocolate souffles with salted caramel cream. We took our ability to co-operate as a social species . . . and turned it into craft circles and bowling leagues and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. We took our capacity to make and use tools . . . and turned it into the Apollo moon landing. We took our uniquely precise ability to communicate through language . . . and turned it into King Lear. None of these things are necessary for survival and reproduction. That is exactly what makes them so splendid. When we take our basic evolutionary wiring and transform it into something far beyond any prosaic matters of survival and reproduction . . . that’s when humanity is at its best. That’s when we show ourselves to be capable of creating meaning and joy, for ourselves and for one another. That’s when we’re most uniquely human.
Friday, March 05, 2010
More Sensationalism - Reading the Language of the Anonymous Masses
CBS recently featured an article entitled Outrage Growing Over Repeat Sex Offenders, and I must wonder whether this headline itself doesn't fuel that type of mentality. In the article, Ben Tracy feeds fuel to the fire of fear by including the following paragraphs:
Experts say there are not enough parole officers to monitor the more than 700,000 registered sex offenders in the United States. At least 100,000 may not even be living where they say they are.Not only does this heighten the "growing outrage" of the U.S. public, it gives further incentive to doubt the systems that have been put in place to help track, monitor, and prevent further attacks by sex offenders without providing a discussion of why there are not enough officers or why these systems may be insufficient. At no point does the author suggest any links between the blanket laws designed to prosecute and punish varying degrees of sexual activity as if they are the all the same crime. As one of the commenters, Fatesrider, stated rather eloquently:
"The sex offender registry provides this false sense of security we are monitoring and doing something with the sex offenders out there," said Robin Sax, a former Los Angeles county prosecutor.
And monitoring doesn't always work. Even with home inspections, Phillip Garrido was still able to hide Jaycee Dugard in his backyard for 18 years. Last November in Cleveland, 11 bodies were found in the house of another registered sex offender being monitored by police.
The trouble with the term "sex offender" is that it paints a guy who has consensual sex with his 17 year old girlfriend on the night he turns 18 with the same brush as a violent child sex predator. In the eyes of the law - being convicted of a sex crime - the two are EQUAL. We need to properly identify those who ARE violent, who ARE predators, who ARE worthy of being monitored. With draconian "you can't live here" laws being passed everywhere, and with so few actual predators worthy of being monitored, we are knee-jerking ourselves into a corner with respect to our ability to try to keep our communities safer. There are just too many to oversee and many of THEM are falling off the radar because no one knows where they are. We have to focus in on those individuals likely to re-offend and see to it they never do again. And we have to cut those convicted of consensual sex acts some slack and not necessarily automatically brand them with the same scarlet letter. So rather than some other knee-jerk, draconian, idiotic ploy that doesn't work, how about applying some of that alleged intelligence humans have for fixing a problem and find a solution instead of a band-aid?This comes back to the issues we face as a society that prosecutes children and teens for experimental sexuality, and for consensual sex between teens crossing the arbitrary border of consent from "child" to "adult" with little allowance for the recognition of stages of maturation with the same level of severity as that of habitual rapists, molesters, and murderers. Where is the justice? Where is the discussion of reform? I don't care for most major networks that sensationalize news and focus on tragedy without true depth of investigation. However, I did create an account with the CBS web site in order to comment to Fatesrider who had already said much of what I wished to bring to bear.
Thank you. As someone who is both a survivor of childhood sexual abuse AND as a person seeking to reform our sex offender laws, these frothing-at-the-mouth hell-and-damnation reactions do not allow us to discuss the real issues behind overcrowding and lack of efficient monitoring of real offenders. When we criminalize children with the same laws intended to protect them, we're not helping anyone. We end up stigmatizing and marginalizing youth engaged in natural, exploratory behavior, and we flood the system with so-called "sex offenders" of every degree, and monitor them equally as monsters. We need to start a dialogue of reform, and discuss with our legislators the difference between truly malicious and harmful individuals in our society, and those who fall outside such categories that get caught up in the language of the law. *Then* we can better address what ways to handle those who, like Gardner, who are the true criminals.Sadly, my words were not as eloquent as the original commenter, but after reading the majority of comments that appealed to either a particular Christian standard of morals that includes violence and calls for extreme forms of punishment for all "sex offenders" without addressing the problematic labeling, I wanted to add to the discourse on reform. These articles are currently vehicles for delivering fear and to gain immediate, extreme responses from their audience. It is our responsibility as citizens to adapt this divisive, inflammatory language into a vehicle for discourse of reform and as opportunities for education and outreach.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Frustrations (Not the Fun Kind)
It does seem to me that with every topic I study from prostitution to climate change to transnationalism to toxic waste to education to children labeled as sex offenders and beyond, that no matter what the topic, I feel as though I'm getting too bogged down into the details and attacking a symptom to understand how it works. It's a very top-down approach, when what I want to be discovering is the heart of the cause of these symptoms, and the rhythm at which it beats. Again and again within the anthropological discourse from every class and research project, I've found at least one author (and usually many more than one) among the readings who lament the lack of inter- and intra-discipline discourse that shares the findings of a particular nuance within one of those segments of the larger picture. As I read, I feel as though I am being given one puzzle piece at a time for a jigsaw puzzle with over a billion parts. Somehow I get the feeling that even if I had all the pieces and hundreds of people to help me assemble the great picture, the image itself would distort the true workings going on beneath the cardboard backing.
