Please post your blog comments to the readings here.
I seem to be confused on the weeks (if you were counting), this is week 7, not week 6.
Please post your blog comments to the readings here.
I seem to be confused on the weeks (if you were counting), this is week 7, not week 6.
The reading that really shocked me was A Glass Half Empty: Latina Reproduction and Public Discourse. It talked about how United States government and stereotypes are viewing Latina reproduction as out of control. However, contrary to what I, and most other people think, whites have a higher sexuality rate. Latina girls in the United States usually follow their cultural norms to the fullest. This leads to the lower sexuality rate. I believe that when immigrants or non-whites start to follow America’s norms they fall into sexual relations earlier than they would have in their native country. So, whose fault is this? I believe the media and television have a lot to do with how women portray their bodies and what they think is right. Also, the government put pressure on women to be more like the wealthier people in America. The wealthier people sterotypically caucasian. I think that the non- whites strive to be like what the American society wants. I believe that this leads to them being more sexually active, to fit in. America makes it seem like every other race other than Caucasians are having a problem with population control because of sexual behavior. Statistically, Caucasians have the biggest problem with sexual relations at an early age. The government is working so hard to fix the “problem” with immigrants sexual behavior, I think they need to focus on fixing the sexual behavior of the caucasians. To fix this, the government needs to change their ways and change America’s views and their social norms. This obviously would be very hard to di, but to help our overpoplulation it needs to be done. This also stems back to the fact that our government does not have enough resources. I think most of our problems today are because of this fact, and hopefully one day we can fix it.
Also, this reading discussed how Mexican- American women use contraception almost as much as American women do! While I was reading this, I just couldn’t believe it. Everything I have read and heard makes it seem like they don’t want to use contraception or just don’t care. It is really interesting to see how a government can completely blindfold you. I told some other people about this, and they really couldn’t believe it either! Just shows how the government will do anything to get you to believe what they want. Also, another interesting fact is that Mexican women were said to want less children than American women. This stereotype that Mexican- American women want large families and take over the United States welfare system must stems from the government. We should give Mexican- American children the right to our welfare system. They were born in the United States! I think that the government keeps forgetting that this is the “Land of the free” and that our families were all immigrants at one point in time. I truly believe that the United States government’s idea of a perfect America would be only American- born citizens, or even Just anglo- saxon Caucasians! I think this comes from the fact that the government is scared that in a few years American is going to be a completely different country.
Rationalization can be a scary tactic because it is so effective as I found out after reading the Race Hysteria Article. Somehow, men decided that white middle/upper class women suffered from “nervousness” or “hysteria” if they pushed themselves past the limits that women could handle.
These limits include keeping women housebound because that is their natural place in our society. Anywhere outside this domain causes too much stress. Another standard that was expected of women was to be greatful for their stay-at-home lifestyles and love their families. If they felt they were being bullied or abused by their husbands, they were exaggerating or if they felt their children were a burden they were insane. A women’s job is to attend to her husband and her children. She comes last in line. Any complaining about her life meant she was selfish and eventually would lead to “hysteria.
It seems the worst injury a women could inflict upon her own health was to pursue an education. All those books, and equations, and thought just caused her to worry her pretty little head off ending in “nervousness.”
The rationalizations don’t stop there. The supposed condition of “hysteria” was thought to cause the ovaries and other reproductive organs to shrivel and become disfunctional. Without the ability to carry a white child into this world, a women was seen as worthless. So by trying to expand their worlds and minds, women were apparently neutering themselves because their minds and bodies weren’t strong enough to function in the Man’s world.
Wow. It’s scary that people actually believed this and the most vehement about these claims were OB/GYNs. The men who were supposed to be caring for these women, were the ones who were handicapping them with this belief that they were fragile and must be kept intact to bear children at all costs.
People will believe what they want to believe, even though the writings on the wall. A good modern example of this is research that has been done on abstinence only sex education versus comprehensive sex education and how effective they are. Many studies have conclusively shown that comprehensive sex ed is far more effective at teaching kids how to be responsible and keep STI rates and teen pregnancy rates down. The government refuses to acknowledge this and will only fund abstinence only programs, believing it to be the superior, moral method for sex ed, citing ONE study that showed abstinence to be more effective.
People will use what information they want to legitimize their beleifs, their arguments, their behavior even if it doesn’t make sense. Unfortunately, women were victims of this irrationality in the 18th century and still are somewhat today.
A couple of things struck me about the readings. Particularly in the invention of teen mothers (i forget what its called) and defining lesbian motherhood; there is so much emphasis on these teen mothers and the image that they project; same with lesbians that have children. The image of “the baby having babies” and the lesbian mother with her child and her lover/partner next to her. There is so much symbolism in those. However one line really struck a chord with me in the Defining lesbianism- the author talks about this woman Louise that had a child but for a long time was divided in the process of constructing an identity for herself and motherhood that was “normal” to heterosexuals and yet that excluded homosexuals (lesbians). Louise “explored aspects of her being that would have remained hidden if she allowed lesbianism alone to define who she is.” After reading that line, i got stuck on it. For me, when i see teen mothers i automatically feel bad. Im not going to lie. I saw them all throughout my four years in the Boston Public School system. I had friends that became pregnant in high school…But do you think they got their spirits down about their future? and felt sorry for themselves? No. My friends that had children, sure it was hard for them, however, they still went onto college and have good paying jobs. They didn’t allow themselves to be defined by their “teen pregnancy” status. They stayed in school and worked through their situation.
The author talks about lesbians fighting the stereotype of homosexuality as being unnatural and not involving reproduction whatsoever. Lesbian culture is almost defined by the fact that having a child scientifically cannot happen therefore, to some-particularly conservatives, it shouldn’t happen. Relationships in the lesbian community being defined this way is rediculous yet it is commonplace for someone to question and react- whether positively or negitively- to seeing a lesbian couple and their child. This is not how they should be defined. Lesbianism should not be defined in such a way that it hinders our perceptions on whether or not they will make good mothers. People born and raised by a mother and a father still grow up to be uneducated f ups. It really doesn’t matter! all that matters is the type of environment someone is raised in. Thats all.
