Mad Men Living On in 2015? : The Unequal Pay for Equal Work Debate

Please read the following article from the Huffington Post Blogs page:

“Half a Century Later, Mad Men’s Peggy Olson Is Still Waiting for Paycheck Fairness”

For Friday, April 3rd Discussion

(I’ve been on a Mad Men binge so if you don’t like Mad Men, sorry. I’m obsessed.)

In her blog, Deborah J. Vagins discusses the still very prevalent issue of unequal pay for equal work.

In the 1960’s President Kennedy signed into effect the Equal Pay Act, which theoretically was supposed to force employers to pay their female employees the same as their male counterparts that hold the same position. Example, if a man were a copywriter and an advertising agency (Mad Men reference again), his female coworker also a copywriter would receive the same pay. In general, pretty awesome and life changing for women’s right.

However, over time loopholes were found and even today in 2015, there still is a wage gap between men and women. Most recently, an analysis of the California Capitol found that women who work in the Capitol or on legislative staff do not receive the same pay as their male counterparts. (You can find more information about this here if you’re interested).

Even in 2015, many feel like they can’t do much, quoting Vagins:

“It’s 2015 and women’s wages lag behind men, many of the tools to do anything about it are weak, and most workers still cannot talk about their pay without fear of retaliation.”

In general, women still in 2015 do not receive the same wages as men.

For fun, here’s a chart from the White House Website published in August 2014:

So what do you think:

• Are lawmakers doing enough to make “equal pay for equal work” a priority or do you think they are just sweeping it under the rug?
• Regarding the quote by Vagins, do you feel like women “cannot talk about their pay without fear of retaliation”- why or why not?
• Based on your ideas and opinions about feminism, does feminism help or hinder the progress of the “equal pay” push?

The Rise of Stay at Home Moms

Read this first!

In her article, “Making time for kids? Study says quality trumps quantity,” Brigid Schulte takes the burden off women when it comes to being a mother. Schulte tackles the topic that had previously riddled the minds of parents and sociology researchers alike. Does spending more time with children as parents (or as a mother) result in a better childhood and a better future for kids? Schulte cites a study that found that what parents did with their children in the time they had was more important than the amount of time they spent with their children; i.e. “quality trumps quantity.”

We’ve previously thought of parenting as a job primarily for mothers or mother figures, not “parents” as the verb might suggest. This is mostly evident in the resulting stress of pressure for mother figures in households to spend time with their children. With the added pressures of our modern society to also keep a full time job, women have their hands full, and are charged with performing the notorious “juggling act.”

“No one ever asks [my husband] how he’s balancing it all,” one mom that Schulte spoke with said. “I don’t know why it is that I am trying to be the perfect mother, but I definitely am. That voice in my head is not very gentle,” she said.

The pressures that mothers feel to be exceptional parents are apparently attributable to external factors; society’s previously prescribed role for women in the home. Jennifer Senior drew similar conclusions and also found that this “guilt” is easily society’s reluctance towards working mothers.

“Perhaps if you were part of a culture that actually felt less ambivalent about mothers working, and had a system of child care in place where it was okay for mothers to work, I think you would automatically feel less guilt and pressure to spend more time with kids,” she said.

The soon to be published study that Schulte cites also suggests that the amount of time (hours per week) that women, and men, have been spending with their children has steadily increased over time.

Though Schulte does emphasize the role of women and mothers in her article, she also mentions the importance of men in the relationship. This is an important element to keep in mind as it demonstrates that this is an issue for both men and women to attend to. The entire realm of parenting could, and should, undergo a major shift towards more equalized pressure to parent, but less stress to be “perfect.”

Preliminary questions:

-Why has the idea that mothers need to spend more time with their kids been ingrained in the fabric of our society?

Consider each of the preliminary questions in your response to the following:

-How do you think this research will impact gender roles in the home?

Game of Thrones: Is it Feminist?

GAME OF THRONES SPOILER ALERT

Please read this article before proceeding. 

In this article, Eliana Dockterman writes of the pro and anti feminist aspects of the television show Game of Thrones. I found this article very interesting because I took a class in my senior year of high school on Game of Thrones. In this class we often discussed whether the show was pro or anti feminist. Many people I know who have never watched Game of Thrones think that the show is very anti-feminist, most likely because of the visible press surrounding the graphic nudity, sex scenes, and patriarchal society that is Game of Thrones. What they do not hear about is the immense power of the women overcoming this oppressive society. As Dockterman points out in her article, there is actually a clear growing strength of women in Game of Thrones. “Arya killed her first grown man with her sword; Ygritte refused to be scared by some cannibals threatening her and threatened them right back; Olenna Redwyne murdered Joffrey.” She also later mentions the powerful positions some women hold in the show such as Daenerys’ queenhood as well as examples of women becoming psychologically stronger as the show progresses with each episode. “Yes, women on the show are treated as sex objects, but now they’re learning to wield their sexuality as a weapon.”