Even if these three narrowed topics I've chosen could be selected from either through coin toss or long deliberation, I can't help feeling that if I were to spend years of my life focused on only one of them, my efforts would be wasted. There is a greater dialogue that needs to be happening that has some potential to reshape the ways in which we operate as a society. If I think locally, is there a place where I could best target that which is a smaller form of the greater cause? Would I recognize it if I saw its face?
We talk within academia about capitalism in terms of it as a corrupt system, but never use the word corrupt. Are we so frightened by what happened during the Red Scare to voice the problems inherent in this particular system? This is not to say that other models of governance and societal structures have been without their problems. Socialism is a nice idea in theory, but so is democracy.
Then again, we use capitalism as the scapegoat even if we are unable to fully frame it in those terms. While the system itself is inherently corrupt, drawing on our instincts for competition and sexual dominance/fitness, and only works within an ever-expanding framework of growth that must create hierarchies of inequality and marginalization, are we not to blame, as a (mostly) global population for buying into it? (Pardon the pun.)
*sighs*
"Few serious attempts have been made to bring the literature together or even to follow-up on previous studies" wrote Davis and Whitten (1987: 88). While this was written over twenty years ago, and was specifically about research in human sexuality, it could very easily apply to almost any anthropological focus, or really, any true academic work. Not only do we fail as researchers to truly come together--in part, due to the competition inherent in academic fieldwork and the vying for grant and research funding--but we fail to take our discourse to a higher level and apply it. I wish I had the health, the stamina, and the mind to know how to accomplish this. Even if only on one topic within the larger scope of research, academic, public, or private. If I could manage to bring even a small group of minds together, discourse on an issue facing us as a society whether local, national, or global, and be able to work together to seek out the cause(s) and find reasonable, sustainable, real-world solutions, I would feel as though I had accomplished something.
After all, even switching to local, organic apples in schools, acts as the drop on the water that creates water to change the pond.
Even if these three narrowed topics I've chosen could be selected from either through coin toss or long deliberation, I can't help feeling that if I were to spend years of my life focused on only one of them, my efforts would be wasted. There is a greater dialogue that needs to be happening that has some potential to reshape the ways in which we operate as a society. If I think locally, is there a place where I could best target that which is a smaller form of the greater cause? Would I recognize it if I saw its face?
We talk within academia about capitalism in terms of it as a corrupt system, but never use the word corrupt. Are we so frightened by what happened during the Red Scare to voice the problems inherent in this particular system? This is not to say that other models of governance and societal structures have been without their problems. Socialism is a nice idea in theory, but so is democracy.
Then again, we use capitalism as the scapegoat even if we are unable to fully frame it in those terms. While the system itself is inherently corrupt, drawing on our instincts for competition and sexual dominance/fitness, and only works within an ever-expanding framework of growth that must create hierarchies of inequality and marginalization, are we not to blame, as a (mostly) global population for buying into it? (Pardon the pun.)
*sighs*
"Few serious attempts have been made to bring the literature together or even to follow-up on previous studies" wrote Davis and Whitten (1987: 88). While this was written over twenty years ago, and was specifically about research in human sexuality, it could very easily apply to almost any anthropological focus, or really, any true academic work. Not only do we fail as researchers to truly come together--in part, due to the competition inherent in academic fieldwork and the vying for grant and research funding--but we fail to take our discourse to a higher level and apply it. I wish I had the health, the stamina, and the mind to know how to accomplish this. Even if only on one topic within the larger scope of research, academic, public, or private. If I could manage to bring even a small group of minds together, discourse on an issue facing us as a society whether local, national, or global, and be able to work together to seek out the cause(s) and find reasonable, sustainable, real-world solutions, I would feel as though I had accomplished something.