The reading that I feel educated me the most was “Will the “Real” Mother Please Stand Up?” by Patricia Hill Collins. This article was extremely informative and brought to my attention issues that I have never contemplated before. Collins opened my eyes to the complex issues of reproduction within our society by highlighting the easily and readily accessible ways in which upper class white women are encouraged to reproduce and the ways in which minority women are discouraged from reproducing.
It sickened me to realize how Nazi science looked to England and the United States for inspiration in crafting its eugenics policies. It makes me mad to think that with all the education I received throughout my years in high school, my teachers have never once mentioned the fact that the holocaust was inspired by eugenics practices taking place within our country the United States. What further outrages me is the fact that eugenic practices are still taking place today within our society. It is so true in the way that society and the media portray the infertility of a white woman to be absolutely crushing and devastating and are then “assisted with a dazzling array of medical advances to cure this socially constructed tragedy.†While white middle class woman are constantly being to reproduce and are looked at as “possessing the genetic material necessary for creating white babiesâ€, poor women and women of color are rewarded by government policy for not reproducing which is common place eugenics today.
My question is when will we ever live in a society where everyone is free and equal? Why must we always discriminate against people of a different race, gender, or culture? When will be able to finally live in peace and harmony with each other and not oppress different groups of people? I would love to one day live in a world like that.
PinkGrl6: What do you mean when you say that “Latina girls in the United States usually follow their cultural norms to the fullest?” And how might this relate to sexuality rates? Also, what do you mean by “sexuality rates”–does this refer to the number of women under 18 who are having sexual intercourse, to the number of young women who are getting pregnant? I wasn’t sure what you mean here.
I’d also like you to think more about why you and others who you were talking with (friends? family?) were surprised to learn that Latinas use contraceptive at rates almost equal to white women. I’m not sure that you can pin these perceptions purely on the government (and explain what you mean by the government here, seems to be used in a rather abstract way here)–where else may you have gained these assumptions?
Finally, take a look at the way that you are talking about overpopulation in your comment and think about some of the myths of overpopulation that we have talked about in class.
AutumnRocks: Which “women” are you speaking to in your comment? One of the main points of the “Race of Hysteria” article is that one cannot lump all women into the same category when looking at the ways that gender expectations (or sexual expectations, mothering expectations, etc.) are constructed. Lumping all women together, without looking at the intersection of race and class, means that key pieces of a historical analysis of something like hysteria (or valuations of motherhood or women) are overlooked.
In the readings this week I feel as though the running theme in these articles is the idea society has had about who should be having children at different points in our nation’s history and how popular culture influences these perceptions.
Will the “Real†Mother Please Stand Up and Dubious Conceptions: The Controversy over Teen Pregnancy both address the idea that biology can be used as an essential and central way to solve social problems. In Will the Real Mother Please Stand Up, Patricia Hill Collins references both positive and negative eugenics. Under a policy of positive eugenics white middle class women would be reproducing at greater rates as they are viewed as “Fit Mothersâ€. They are one of the groups who “should†be having children. They will produce the desired offspring to further the future of the United States because only white women can produce white babies; white women will socialize these white children into the standing system of institutionalized racism that exists in our country. This socialization will also help to maintain the status quo. Finally, these white women are the symbolic mothers of our nation. As referenced in some of the articles we read for last week, these women can be used as symbols to stir patriotism and nationalism. These women, these mothers of our future generations and our country are to be protected and defended. If more of these women have children (biology), then there will be more “economically and academically productive citizens†which will counter balance the children of “unfit†mothers, such as working class African American women living in poverty (social problems). This belief system is evidenced in this article by the amount of services to combat infertility for white middle and upper-class women as compared to the lack of family planning services available for poor women of color. Negative eugenic policy is evidenced here in that sterilization of women in these communities has been encouraged where as extended reproductive opportunities are provided for white upper class women is evidence of Positive eugenic thinking.
A Glass Half Empty also addressed how opportunity effects how women and society view motherhood and childbearing. This article, in the end shows how various outside factors affect fertility rates. It draws attention to the cultural, social and economic factors influencing women’s decisions relating to fertility. The article states that analysis of the study results suggest that “several factors influence the number of children women have, factors that are as, if not more, important than being Latina or Anglo. Age, education and martial status consistently predict whether women have more or less children.†This is in some ways similar to the factors that may be affecting teen birth rates. If someone sees few opportunities in their future, and the lack of options is compounded by race, ethnicity, immigration status, lack of social support systems or socioeconomic status, they may be more likely to have children or have more children. If this is coupled with the falling fertility rates of middle and upper class, well educated women in the workforce it may appear to be a greater disparity than historically has existed. However it may be in the comparison that we are assigning values to these decisions, not in our feelings about the fertility of different groups of women in and of itself.
Dubious Conceptions: The Controversy over Teen Pregnancy was an article that I really enjoyed reading. In framing issues a certain way, the media shapes public perception about issues and in the case of teen pregnancy this article makes a strong case that the widely accepted idea that teen pregnancy results in many adverse outcomes for young women may be backwards. It seems that our popularly held beliefs about teen pregnancy may be incorrect party because they are taken out of context. The article states that since the 1980’s the teen birth rate has not increased but the birth rate to teen mothers out of wedlock has. This may point to a combination of two issues informing our thoughts and feelings about the issue of teen pregnancy. Society may be uncomfortable with teen pregnancy and especially uncomfortable with it when it is out of wedlock. However this also follows the trend of more children being born out of wedlock to women of all ages.
At the heart of the article is that the data on teen parents documents the effects of social disadvantage at every step along the path to teenage motherhood. Poor and minority youth are sexually active at an earlier age, are less likely to use a method of contraception and less likely to seek abortion if they become pregnant than white, affluent teens. All of these factors put them at higher risk of pregnancy than their peers who are white and of higher socioeconomic classes. If these teenagers are starting in poverty and this poverty is influencing their risk of pregnancy, then perhaps it is these factors that are continuing after pregnancy and not teen motherhood that is predisposing women to live lives in poverty. I think the author summed it up when she said “The major institutions of American life – families, schools, job market, and the medical system-are not working for themâ€. These institutions are not working for minority females in American and though the majority of teen mothers do not become pregnant intentionally, they choose to continue their pregnancies and become mothers because they see few good alternatives. In motherhood they may see it as “the only vaguely promising option in a life whose options are already constrained by gender, poverty, race and failureâ€? As a society, if we want to tackle the problems of teen pregnancy (biology) we need to take a closer look at the social structures that are in place that support and perhaps encourage teenagers, especially minority teenagers, to become teen mothers. This is a public health issue that has to do with providing opportunity for minority, poor women to have meaningful and realistic options for their lives that go beyond working low wage, dead end job jobs.