This is what I thought was most interesting, and most important when considering whether the show is or is not feminist. Any viewer of the show constantly sees women, even the women in power, treated as sex objects, but Dockterman is absolutely right when she says the women on the show are learning to use this to their advantage. Doesn’t that in itself make this show feminist? The fact is that even in this culture where men are extremely oppressive towards women, many women are fighting back and taking the power. I completely agree with Dockterman when she says “The strength of these women is all the more impressive considering they live in a male-dominated world in which women don’t inherit property (except in Dorne), can’t be warriors (except among the wildlings and the ironborn) and are mainly expected to just produce heirs.”

This article has definitely challenged my understanding of what makes something feminist. When I look to my personal definition of what makes something feminist, equal rights and equal treatment, it definitely does not line up with the society of Game of Thrones, but when I think of the characters, it does. While the society and world of Game of Thrones is definitely not feminist in my mind, the female characters are as they fight and are determined to make the society more feminist. So does this make the show as a whole feminist?

What do you think? Is the show feminist or do the rapes and constant sexual objectivity of women take away from this and cause the show to come off as anti-feminist? Should the writers be trying to censor the show a bit more so it is not so graphic or is the graphicness an essential element of the show? Do you think the show affects its viewers in a positive or negative way in relation to how women should be treated?

The Taboo Against Tampons: What’s so bad about your period, after all?

Please read the following article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/27/rupi-kaur-period-instagram_n_6954898.html?utm_hp_ref=women&ir=Women

Getting your period isn’t glamorous. It isn’t empowering. It doesn’t magically “transform you into a woman.” Menstruation is one of the most important biological processes that a woman’s body undergoes, and yet it is still a taboo topic in the year 2015.

Just last week, artist Rupi Kaur decided to conduct a small social test to show the world just how ridiculous this societal fear of periods is. She posted a photo on Instagram depicting her laying in bed, with a small stain of blood on her pants and on the sheet underneath her. I admit that when I first saw the photo, shared by someone else on my own Instagram feed, I was taken aback. Before reading the caption, I thought that someone posted this to embarrass the girl in the photo. However, I read the caption and was immediately impressed at Kaur’s thoughtful project. My own instinctive reaction shows just how society has been conditioned to squirm at the idea of menstruation, and Kaur’s post made me realize how ridiculous that stigma really is.

The author of this article, Emma Gray, writes that Instagram removed Kaur’s photo TWICE after she posted it. This means that not only did someone report the photo to Instagram for removal, citing it as “going against community guidelines,” but Instagram editors agreed and chose to remove the photo. Granted, the photo isn’t pretty, but it is not offensive. Kaur was unapologetic, writing, “i will not apologize for not feeding the ego and pride of misogynist society that will have my body in an underwear but not be okay with a small leak. when your pages are filled with countless photos/accounts where women (so many who are underage) are objectified. pornified. and treated less than human.” (Check out Kaur’s Facebook page, https://www.facebook.com/rupikaurpoetry?fref=ts to see her  analysis of the project.)

Gray is right; violence and gore are more accepted in today’s society than a woman’s menstrual cycle. People get squeamish and change the channel when an ad for tampons comes on TV, but have no problem watching ads for Call of Duty, a game where people can slaughter each other for enjoyment. It’s time to remove the taboo and accept periods as a part of life. I’m not saying we women have to be treated like queens when it’s our time of the month, but society as a whole needs to grow up and be able to see a pantyliner in the trash without cringing!

Why do you think people are still so uncomfortable with the idea of periods today? Is it unreasonable to think that this is old-fashioned, or even mysogynistic? Do you think Kaur’s idea was too provocative, or will it spark a movement for change?  Leave your comments below!

What is it with the word slut?

Please read the following link first: http://time.com/3752821/monica-lewinsky-ted2015-slut-play/

In 2015, it’s not uncommon to hear the word “slut” on a daily basis. We hear girls call other girls sluts, boys calling girls sluts, read is as a derogatory word on social media, etc. Sometimes it’s even just said as a funny joke. Jessica Bennet, a reporter for Time, comments on how much use the word has in society today. So much so, that there is now a play entitled SLUT.