After all, even switching to local, organic apples in schools, acts as the drop on the water that creates water to change the pond.
Monday, February 08, 2010
Beginning of a Bibliography
I have sorted through my selected works, set up a tentative layout for my finished paper, and have begun the careful study of my three narrowed topics. Still many obstacles to the criminalization of children; it is neither a well-researched topic within anthropology, nor it is a subject anyone wishes to take on within legislation. Judith Levine and the RSOL seem to be my primary sources of information at the moment, though I am also reviewing anthropological texts regarding sex education and other childhood sexuality issues to see what I can pull from there to find a foundational understanding of our current cultural perceptions of sex and adolescence.
Tomorrow: My second meeting with the CCSL! Wednesday: Meeting and progress report
Tomorrow: My second meeting with the CCSL! Wednesday: Meeting and progress report
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Judith Levine and Campus Coalition for Sexual Literacy
I heard back from Judith Levine! She responded within a day of my email, which made me rather giddy. She's a hero of mine, and her Harmful to Minors: the Perils of Protecting Children from Sex was a great inspiration to me several years ago when I read it. Not only was she quite supportive of my endeavors, but gave me some resources to utilize in my research and to pursue for further activism with regards to the criminalization of children.
The biggest resource she sent me is a link to the Reform Sex Offender Laws site, already linked to Washington state's representative for these issues. As I study the media surrounding the labeling of children as sexual predators, I will be contacting the local representative to talk about ways in which I, and others, can get involved in changing legislation. The battle is a tough one, because no one wants to be seen as anti-child.
On Tuesday, I attended my first Campus Coalition for Sexual Literacy, which meets every other Tuesday from 3-4p.m. in the Q-Center. I met two people who already are big activists in sexual literacy. While much of our conversation involved a private discussion, some of our focus was on services we can provide for people on campus. We are planning both a more intimate, safe-space discussion for a topic (we brainstormed a number of topics to discuss), and an on-campus "Ask the Sexpert" styled event for spring in which we will make ourselves available in visible areas such as Red Square or the lawn in front of the HUB, and answer questions people ask us.
While there, I introduced myself, gave them some information about my skills, and let them know where I might be of use to them. I'm looking forward to the next meeting!
On this week's agenda: 1. Start reading Out in Public, which just arrived in the mail. 2. Contact RSOL in Washington. 3. Continue research on Children and Sexual Predator labels.
The biggest resource she sent me is a link to the Reform Sex Offender Laws site, already linked to Washington state's representative for these issues. As I study the media surrounding the labeling of children as sexual predators, I will be contacting the local representative to talk about ways in which I, and others, can get involved in changing legislation. The battle is a tough one, because no one wants to be seen as anti-child.
On Tuesday, I attended my first Campus Coalition for Sexual Literacy, which meets every other Tuesday from 3-4p.m. in the Q-Center. I met two people who already are big activists in sexual literacy. While much of our conversation involved a private discussion, some of our focus was on services we can provide for people on campus. We are planning both a more intimate, safe-space discussion for a topic (we brainstormed a number of topics to discuss), and an on-campus "Ask the Sexpert" styled event for spring in which we will make ourselves available in visible areas such as Red Square or the lawn in front of the HUB, and answer questions people ask us.
While there, I introduced myself, gave them some information about my skills, and let them know where I might be of use to them. I'm looking forward to the next meeting!
On this week's agenda: 1. Start reading Out in Public, which just arrived in the mail. 2. Contact RSOL in Washington. 3. Continue research on Children and Sexual Predator labels.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Harmful to Minors
Today I contacted Judith Levine, author of Harmful to Minors, which I read a few years ago and found to be one of the few voices speaking out against the hysteria that has culminated in our legal system and how we treat innocent, natural explorations of children and adolescent sexuality in a criminal manner. In this climate, preschoolers can be labeled as sex harassers for hugging a teacher, holding hands or a playground peck is now grounds for a lifelong sentence as a sexual predator, or at least close scrutiny within an elementary school that will slap it on a permanent record.