In “A Glass Half Empty..” I found it interesting how the study focused on popular magazines and how they have perpetuated the myths surrounding Latina reproduction and threat of Latina and Mexican immigration to the US. It really reminded me to always question what I am reading and be aware that these magazines are not objective and are usually written for a particular agenda. I found it alarming that the discourse over these issues had not changed much in 35 years (during the study.) In fact, over the years the articles seemed increasingly desperate to emphasize the threat of the fertility rates of women immigrating from Latin America and especially Mexico. The rhetoric of these national magazines discussed Anglo women’s fertility as the norm, and also having “subject status,” which automatically pits them against Latinas who are thought of as the opposite; irresponsible, irrational, essentially threatening. A quote isolated Latina and Mexican immigrants even further by comparing their ferility rates against both “black and white American natives.” It seems strange to me, and hypocritical, that black women’s fertility is being discussed here on the same level as white women’s, but this is meant to just increase the panic surrounding immigration.
Recently I read an article on BBC about pronatalism in the UK. It highlighted the stories of a few women who were upper class, educated, and white; none had given birth before the age of 35. Many had had trouble conceiving and were still trying. The one woman of color portrayed in this program was 17, and she had “fallen pregnant,” although she was quite content with starting a family. Then the article emphasized that the UK’s ONLY population policy was to cut teen pregnancies in half. Even though this is overshadowing what we talked about last week I thought this was still relevant in that the only woman of color portrayed was being shown with the obvious implication that she was a symbol for the nation’s biggest threat; over-producing, young, non-white immigrants. The UK is just as nervous as the US about their falling birth rates and the “threat” immigration. They are equally willing to spread these fears through the media and stereotype Latina and Mexican women as without “subject status.”
This thinking is clearly eugenics. If there is panic over falling birth rates in the US why is the country so quick to sterilize women of color and push out Mexican and Latina immigrants? It doesn’t make sense and can only be explained by the white middle class fear that their American identity is being threatened. I think this idea is ridiculous in itself because historically American culture has been influenced by people of different races and ethnicities. In the past even white people of European descent had to combat negative stereotypes of their nationality; Why are they so critical of others’ now? I think Americans need to be educated on diversity, perhaps all students in high school, and the intersectionalities within it, and not rely on magazines for this education. I think this could lessen the impact of stereotypes and create communities where Mexican and Latina immigrants would have more access to education annd health care and also support.
The Race of Hysteria article by Briggs gives us insight into how the medical community justified experimenting on non white women. The medical community that we know today is tainted with the history of a patriarchal, affluent, white, male society that made a lot of mistakes and abused many people in order to discover the knowledge we have today. Scientists and doctors in the medical community who studied hysteria made several assumptions about white women and women of color that are not true. These assumptions were used as a basis for an argument that resulted in the justification of use of non white women in experiments. The medical community portrayed the white woman as fragile, nervous, and very sensitive to the slightest stress. White women were thought to avoid sex and be incapable of bearing many children. The medical community depicted women of color as hardy and even unable to feel pain! Women of color were thought to be hypersexual and had the ability to give birth easily and often.
The assumption that black women had an underdeveloped nervous system resulted in the thought that they were unable to feel pain. This horrific idea was the basis for J Marion Sims experiments on slave women. The passage where Briggs describes Sims operating 29 times without anesthesia on one slave woman, makes me sick. It is through the suffering of this woman and others that some gynecological discoveries have been made. This emphasizes the idea that our medical community is based on assumptions of patriarchal minded, affluent, white, heterosexual males. This causes me to think about how any drug or surgical technique was perfected, and who had to suffer / die for us to be able to use these drugs or surgical techniques. These people are not mentioned in the medical textbooks, so and so had to die to that we can figure out how this works, so thanks. No, we just idealize the scientists behind the experiments.
I wonder how long it took male gynecologists to discover that indeed everyone feels pain and that women do have nerves in their reproductive organs.
“Immigrants Rights are Womens Rights†by Angela Hooton and Silvia Henriquez was not the opinion I would sway with in their debate. I do not feel the connection between immigration rights and women’s rights, other than the blunt fact that they are both working for their equality. I do feel that everyone should be treated equal and women should have access to proper prenatal care but the line must be drawn on allowing immigrants to enter the U.S. The ultimate solution to the problem would be for these Latino countries (Mexico) to be able to appropriately provide for their citizens but this is beyond the U.S.’s abilities. I do not feel it is right for immigrants to enter and then acquire medical assistance before or once meeting the requirements of legality. It is unfair that these immigrants are not receiving as good of care as they should be but it is also unfair that taxpayers are supporting a lot of their actions. Whether man or woman, these immigrants are taking up jobs that are low paying, and not adequate in pay. The employers have the upper hand and know that because U.S. citizens are unlikely to work these jobs. The whole system is a problem but pointing fingers and saying that feminists should help immigrants out more is a bit much. I think this is a person opinion and that assuming equality for women is the same as equality for immigrants, are very separate items to compare.
The history of the word “hysterical†to me is not surprising. It seems typical that women would be oppressed based off of their natural differences from men. It has a lot to do socialized gender roles that have been placed on both men and women. Since men are supposed to be strong, non-emotional, aggressive, and practical (since we all know all men are like this…), it should not be surprising that women would be penalized and even further oppressed due to their perceived “weakness†and because their “body and nature has failed them by manifesting in this hysteria.†The quote that really made me angry was when a so called doctor discouraged womens education because “ blood demanded by the brain would prevent the reproductive system from developing properlyâ€. But on the other end, if a woman did not possess these traits, she was seen as somewhat savage, “closer to apes†simply because she was “hardy†and this more subject to sterilization and marginalization.