Monica Lewinsky brought a lot of attention to the word after her affair with Clinton broke in 1998. Nearly two decades later, and the harshness of the word slut is still what is used to define Monica today. In school, girls that are defined as sluts have trouble relieving themselves of that horrid title. Some are suggested switching schools if they are known as a slut.

The word originated in the early 1300’s, and was actually used to describe men who were unkept. If the word began to describe men, how did it get to the awful connotation is has today? Is there a way women can reclaim the word, or is the definition set in stone? Do men have more power in reclaiming it, or is it up to women?

-Makeup- Your Mind

** From 1:00-3:00 I’ll be participating in preparation for Lemonade Day, and sadly I cannot be here to do much facilitating! Please don’t let this defer you from leaving a comment!! Nonetheless, I’ll be online and replying to your comments after 3:30 PM, so please check back so we can keep the conversation going! Thanks.

Please first read from the following link: http://www.rolereboot.org/life/details/2012-10-why-makeup-is-a-waste-of-my-time

In her article Emily Heist Moss tells her audience of her experience with makeup, and how she thinks it’s a waste of her time. Within the text she argues that with the abundance of social media and unrealistic ideas of what a woman should look like, many women are feeling isolated, insecure, and lacking confidence. The question is, is makeup to blame?

As we live through her experiences from lower school to college, we not only see that exposure to makeup can start early, but also that as she gets older, it seems like she “needs” more and more “necessary” products. Not to mention the fact that when she didn’t know much about makeup at the age of 24, she was rudely laughed at! Excuse me; I didn’t know I only have 4-6 more years to master the art of makeup.

Moss mentions the word “mask-less” to describe a woman who is going out of the house without any makeup. Personally, I don’t like that term because I don’t think that makeup is a mask since it implies that we have something to hide. For me makeup wearing is an art form, a way of expression, even a stress reliever. I love taking the time in the morning, or on special occasions, to experiment with different eye shadows, lip colors, blushes etc. Does that mean I’m putting a mask on? Does it mean I have something to hide?

As we gear up for college and eventually joining the work force, the word “professionalism”, specifically in appearance, is brought up. If what Moss says is true, professionalism for women usually entails a little makeup, then my question is why? Is the basic hygiene of brushing teeth, showering, and hair combing not enough? Hmm.

Besides the questions scattered above, what do you think of what she has said? Is makeup a way for people to deal with their insecurities because of social medias portrayal of women (and men) as flawless human beings? Why do you wear makeup? And if you don’t, then why don’t you? When you see someone wearing makeup, do you automatically assume a specific idea?

 

Would Hillary Clinton’s Presidential win be anti-feminist?

Please read: http://www.cheatsheet.com/politics/hillary-clinton-shouldnt-be-president-a-feminist-perspective.html/?a=viewall

 

In this article, Anthea Mitchell writes about her concern that the election of Hillary Clinton would be a “slap in the face” to American women due to the fact that First Lady/Senator/Secretary Clinton has already had her foot in the door of the Presidency, per se.

 

Mitchell’s argument is that, of the 318 million qualified candidates, with half of those being women, America is looking to elect one that will have been “grandfathered in” by her husband’s career and connections, much in the way that family names have gotten other candidates their spots (looking at the Bushes and Kennedys of the political world).

 

Furthermore, Mitchell argues that we as Americans are quick to give Clinton more attention simply because of her name, and that the problem lies within the fact that both Hillary and her husband’s pathways were “paved with family, money, and connections and those educations and experiences family, money, and connections buy.” Mitchell wants to see a woman rise from her own merit so “the victory would feel more complete.”

 

With all that being said, Mitchell does not deny former Secretary Clinton’s credentials, and she even goes as far as to say she would be rooting for her if she does run in 2016. In my opinion, I get a sense that Mitchell’s problem lies more within the American people and their idea of a qualified candidate rather than Clinton herself.

Therefore, I have a few questions of opinion. 1) Does Clinton’s run/win have anything to do with feminism at all, and if it does, why? The same feelings could be aroused if Jeb Bush runs for President, and 2) Some could argue that Clinton will be held to a higher standard because she “knows the ropes” of the Presidency. Do you agree or disagree? and 3) Why, with all the other qualified female candidates, has American flocked to Clinton for President in 2016? Is it because of the name only?

What Actually Means “Feminism Today”?