Since reading her book, Judith has become one of my heroes in the efforts to bring sanity and reason back to discussions about human sexuality in general, and within education in particular. My main query was to discover whether or not there are any groups, organizations, or otherwise actively seeking to counter these laws that punish children in incomprehensible ways. I hope that she will reply, though I imagine she receives a great inundation of emails on a regular basis, and am feeling like a nervous fangirl.
Before sending the email, I had already participated in an online discussion regarding a blog entry titled "Turning Kids Into Criminals" (found here). My response to someone who argued that the data seemed vague as did any real accounts of injustice:
Since reading her book, Judith has become one of my heroes in the efforts to bring sanity and reason back to discussions about human sexuality in general, and within education in particular. My main query was to discover whether or not there are any groups, organizations, or otherwise actively seeking to counter these laws that punish children in incomprehensible ways. I hope that she will reply, though I imagine she receives a great inundation of emails on a regular basis, and am feeling like a nervous fangirl.
Before sending the email, I had already participated in an online discussion regarding a blog entry titled "Turning Kids Into Criminals" (found here). My response to someone who argued that the data seemed vague as did any real accounts of injustice:
People often cite the ambiguous nature of teen years when one individual in a couple suddenly crosses that invisible "18" line and suddenly becomes a criminal. Or even teens under the age of 18 engaging in consensual, exploratory sex, a natural part of development, in which one partner (usually male) is prosecuted by the other partner's parents for rape. But the hysteria is far worse than that. There are growing reports from around the nation of elementary students, kindergartners, and even preschoolers being labeled sexual harassers by their schools or even brought up on legal charges by parents of so-called victims for simple shows of innocent affection like attempting a playground kiss or even for hugging a teacher. A three year old preschooler, just out of diapers will have a permanent mark as having engaged in inappropriate physical conduct throughout elementary school because he hugged a teacher. This is where these laws get completely out of hand. In Harmful to Minors, a book challenging many of our views on children, sexuality, and sex education, the author, Judith Levine, offers many examples in which our broad-based laws and rabid fear of anything remotely sexual among American youth has backfired. When holding hands, playground pecks, natural curiosity, and hugging is deemed worthy of criminal action, what are we teaching our children? Most schools do not even express in clearly defined ways what types of touch are appropriate, and which are grounds for potential legal action. In all of the fervor to "think of the children," it doesn't seem as though there is much "thinking" going on at all.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Beginning the Search
Before I began my search for articles for my bibliography, I had to address the internal issues facing me. Though my comfort zones and past experiences have given me a wealthy foundation of information about human sexuality, and I could see many places in which that knowledge could be put to use, by my senior year I already had doubts about whether or not to continue to pursue this "comfortable path."
With our nation's political climate being hostile for the last ten years, ever since the Bush administration's theft of the United States, we remain uninsured, in debt, and overconsumers of our environment. All of these issues take precendence in my mind for topics that need to be addressed by the citizens of this country, and such changes can be supported by anthropologists willing to put in the effort toward public discourse and active changes on a community level.
Entering the quarter, I had already attempted to contact several individuals from previous Lavender Language Conferences who presented topics that were of interest to me. Only one among them returned my emails, and was able to direct me toward other resources, but had nothing to share from recent publications.
Not wanting to let this stand in my way, I began a systematic search of anthropological journal articles published over the last fifteen years with various keyword searches such as "gender," "transgender," "queer," "gay," "lesbian," "prostitute," "sex work," et al. Despite the diverse qualifiers I offered the search, the majority of my results turned up primarily international, regionally-based, and often highly biased returns. Again, I pressed on. I decided to branch out into other fields as well, collecting information from women's study articles, and also current publications in the broad media.
In many ways this will require a cross-disciplinary viewpoint, for there are some issues not being addressed by Anthropology today, and others that are only represented through the limited lens of a specific region. While diverse sources are important to gain a broader perspective on over-arching themes within human sexuality research, I know that I will likely be spending my in-public work within the local Seattle area, or at least somewhere within the United States. I am a firm believer that we must work on ourselves before we can attempt to adequately assist others in their goals towards region-based progress.
[This is, of course, a lot of jargon. Are you laughing yet Holly? Karen would be slapping my hands and giving me a lecture right about now.]
Another aspect of my initial searches involved a discovery of areas that I felt need further addressing or at least further research. While my first list of terms I wished to explore under the heading of human sexuality grew rather cumbersome, seeing what was already available in the literature and comparing that to recent news reports that concerned me, I found myself most especially drawn to a few core issues: decriminalizing prostitution, the criminalization of children who are eternally labeled "sex predators" for minor exploratory instances, and the juxtaposition of gender identity and sexual preference including terms like transgendered and gender queer.