Eugenics should not even be in our vocabulary, but as we have seen in way too many articles, that its very much present today. The 1927 Bell vs. Buck case stated that the power of sterilization was a fell on the police of the STATE! How is it that the general public are not aware of the history of this and its relation to nazi and neonazism?? Its sad that this problem is now facing the LGBTQ community and most have no idea what they are up against.
The glass half empty article hit me particularly hard. What was shocking to me was that Latina women in general usually have fewer children than women born in the United States. The fact that they cut off welfare for immigrant women and more discreetly for African American women is a social and political atrocity. American society also portrays Latinas as “oversexed†and generally promiscuous, when generally, that is very far from the truth, as religion is much more prevalent in those communities as well as strong family ties. The statistics don’t lie!!
I have often thought about teen pregnancy and what I would do if I became pregnant in high school. While this was never actually a possibility, being a lover of babies I thought about how my life would change and also how I would not let it change. Coming from a middle class affluent background I would have had a very privilaged advantage if I was to have a child during high school. I always believed (and still believe) that while making innumerable sacrifices I would never drop out of school, nor would I let it prevent my dreams of going to college and beyond. This of course was just a day dream I would have had and I can not be sure that this is how it would have actually turned out.
Reading “Dubious Conceptions: The Controversy over Teen Pregnancy” many assumptions that I had were challenged and proven to be wrong. Seperating cause from correlation was a section of the article that provided me with many facts and ideas I was unaware of. While I knew that it is more likely for young women who come from poverty, single-parent homes, and under educated environments I also thought of teen pregnancy as a factor that causes poverty for many young women. It was also very interestind to read the numbers of young girls who already dropped out of high school before becoming pregnant and that it was not pregnancies that was leading to high school drop outs. The data presented in this aritcle was very supportive of the arguements.
The article included data about single-mothers who were either divorced or never married. The data included women who had children without being married and were beyond their teenage years. The article discussed these women as having children out of wedlock and placed them in a negative light. What independent women, hetero or homosexual, who chose to have children alone? There are many women who are ready to start a family and have a child on their own by choice and not on accident. I think the statistics for these women should have been included or at least discussed as to whether or not their inclusion in the data skewed it in any way.
Poverty, lack of education, and teen pregnancy is a vicious circle in my mind. I would not be opposed to teen pregnancy if these girls were completing their education and able to provide a full life for their children. I do not approve of girls who do not take teen pregnancy, or education for that matter, as a serious thing. If a young girl would like to have a child and can incorperate that into all other aspects of her life without it interfering I would say go for it. I don’t believe that this is possible in our society today and I do not think that it is just the fault of the teen mother. I think that society plays a large role in the situation by not providing aid, education, contraceptives, or employment for young girls.
Painting poverty and other socioeconomic problems as a result of foolish adolescent decisions is very handy for a government that doesn’t want to deal with the inequality within its population. Although teen pregnancy is arguably as much a result of disadvantaged status as a cause, presenting it as the other way around makes it solely the fault of the mother and frees those in power, in their minds, from any obligation to provide assistance to those in need.
I found the part of the “Dubious Conceptions†article about the American ‘implicit social contract’ really interesting. It seems to involve moral more than social factors in a society that continues to idealize marriage and nuclear families at all costs. In the “Wake Up Little Susie†article last week, I remember an account of black unwed mothers attributing their single status to choice; they had had men in their lives but chose to raise their children alone because they did not feel these men would be healthy influences in their lives. While having two parents does often increase the support given to a child, this may not be true in all cases. Women have much more freedom today to choose whether to raise their baby alone or with a partner; while some forces continue to push for “family values,†the stigma on single mothers has decreased to a huge degree (I know this isn’t completely true—from personal stories other people have shared in class, for one).
The contrast between mainstream impressions of teen/unwed pregnancy rates and affected populations, and the actual statistics, is really notable—it’s something that would have surprised me a lot more before taking two classes in the Communication department with Sut Jhally, which focus heavily on public relations and the ways in which it shapes all of our perceptions, usually without us having any idea. While reading all of the articles for this week, the themes of public relations as (very effective) manipulation kept coming up in my head. Pretty unsettling…has anyone else taken these courses?
My boyfriend’s cousin who is 19 years old, one year younger than myself is pregnant. He called me to tell me the good news, ” You know my cousin, Hilliary? she’s pregnant!”. My first thought was, how is this good news? teen pregnancy? But i mustered out a “yeah, that’s greatâ€. Coming from a background where one’s expected to go to college after high school and if you didn’t, you’re some kind of loser, I never personally knew any teen mothers. I couldn’t really understand how he was happy for her, I was just worried. Her fetus’s father is a low life jerk, she lives with her mother and she works a low paying job. I was worried that she’d never be able to do what she aspired to do, that she wouldn’t be able to give the child everything she (it’s a girl) wanted.
While reading “ Will the ‘Real’ Mother Please Stand Up?â€, I saw my thought process under the section about working-class white women. I was passing judgment about how “fit†she was to become a mother through the lense of my (economic) privilege in which i see the world. I began to wonder if I would have had the same concerns if she was coming from an upper-class background. I don’t think I would have. Certainly, the economic concerns wouldn’t be there, but fulfilling a mother’s aspirations and dreams is a lot easier with the abundance of money. I was unconsciously playing into the concept of a “real†mother. A real mother being white and upper class. (just to note, race wasn’t an issue in this case). Then I felt really bad for all the judgment I passed, all the meanwhile thinking i’m a progressive and radical. I remembered conversations I’ve had with her in the past. She was sacrificing a lot for her child, which is more than a lot of “real†(white & upper class) mothers have done. I’ve seen a lot of upper class parents that don’t know what to do with their children and just throw money at them, thinking whatever the problem is will disappear or that the money and lavish gifts will make them happy.
This article also reminded me of something I’ve learned in the past, that in some sects of Judaism, one isn’t considered to be Jewish if the mother that he/she was born to isn’t Jewish herself. This came to my mind while reading what a ‘real’ mother consisted of.