Please read this article first: http://thoughtcatalog.com/lau-eugene/2014/12/why-feminism-today-disgusts-me/

In the article “Why ‘Feminism’ Today Disgusts Me” by Lau Eugene, he starts by declaring himself as a feminist but explaining that he is against what feminists today define as “feminism”. The problem with his claims is that he never actually defines what he thinks is “feminism’s” proper definition or what he understands “feminism today” is. Throughout this article, Eugene argues three different claims that disagree with what he says are the majority of feminists’ opinions today. In between the paragraphs, he repeatedly states “I am a feminist” – my guess is he does it so the reader does not forget he is a feminist, even though he expresses how he is in disagreement with the some of the feminists.

His first argument is that women have the responsibility to dress appropriately when walking late at night in order to not get raped. I understand his point when he explains that women have “to be careful and acknowledge the reality of our perverse and dangerous world,” but does this mean we have to change the way women dress? I don’t think so. Everybody has the right to express themselves how they want to – dress how they want to. I find it very unfair to blame women’s clothing choices for being raped. What about the man’s fault? HE is the one who is doing the act. No matter how “tempting” women’s clothing or lack thereof is for a man’s sexual desire – it shouldn’t be an excuse for a man to actually commit the crime of rape.

His second argument is that he does believe in equal rights for men and women, but does not believe in the complete equality between genders. This confuses me because isn’t that what feminism is all about? Eugene says “The way we think, behave, and even our genetic makeup is inherently different.” He basically says that we can’t be treated as complete equals. Well, the American Psychological Association (APA) states on their official website (apa.org) that after a review of dozens of studies, they have found that men and women are basically alike when it comes to personality, thinking ability and leadership. The APA also explains how the differences between genders are mainly because of social expectations, not biology.

I do agree with his claim about “gender roles,” though. I also find it “scary,” as Eugene says, that if parents buy “girly” gifts for their daughters, feminists will complain about that. In my opinion, it shouldn’t be frowned upon parents’ decision to buy their children toys commonly used by their children’s respective genders. Parents have no idea what their kids actually like or want, specially when they are still too young. Of course, I agree that if they notice that, for example, their daughter seems to prefers to play with her brother’s toy cars than her Barbie doll, then they should let her have a toy car.

His last argument is that feminists today, instead of advocating women’s equality to men, they use feminism as “an avenue for hate-speech against men or exalting women to a godlike status whereby anyone who has anything bad to say about a member of the female gender is automatically condemned to an eternal doom.” I agree somewhat with this claim because I do believe some feminists go to extremes and are “men-haters,” and that shouldn’t be classified as “feminism.” But in my opinion, I think this is mostly what people tend to think about feminists – that they are “men-haters”. I believe their intention is to make people acknowledge how women are as important and able as men, not advocate their superiority to men. I do completely disagree with his statement “As there are sexual predators among males who are a disgrace to us all, there are women who simply do not respect themselves enough to dress appropriately or to take precautions against such men.” A sexual predator is a person who commits violent sexual offenses… can you really equalize that with a woman who decides to wear “sexy” or “revealing” clothes? I still do not understand how people think that women who dress like that don’t respect themselves. Women do what they want – it doesn’t have to do with their self-esteem or their respect for themselves.

At the end, Eugene addresses his “haters” and says to them “to each their own.” I agree everyone has the right to be a feminist in the way they want to. I believe there is no right way to be a feminist. This leads me to think – is “feminism today” actually a thing? Eugene says how he disagrees with the majority of feminists, but how does he actually know for sure that’s what the majority of feminists think? I think every feminist has his/her own different opinions, but of course they share a common goal. But if feminists today have a variety of different opinions, what actually is “feminism today”?

As Eugene says to let him state his opinion, I stated mine and now I’d like to know yours. Do you agree or disagree with Eugene’s arguments? Why do you think he wrote “I am a feminist” between each paragraph? Do you agree with my claims? Do you believe all feminists should agree on certain aspects? Or should they have their different opinions and still be considered feminists?

Will we ever reach a consensus on rape?

The concepts of “victim blaming” and “consent” are terms that many of us often come across and are familiar with. It’s safe to say that most have a basic understanding of both terms, the issue of rape and sexual assault, and its severity. However, Hayley Rose Horzepa‘s article addresses a reality still relevant to today’s society; “acquaintance rape,” sexual assault committed by a friend, family member, ex-partner, or anyone the victim knows, accounts for far more than the majority of all rape cases. Horzepa attempts to bring to light how misleading the idea of rape and sexual assault really is by stating, “It is time to put an end to the biggest rape myth of all time. The rape myth I am talking about is that of the scary monster in the alley, because that is what many people think of when they hear the term ‘rapist.'” Unlike her straightforward article, Horzepa, although perhaps unintentionally, alludes to the ambiguous nature of rape and sexual assault. In addition to the “stranger danger” myth, she also touches on more uncertainties. For example, towards the end of her article, Horzepa, with certainty, urges her readers to help victims by listening, offering support, or even seeking law enforcement.