By focusing on narrower topics, I can better explore where future work could have meaning should I explore it. While I remain interested in further studies of polyamory, the "kink community," pre-natal and post-partum sexuality, and childhood development, to pursue them would be narcissistic and what I consider "taking the easy path."
Nevertheless I must return to my original statement that I am now unsure whether human sexuality itself is even relevant to the more pressing concerns of food security and environmental damage from anthropogenic sources. No matter how much I wish to see justice for the people, it matters little if there is nowhere for humans to live or any resources with which they can survive.
Then again, I am unsure if I have the stamina necessary for work within environmental spheres. Perhaps in many ways, human sexuality remains an escape plan, a way of moving away from the real work that needs to be done immediately. An optomistic view, though, might suggest that if I am creative enough, I could work to assist in systemic changes that address both the concerns of individuals on a social justice level and the urgent needs of a globe facing severe changes over the course of the next thirty years.
STATUS UPDATE: Though in some ways I am well ahead of where I wish to be mentally for this independent study project, the actual reading of texts and creation of a rough bibliography is not where I intended by the third week. However, narrowing my focus should help me provide more quality research for each subject.
With our nation's political climate being hostile for the last ten years, ever since the Bush administration's theft of the United States, we remain uninsured, in debt, and overconsumers of our environment. All of these issues take precendence in my mind for topics that need to be addressed by the citizens of this country, and such changes can be supported by anthropologists willing to put in the effort toward public discourse and active changes on a community level.
Entering the quarter, I had already attempted to contact several individuals from previous Lavender Language Conferences who presented topics that were of interest to me. Only one among them returned my emails, and was able to direct me toward other resources, but had nothing to share from recent publications.
Not wanting to let this stand in my way, I began a systematic search of anthropological journal articles published over the last fifteen years with various keyword searches such as "gender," "transgender," "queer," "gay," "lesbian," "prostitute," "sex work," et al. Despite the diverse qualifiers I offered the search, the majority of my results turned up primarily international, regionally-based, and often highly biased returns. Again, I pressed on. I decided to branch out into other fields as well, collecting information from women's study articles, and also current publications in the broad media.
In many ways this will require a cross-disciplinary viewpoint, for there are some issues not being addressed by Anthropology today, and others that are only represented through the limited lens of a specific region. While diverse sources are important to gain a broader perspective on over-arching themes within human sexuality research, I know that I will likely be spending my in-public work within the local Seattle area, or at least somewhere within the United States. I am a firm believer that we must work on ourselves before we can attempt to adequately assist others in their goals towards region-based progress.
[This is, of course, a lot of jargon. Are you laughing yet Holly? Karen would be slapping my hands and giving me a lecture right about now.]
Another aspect of my initial searches involved a discovery of areas that I felt need further addressing or at least further research. While my first list of terms I wished to explore under the heading of human sexuality grew rather cumbersome, seeing what was already available in the literature and comparing that to recent news reports that concerned me, I found myself most especially drawn to a few core issues: decriminalizing prostitution, the criminalization of children who are eternally labeled "sex predators" for minor exploratory instances, and the juxtaposition of gender identity and sexual preference including terms like transgendered and gender queer.
By focusing on narrower topics, I can better explore where future work could have meaning should I explore it. While I remain interested in further studies of polyamory, the "kink community," pre-natal and post-partum sexuality, and childhood development, to pursue them would be narcissistic and what I consider "taking the easy path."
Nevertheless I must return to my original statement that I am now unsure whether human sexuality itself is even relevant to the more pressing concerns of food security and environmental damage from anthropogenic sources. No matter how much I wish to see justice for the people, it matters little if there is nowhere for humans to live or any resources with which they can survive.
Then again, I am unsure if I have the stamina necessary for work within environmental spheres. Perhaps in many ways, human sexuality remains an escape plan, a way of moving away from the real work that needs to be done immediately. An optomistic view, though, might suggest that if I am creative enough, I could work to assist in systemic changes that address both the concerns of individuals on a social justice level and the urgent needs of a globe facing severe changes over the course of the next thirty years.
STATUS UPDATE: Though in some ways I am well ahead of where I wish to be mentally for this independent study project, the actual reading of texts and creation of a rough bibliography is not where I intended by the third week. However, narrowing my focus should help me provide more quality research for each subject.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)