After reading through the articles for this week, I began to think about the underlying reasons behind many of the “problems” in American culture today. In regards to “Dubious Conceptions: The Controversy over Teen Pregnancy”, it is evident that the issue of teen pregnancy has to take into account the intersectionality of the problem, as well as the culture that produced this so-called problem. Something that really sticks out in my mind about this particular reading is that according to Luker, “Teen birth rates are highest for those who have the greatest economic disadvantage and lowest academic ability”. In relation to our class, I remember Sara discussed how it was nearly impossible for her to find a doctor that would permanently sterilize her, demonstrating that there is a societal focus on producing more middle-class, white babies. However, according to Collins, in “Will the “Real” Mother Please Stand Up?”, “government-funded permanent sterlization often becomes one of the few viable methods of birth control” for poor women, especiallly women of color.
In turn, it is evident that many times it is not the choice of these teens to become pregnant, but the social context that they exist in within our culture, including econcomic and acedemic means, that led to their pregnancy. Rather than dealing with the problem at hand, it seems to be a common trend in America, to blame the victim, rather than attempting to improve the lives of the underpriveleged, which American culture has impossed upon these people. It is essential to take a step back and decide what is the real problem at hand and what is the most effective method of dealing with this problem. In regards to Luker’s aritcle, she believes that, “increased job opportunities for both young men and young women; meaningful job training programs and child support programs would serve either to make marriage more feasible for those who wish to marry or to support chldren whose parents are not married”.
Once again, this class has demonstrated that the issues regarding women’s health and reproductive rights has more to do with the American society imposed upon us, than anything else. Dealing with these issues, involves taken a closer look at our culture and challenging the structures that have been put in place.
In many of my classes there has been the recurring theme of eugenics and its related topics, and frankly it is begining to horrify me. I would be naive of me to say that I never realized such thinking existed in the US, that middle class white women are more fit mothers than minority women. What is so shocking to me, is how much it really ultimatly matters in society.
It is hard to consider issue of teen pregnancy without examining the welfare systems in place, as most teenage mothers will at one point be dependent on welfare. I raise this point because these issues reminded me of an article I read in another class. The article from the other class was focused on Sweden, a country with a comparably great welfare system. In this article the author credited the willingness of the Swedes (among other things) to share the burden of responsibility among the entire population as the key to the success of the welfare system. While the country enjoys many great benefits, it subsidizes these benefits through very high taxes, something many countries try to avoid. The author also cited that there is a threat to the system on the horizon, that may effect citizens tendedncies towards solidarity: immigration. Because Sweden is historically homogenous, a recent increase in foreign born population is threatening the contentment that people seem to enjoy with ‘sharing the pain’.
I am relating this to our class reading because it astounds me that even a population that is so ahead of norms when it comes to welfare, could change its stance on common good because of ethnicity. It appauls me that this institutionalized racism can permeate not only a country such as the US, but also countries that are rooted in shared responsibility. Since when is it acceptnable to practice a shared burden style of welfare, unless of course it starts to involve groups that one may not like to approve of?
When this thinking is applied to maternity, specifically teenage mothers, the results horrifying. Teenage mothers are already under intense pressure as being viewed as incompetent mothers (a statement I GREATLY disagree with), and if you factor in the racist undertones of considereing minority teenage mothers to be even less capeable, it seems impossible for any of them to be a success
I can relate to the “Dubious Conceptions†article in many ways because my mother gave birth to my older sister when she was only 19 years old in 1975. My mother is Caucasian and grew up in a middle-class home in Boston, and when she got pregnant she was not yet married. The article explained that teen mothers are less likely to finish high school and are more likely to be on welfare and have dead-end jobs. My mother is an example of someone who proves all of these stereotypes wrong because she graduated high school, went on to a business college, has a well-paying job, and was never on welfare. She struggled tremendously while raising my sister, but this situation goes to show that your life is not always ruined or doomed if you have a baby at a young age. It seems that there is a double standard for young unmarried mothers and young married mothers. In our society it is acceptable for a married young woman to have a baby and nobody thinks anything bad about it, but when an unmarried young woman gets pregnant she is often looked at as irresponsible or too young to raise a child. As our society we need to stop looking at teen mothers in such a negative way and instead support them and give them the necessary resources because many have the ability to become wonderful mothers.
I think the best way to prevent unwanted teen pregnancies is to give young people all the proper information, whether it is about abstinence or contraceptive options. Abstinence-only education is not enough because people are going to have sex no matter what and our society needs to recognize and understand this and stop ignoring this issue. Schools need to be more open about sex education because this is the place where students will get the majority of their information. I think we also need to improve the services that are offered for young mothers because most are going to have a difficult time raising a child at a young age and any guidance would be beneficial for them. Teen pregnancy is a big issue in our society today and we need to address this problem properly if we want to change things instead of turning our heads the other way.
Although it was not required for this week I read the article about the colonization of Native women’s reproductive health and I found it to be a little disturbing and quite shocking. The article talked about how the government thinks that the growth of the non- white population is a threat to national security and how the non-white population eats up all of our resources, and I do not agree with this because every person, regardless of race, uses our resources so it is unfair to use non-whites as scapegoats. The article also focused on the issue that Native American women are sterilized without even knowing it in many situations. One sad statistic in the article states that as much as 80 percent of the Native American population is sterilized on some reservations! It seems to me that the US is basically trying to completely exterminate the Native American population by sterilizing as many people as possible with or without their consent because the Native Americans own land that have precious natural resources and the government wants them for their economic benefit and will do anything to make this happen.