While there is no definite, right way to address a sexual assault case, Horzepa’s suggestion contrasts with Cynthia Kao‘s portrayal of law enforcement. In her video, Kao relates reporting a rape to reporting a robbery. The video, like Horzepa’s article, features several aspects of victim blaming, such as the consumption of alcohol and lack of “concrete” evidence. The robbed man while desperately seeking justice becomes exasperated and by the end of the video states, “This whole system is set up against the victim.” By concluding with the line, “Robbers will be robbers,” Kao underlines the ridiculousness of victim blaming by referencing the familiar societal attempt to excuse the act. Interestingly enough, Kao seems to desire a shift of blame to law enforcement, or perhaps even to our culture and society as a whole.

While both media pieces differ in some respects, the messages align and the focus remains on the situation after the assault and placing blame. Just to throw in another perspective, Denette Wilford explains Rockstar Dinosaur Pirate Princess’s metaphor of making someone tea in relation to consent. The details of the metaphor are outlined in the article and prove to be unquestionably clear and helpful. Analyzing all three articles and media, however, only leads to more uncertainty and confusion. Is law enforcement a helpful resource for victims? Is rape and consent as simple as offering a cup of tea? Why is it that individually each media piece is capable of being understood but when taken together lead to confusion and more questions? Ultimately, rape continues to occur. Classifying rape remains in a gray area. Handling and resolving rape cases remains daunting and isolating.

My question is, is it possible for our society to arrive at a unified, justified, and well-understood evaluation of rape? If it is possible, how do we go about that? Do we shift blame to anyone or anything other than the victim? Should we focus our attention on preventing rape or instead, accept that it will always be a reality and therefore address the aftermath and healing process?  More importantly, as an individual, do you buy the way in which each author appears to simplify the concept of rape along with all its consequences, like victim blaming?

Why do Feminism and Chivalry seem Counterintuitive to One Another?

Please read:http://www.bustle.com/articles/68516-emma-watson-said-feminism-chivalry-arent-mutually-exclusive-heres-why-shes-right

It’s no secret that the term “feminism” has taken on an entirely incorrect connotation in the minds of many people. The most common is that feminism is anti-men, or simply pro-women. While the idea of feminism certainly supports the rights of women, it cannot be forgotten that this concept is meant to promote equality between both genders, neither being more important or more powerful than the other. So, if this is the truth behind what feminists stand for, why is the concept of chivalry thought to be archaic and backwards?

The answer to this question stems from the basic definitions of each concept itself. As said before, feminism promotes gender equality, not a complete women’s takeover. Just as much, chivalry, is a concept that has evolved over time to promote the combination of qualities expected of an ideal man. This is commonly seen as the man in the relationship opening the door for his woman or pulling out her chair, while also extending to the man paying for the date.

Any person who has the wrong idea of feminism is going to have the wrong idea of chivalry, it’s as simple as that. Just because a man decides to open a door for a woman, that does not make the woman weak or incapable which seems to be the perception of the entire concept of chivalry. Since the idea of chivalry came about during a time when women were seen as less capable in the eyes of men, the concept over the years has taken on that assumption. However, what should have happened is this: As the idea of chivalry maintains its purpose of exemplifying what a good man is, women slowly become a more serious and prominent part of society. The two should have occurred at the same time, but instead, each diminished the other in the process.

So, why is this important that chivalry and feminism coexist peacefully in society today? I, for one, do not want my children to grow up thinking that women are subordinate to men OR that men should not still act generous and considerate toward women. Rather, I would want my child knowing that while it is perfectly OK to have a man open the door for you and buy you dinner, it is equally as okay for you to do the same for them. Chivalry and Feminism need to be thought of as “fighting the same fight” and maybe, then will the false assumptions and notions behind feminism be eradicated.

Do you think that chivalry and feminism ultimately work to achieve the same thing? What does the common view of chivalry do to the relationships of today, such as gays or transgenders? Does it harm them? Confuse them? How can we go about promoting the coexistence of these two extensively important aspects of societal structure?