I know multiple people who have had teen pregnancies. Some of them even having more than one child before they reached the age of 18. I was a mentor in high school and mentored a young girl who was fifteen. She had just got a boyfriend who was two years older so I discussed birth control with her as an option. She had already known she was pregnant but didn’t tell me right away because she was embarassed. My mentee came from a poor single mother home and didn’t have much support. After having the child she ended up breaking up with her boyfriend and dropping out of school. I graduated from high school but still kept in touch with her so that she could call me whenever she needed help. It was so sad to see that she would struggle to afford pampers and milk formula because she had no help from the boyfriend and her mother didn’t have much money to give her. About a year later, she had another baby from a different guy. She is now eighteen years old with two sons and has a ninth-grade education level. I just felt so helpless and wished there was something more I could do to help her. After her first child I had discussed birth control again but she never got on any form of contraceptive and I always encouraged her to finish school. In the reading family and medicine, they talk about how teenagers are more likely to get pregnant if they come from a disadvantaged home and low academic ability. My mentee did come from a disadvantaged home but I think the major factor was that she didn’t have any real moral support. I think it is crazy that before 1975 teens could get expelled because they were pregnant. That is depriving someone from an education because they had a child. Teenagers should be encouraged to go to schools and continue to lead fulfilling lives. More programs should be contructed to give support so that the child can also have a better opportunity and not fall into the same cycle. Teen pregnancy should not be looked at so negatively, but rather look at why teen pregnancies are happening. Many of these young girls are not to blame. The Family and Medicine made a good point in asking, “What can public policy do about teen pregnancy if many teenagers drift into childbearing as the only vaguely promising option in life whose options are already constrained by gender, poverty, race, and failure?” I definitely agree that as a minority and a woman they are already restricted horizons and hopes. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t women who overcome these obstacles. The reading called A Glass Half Empty talks about how people describe the upcoming rise of latinas in the United States as a threat. They talk about them as if they are some type of poison rather than embracing new cultures. I have realized that in all the readings they have talked about how people continue to relate high fertility and sexual behavior to women of color. Instead of looking at the core problems in society, they use high sexual behaviors as the reason. There is always a blame put on women and its not right.
As with many other people, I found “Dubious Conceptions, The Contrversy Over Teen Pregnancy” a very interesting and informative article. I grew up in a predominately white upper middle class town, and some of the neighboring cities had high rates of teen pregnancy. It wasn’t always uncommon for a young girl, sometimes still in high school, to become pregnant with her boyfriends child and be forced to drop out of school. In order to spread awareness about this issue, our school system used “Baby Think it Over” in high school health classes; a computerized baby that you had to take care of for 24 hours.
The section of this article “Distinguishing Causes from Correlations” made some great points when it talked about socioeconomical factors that contribute to the rates of teen pregnancy. Disadvantaged young women are less likely to seek abortions than young women who are of high socioeconmonic class. The article mentioned that part of that may be due to the fact that women who are disadvantaged have lower educational aspirations for themselves, and dropping out of school to raise a child may not be the worst thing for them. In addition, for these women with limited education, it may be much harder for them to raise a child if they are a single mother. These are trends that I have seen first hand because of where I grew up. I agree with Feefer in saying that this is a serious public health issue, and resources need to be provided for these young women in order for them to feel like they have a chance to have a good job and be satisfied with their lives.
Week after week I complete these readings and I have now come to fully appreciate the power of language. It seems to me that the main issue with the polemics of women’s reproductive health and, as it is this week’s topic, the Valuation of Motherhood, is the fact that extremists tend to overlook the main issue and inundate their audience with labels, definitions and words that seem to permeate this society, slowly shifting and changing our mentalities into thinking under the format of “otherization.” In other words, the language used by many people, conservatives in particular, have a way of swaying peoples minds into characterizing and categorizing people of the “minority” population. This may seem at first to be merely the essence of a good debate, however the problem with this is that it is allowing people to form incorrect, judgemental and prejudiced conclusions about people of color, people of lower socioeconomic class and people who are immigrants to this country. This in turn makes people shift the blame onto those who are oppressed by our society in the first place, citing that it is THEIR problem and that THEY contribute nothing to OUR citing, thereby forming communities of US and THEM or WHITE AMERICAN and OTHER. The result of all of this, unfortunately, is that the real source of the problems go unnoticed and ignored. For example, the false medical and social characterizations of Black and Latina women as “overly sexual,” “savage” and having seriously “high fertility” evokes fear and shame from the majority about this “other” group. In the “Race of Hysteria” article, Briggs cites the incorrect assumption that Black women inherently have a “grotesque disease of the generative organs” which directly negates the highly significant fact that these same African American woman indeed have a much lower access to healthcare. The cause of such a grossly incorrect conclusion? Cover stories.
“Cover stories cover or mask what they make invisible with an alternative presence; a presence that redirects our attention, that covers or makes absent what remains to be seen”
Likewise, in the “Family and Medicine” article which focused on teen pregnancy Luker describes that the issue with the discourse of controversy over teen pregnancy is the negligence of taking into account the social, economical and oppresive situations of these young women:
“Teen motherhood is largely the province of those youngsters who are already disadvantaged by their position in our society. The major institutions of American life–families, schools, job markets, the medical system–are not working for them”
Yet another example of this blatant negation of truth is exemplified in the “Will the Real Mother Please Stand Up” article where Collins highlights the real reason behind the cause and success of the eugenics movement, whose main players/speakers would never admit throughout their filibustering:
“…the United States has operated as a racialized state since its inception, race operates as a core concept in constructing American national identity.”
Hence, the real importance behind these issues is not merely to take my side and agree with me because I feel that my opinions are right, because beleive it or not, I sincerely think that it is vital that we have these debates. HOWEVER, it is also crucial that the right language be used, and that people do not carelessly throw around labels and characterizations targetted at people not of their own community to which they belong. It is important in these polemics to TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT YOU SAY. If you are part of the eugenics movement and have the audacity to characterize someone of a different race and social staus as “lesser” than call yourself a racist, because that is what you are; take responsibility for what you are portraying about yourself when you say whatever you want. This idea of universality of and overall definitions and labels is a seriously narrowminded view which is both limited and biased. If you believe in these creeds that advocate a universality in America, that everyone is truly created equal because thats what our constitution says, the you must also call yourself ignorant of the issues at hand, because you clearly have not done your research.
I am glad this week’s readings addressed teen pregnancy. I grew up in an affluent white community outside of Boston. In my hometown the stigma attached to teen pregnancy was daunting for any pregnant, teen mom. In addition, the stigma did not only attach to teen mothers, but unmarried, young single women in their 20s. In my town, you were expected to graduate highschool, go to college, get married, maybe have a job- and then have children. Recently, I returned home for a visit to find out that a girl I use to play soccer with, got pregnant. My natural reaction was: how could she decided to drop out of school and have the baby? Of course, my reaction was a product of the environment I grew up in. I think the myths surrounding teen pregnancy are import to analyze in social contexts. I don’t think it’s appropriate to generalize what is appropriate for an entire population and I think avenues of opportunity need to remain open for young women who choose to keep their pregnancy to term. Where I’m from, this isn’t a choice. Essentially, one could choose to keep a pregnancy to term, but virtually no one does because of the stigma attached to it. I think this needs to change because women must possess the ability to choose the direction of their lives. In addition, teen mothers aren’t automatically assigned to a lifetime of misery because they choose to have a baby. Yet on another note, this ideas primarily come from a middle-class white woman. Other problems exist, depending on the community you live in. I think more opportunities need to be available to poor teen mothers. Often, not enough assistance is provided, and thus, often opportunities are lost because of a lack of access to vital resources.
RainbowBright: I think you need to think how your argument feeds into the whole over-population theory. Essentially you are arguing that immigrants are draining our resources when essentially such an immigrant population fuels our economy. We actually benefit from illegal immigration, even though mainstream media claims the opposite. I would be careful about how your opinions towards immigrants fuel social myths that create alot of the issues discussed in the readings for this week.
Like Aline said in a comment above, we can’t assign generalities to whole populations.
Overall, I think the articles give an overview of the perception of motherhood in our nation from various perspectives. Yet, I think the most important perspective derives from the individual mother herself. As mentioned last class, often policy makers and academics look upon and judge a community from the outside without gaining real insider perspective. I think we all need to be careful when making judgements and policies towards communities of which we are not apart. In the end, the articles fostered a need for better understanding between peoples and communities.
While reading about what a so-called “fit” mother was (middle class white women), in the article “Will the “Real” Mother Please Stand Up?”, I was appauled to realize about the United States’ supposed eugenics goal. Encouraging white women to produce more white babies to have some type of white supremecy to eliminate those of other races. White women “alledgedly fulfill the symbolic function of mothers of the national family”. This article also states that infertility is not only faced as a human tragedy, bbut also as a personal failure of a woman who pursued a career or waited to long, and in a sense “turned their backs on the rightful roles as women.” While singling out middle class white women as the best “fit” for motherhood, that is still not enough. To excude even more people from this catergory, working-class white women as viewed as “less fit” along with those of differenrt races. While they biologically produce “fit” babies, these babies as less nationally cultured, and they are raised to be less academically and economically productive citizens. White middle-class young or teen mothers are also viewed as unfit. Women of different races and poorer backgrounds are attempted to be sterilized or put on all type of birth control to have them stop reproducing, while white women are encouraged and expected to hve many children. If there are so many rules and specifications to being a “fit” mother and having the “right” type of children, how is our population expected to continue and what does that say about what is going on in this country?
This week articles only made me think about one thing, which is “where is justice in this country”. I think of justice as a power to keep things safe, healthy, just/fair, equal etc to everyone in the population regardless of race, gender, sex etc. But by reading the articles, specially the “immigrant rights”, “better dead than pregnant” , “prisoners of a hard life” i think and ask to my self ” is the justice system here in the United States a privelege or a way to keep and maintain social statuses within groups or is really to serve its real purpose.
To me, if the departmet of justice here in United States are just intitutions to help the middle-upper class whites so they can , keep having the wonderful and wealthy life they have, and make sure that the non-whites and poor are not interfering or are not taking their security away. Really thinking about it, the poor group have lack of resources to make these intitutions such as the goverment, the department of jusctice to advocate for them. On the other hand, the wealthy have money, they have all the material resources that will compel intitutions such as the government to make laws that will benifit them etc. In the article “better dead than pregnant” on page 131, there was this black woman convicted of child abuse, she was given the choice to take Norplant or be sentence to prison. What is that all about? Even if this black woman does not have children, she might still be a threat to other children; she was abusing her own children what made the the departement of justice in California think that she would not abuse other children? Im not saying that she should go to prison, but she should be placed in a specialized facility where she got educated and reprehended about how to treat children with love and care.
Finally, let me close up with the idea that not only is the government have and continue supporting things agaisnt the contitution, against human rights such as rewarding women to take something such as Norplant which can eventually kill them. Another final note is that its not a coinsidence(didnt happen randomly) that the majory of the population in jail and prisons are not only women, but in genereal women and men of black decent with little education, and coming from poor communities. Is racism really over?????
The image of the “other”, or non-caucasian women, presented in “The Race of Hysteria” as literal savages such a relatively short a time ago was surprising to me. I did not fully understand the degree of overt racism and bias that informed so-called science at the beginning of the past century. I learned about the eugenics employed by the Nazis in school and later in college, but never had understood the degree to which our “virtuous” Allies held those very same ideals. It is frightening to think what forces hold those sentiments back from becoming overt public policy, and how strong those would be in the face of severe economic depression or in a public under threat of warfare.
The bizarre reasons given for the relative ease “savage” women gave birth in was an incredible example of how politically motivated individuals can pervert science to try and substantiate their ideology. To suggest that Native American women possessed an animal-like pelvis, more like a gorilla than a European female, was akin to phrenology. Rather than looking at western approaches to labor and birth as an ill-adaption to the labor process, the blaming of “savage” women for having more successful births due to their lack of acculturation and development was a blatant knee-jerk reaction to a white-supremacist ideology. That theme, the blaming of ethnic minorities in the United States for their ease of child bearing and overall fertility, is seen echoed in the other articles, especially the one discussing Latina reproduction.
The article “Dubious Conceptions” presented a great example of how current white-supremacist views are presented in public discussion and public policy. As Luker mentions, framing the problem as being “teen pregnancy” erases much of the discussion of inequalities in ethnicity, race, class, and gender that influence the health, economic, and social outcomes of various family structures. This illustrates a shift in the last century from where racism and discrimination based on ethnicity and class were more acceptable in public discourse, but also highlights that these white-supremacist views are still very much a part of our culture, and ingrained in many of us in ways we do not realize or do not accept. Thinking critically about whether “teen pregnancy” is truly the major issue that is being discussed and acted on is not something most Americans typically do, and in that way the more subtle issues of ethnicity, class, and gender inequalities we have today are perhaps even less likely to be discussed and confronted. After all, who wants poor Latina women who just keep on reproducing when they should know better draining our tax dollars and abusing public assistance? And why doesn’t the fact that we don’t even flinch at categorizing “Latina women” as a separate reproducing group bother us?
I found it interesting that there is an association with Latinas and “over reproduction” or reproduction that is considered “out of controlâ€. This is in fact false and the fertility rates for Latinas are comparable to those of Anglo women. I enjoyed how the author of ‘ A Glass Half Empty’ questioned this notion of “over reproduction” by saying that maybe ” Anglo women may be characterized as having “comparatively low” birth rates” or that ” the abnormally low fertility rates of Anglo women are leading to demographic changes and increased pressure for immigration.” These claims could be made instead of the common claim that Latina women are causing population problems with their high rates of fertility.
The thought process is that by regulating Latina women’s reproductive abilities, this will help to significantly decrease population constraints in the United States. As was mentioned in the article, Latina women are a large category that is very broad and should be broken down into smaller, more specific populations of people. These subgroups include Mexican immigrants, Latina immigrants that are not Mexican, U.S. born Latinas or Mexican-origin, and U.S. born Latinas not of Mexican-origin. To say Latina women have a ” problem” with their reproductive patterns is including an enormous group of women that are each facing specific, individual factors in relation to their fertility and reproductive choices.
As with any woman, the following factors directly affect Latina women; age, education, and marital status…these are significant predictors of how many children the women has. Leo Chavez was very wise in noting that reproductive behavior can vary among Latinas as their life experiences change. As women get older, they tend to have fewer children. Also, increased education levels often lead to fewer children.
I enjoyed “A Glass Half Empty” because I was unaware that the statistics for the previously disputed category of “Latina” women were so similar to statistics gathered for Anglo women. For example, “All U.S. born Latinas had almost the same number of children as Anglo women nationally, a low 1.28 children per woman.” For some reason, I had the misconception that Latina women always bore more children and their reproductive patterns really were” out of control”. I now know that this is false. I also previously believed that there wasn’t a large push for using different forms of contraceptives, from the viewpoint of Latina women. According to the article, a large percentage of Latinas are willing to using Birth Control, which demonstrates there are significant concerns of family planning and fertility.
The general picture that is painted by the news media as well as people concerned with controlling immigration from Mexico, Central America, and South America is that Latina women are baby-making machines who have no regard for controlling their fertility. The tie to immigration is that if Latina women are migrating to the United States, they are bringing themselves plus the possibility of many, many offspring which will lead to a more pronounced population problem. This is the image painted for the general U.S. public in order to convince us that immigration will be our population downfall.
I found “Dubious Conceptions: The Controversy over Teen Pregnancy†to be the most interesting and the easiest article to relate to from this weeks readings. I think that every sexually active single woman has contemplated what they would do if they were to become pregnant. The article makes an important point that teen pregnancy is not the only issue that society is concerned with but that pregnancy out of wedlock is what society is very concerned about. I think that it is important that we recognize that as the article points out, that we not only address teen pregnancy as a problem, but that we also take a deeper look at what makes it such a huge problem according to our society. Although, I have not had any close relationships with teenagers that have become pregnant, I do have a couple of friends that got pregnant in their early to mid-twenties without being married. Both women were single at the time that they got pregnant, and the most common question that people asked them was “are you going to get married?†The article states that the main concern of society is that the girl is so young and that she will forever be financial burden to society. However, I really wonder if society would react better towards single teenage mothers that are able to hold a job, receive an education, and make a considerable contribution to society. This article and my own experience make me wonder if the financial burden that teenage pregnancy put on society is the main issue, or if the issue of morality and pre-marital sex is the real issue at hand? I often feel that even at 27, with a job and an education, it would be considered absolutely unacceptable by society for me to become pregnant before marriage. I think that this article makes the very important point of this, and helps us look at the actual issues behind teenage pregnancy and what can be done to prevent it, and to help those that do become pregnant as a teenager or at any point before they are married.
I should have been more specific but the women who I wrote about were upper/middle class white women. They were being characterized as nervous while the rest of the article explains how women of color and lower class are hardy, and pain-free which meant they were capable of having many children without complication (even though this wasn’t true). White men thought these women were pain-free so they thought they’d be the perfect subjects for experiments. Even though their excuse might have been that they were hardy, it is obvious these men were exploiting women who weren’t in the position to fight back.
Of all the readings assigned this week I found dubious conception: the controversy over teen pregnancy to be very informative, eye-opening, and rather bias. Of all the articles I was touched by this one the most. The article stated “although there is little published on the social origins of teen parents, studies have documented the effects of social disadvantages at every step along the path to teenage motherhood. First, since poor and minority youth tend to become sexually active at an earlier age than more advantaged youngsters, they are “at risk” for a longer period of time.” The article specifically states that there is little published data yet they make a concluding disposition on the topic. Fortunately my high school was very mixed even though it was a predominately white school. Of all the experiences I’ve encountered in high school, I can only remember two African American girls in my class becoming pregnant. There were more white girls at school that dropped out due to pregnancy or took a few months off to get a abortion and get back to their regular weight before returning to school. I think it depends on the community that the research is being conducted to make such generalizations for an entire population, when it’s really the location of the school and the community that determines the social origins of teen parents. The article also states that there are no “quick fixes” and liberals argue that answer is more access to contraception, sex education and more access to abortion. No one identifies the value of role models as a possible method. It can be assumed that teens having sex are aware of condoms, abortions and know some of the facts and statistics learned in sex education. If all of these are readily available then what’s the gap in access to services and education and following through on what education and what access to services will provide. If these teens are not comfortable to talk about these issues, don’t have anyone to confide in, if they don’t have anyone to constantly stay on them with their studies and school involvement (sports, student council etc.) what else is there to do but experiment with boys? For me, I always had positive role models and mentors that I saw daily and kept me on top of what I needed to do (study, homework etc.) and what I wanted to do (go the college, apply for scholarships etc.) It was the direction and guidance of role models and mentors that kept me on track. With several articles- including this one, that I’ve read, it seems as no one appreciates the value of a role model or mentor anymore which could be a reason for high pregnancy rates- lack of positive role models and lack of mentors to keep them on track with the things that will shape and determine their future.