Divorce Laws In Oregon

In the state of Oregon, according to Divorce Source, property is divided in an equitable fashion. This means it is divided by what is fair, Oregon encourages people to come to their own decision on how things will be split before taking it into the hands of the courts. The property divided includes real and/or personal property, this includes debts, pensions, houses, real estate, and anything else acquired. It is important to note that Oregon courts also include the homemaker contribution when splitting up assets, it is assumed that both parties in the marriage were equal partners. By including the reproductive labor Oregon is working against the idea of economic globalization, which is the process that integrate economics toward a global market place through growth of corporations and networks of production and consumers. (391)

When it comes to custody Oregon courts decide based on the general welfare of the child, they look into the emotional ties, the attitude towards the child from each parent, the desire of a continued relationship, if a parent was abusive, preference, and the willingness and ability of each parent. This maybe reconsidered if either parent was abusive in anyway, or if the general health of the child would be in danger. Another aspect of divorce is the idea of child support, how it’s divided and decided varies in every state. Oregon has child support which is based on the Income Shares Model, this means that the support is divided by which each parent earns. Some variables taken into account include earning capacity, if the parent can borrow money, how much each person has made in the past and the overall needs of the child. This is used to decided which parent pays child support. This money is to be used to benefit the child, in addition the paying parent may have to have a life insurance plan with the child as a beneficiary so that in case of anything the child is still taken care of.

Although divorce affect everyone, women and children can at times get the grunt of the burden. The main way is financially, after divorce most women have to take on second jobs to be able to cover the extra expenses. This in turn affects the children because they have less parental control, and spend less time with their parents. It is much harder for a women to return to the type of life she had become accustomed to because of the stress of childcare, less money, and more responsibilities. Children of divorce often have more anxieties and fear of love, commitments, or abandonment. The loss of an addition paycheck and money can lead to higher poverty rates for women and children. You can see this by looking at the poverty rates for divorced women and their children in Oregon. From the article entitled Marriage and Poverty I found that mothers were much more likely to fall to poverty after divorce than fathers. It was found in article The Gender Gap in the Economic Well-Being of Nonresident Fathers and Custodial Mothers that “19 percent of mothers became impoverished, only 3 percent of the husbands became poor after separating”. In addition to this mothers are less likely to rise out of poverty as well. Children often times suffer financially after their parents divorce, it was found that children in non-intact households were more likely to experience poverty, by the age of 17 about 81 percent had lived at least one year in poverty. After the divorce as stated earlier child support is decided. In Oregon their are laws that ensure this is paid, for those parents that don’t pay there are consequences that are at times fairly severe. These include, liens on property or assets, state and federal tax refunds intercepted, money deducted from pay check or even a jail sentence. There is also a nine percent interest on all missed child support payments.

After studying the divorce laws in Oregon I see clearly how it connects to what we have been talking about in class, I found that most of the laws set up generally assume that the children will stay with the mother post-divorce. From my research I found that women are more likely to suffer after a divorce whereas men bounce back quicker and after a year are usually living at the same standard as they did before the divorce. Women now have less money and more work which leads to more stress and eventual health problems. I found on the US Census that before divorce about 23 percent of women were not in the labor force whereas after divorce this number drops to 19 percent. This means that more women have to go and get jobs to support their families and in turn spend less time caring for children. While researching I thought back to the reading “The Gender Wage Gap By Occupation”. It seems to me that if we got rid of the gender wage gap, which is the difference in what men and women typically earn, then women would be just as likely to recover after a divorce as their male counterpart. In the book there is a chapter entitled Family Systems, Family Lives, I looked into some of the readings and found that more mothers with children under the age of three in developed countries are now working. This may be due in part to high divorce rates and a need for an additional income. This chapter also has a table on Families and Poverty, I found that according to this a 4.9 of all married couple are below the poverty line, it then jumped to 11.6 when it was a female householder with no male present.  

Overall, it seems that women and child often suffer the most when it comes to divorce and rebounding back to their normal life afterwards. Women have to work more hours and still come home for their “second-shift” taking care of the house and cooking. Since women get paid less for the work they do compared to a man they have a harder time making ends meet when forced to be in a single household.

Work Cited:

Shaw, Susan. Women's Voices Feminist Visions. 5th ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2009. 354-362, 391. Print.

Hegewisch, Ariane. "The Gender Wage Gap by Occupation." Institute For Women's Policy Research. (2012): 2-6. Print.

Iran Bans Women from Some College Courses

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2012/08/21/idesk-intv-abdo-on-iranian-women-barred-from-classes.cnn

Iran bans women from some college courses

 

CNN reported that Iran limited some college courses to men last year. This news had a noticeable impact throughout the world in that it went against the trend of women’s empowerment and increasing participation in higher education. The courses restricted to women include accounting, chemistry, and engineering all of those are appreciated as higher- status in the society. Geneive Abdo, Dir. Iran Program Middle East Institute, analyzes that elimination of women in college courses derives from a regime in which men worry about women who have gained power particularly in last few years. Women’s power has become not only socially but also politically significant in Iranian society and, unfortunately, it led to the discriminatory regime to take the women’s power away.

At present, there are few options for women against this policy without leaving a country. And as Abdo mentions, it will lead to so-called brain drain which are caused by the outflow of competent human capitals to outside countries. This reminds me Condoleezza Rice saying it is waste to discriminate women from political positions on “Miss Representation.” Women have been suffering from alienation in many opportunities but women must have hidden potential that has not been uncovered and that even women themselves have not realized yet. Our future depends on how many we can bring out these women’s potentials and utilized them in our society.

However, I learned that even if a dramatic revolution allowed a lot of women to get involved in socially and politically important position at once, the underlying idea of dominating men and subordinate women are not necessarily disappear only by institutional reform. Institutional reform itself does not necessarily resolve the system of inequality but deep-rooted prejudice against women still exist. I think this is not only the matter for Iran but also many other countries especially developed countries which set the equal rights for men and women in society. It will be not until people resolve the issue of who is in power in Iran that women achieve the real equality and opportunity in society including the right to receive higher education in high-status disciplines.

New Model for Sweden

      I recently came across an article which was praising Sweden for using mannequins which more accurately depict a woman's body. It was refreshing to finally see some change and companies becoming more realistic with their models. Having these positive images of a woman's figure is imperative for girls to grow up with a more positive image of themselves. If when a girl or woman walks into a store she sees the clothes she wants being shown on someone who is comparative to her size she will be more confident.

      We talked in class about the ways in which the media changes the way that we view ourselves. As is mentioned in the article Objectification Theory and Psychology of Women “self-objectification was uniquely linked with body shame, eating disorder symptoms, depression symptoms, and low self-esteem” (382). The reason that so many young girls have this shame about their bodies is because of all of the ads in our day to day life that objectify and sexualize women. I think it would be interesting to see if this particular store actually sells more clothing from using these mannequins, or if the people shopping there leave with a more positive body image.
   
     One part of this article I found interesting was the history of when we started using mannequins, according to them " Throughout WW1 and the Depression, mannequins changed their outfits and body proportions to reflect society at that time." So when they first came about they weren't a size 4-6 when the average American is a size 14, they instead would change and show a reality. Once again the according to the article this changed in the 1960's "when British mannequin firm Rootstein began modeling their dolls after pop culture and fashion icons to reflect runway trends at the time."

    I find it encouraging that there is some positive articles out there about women and their body, we shouldn't all have to fit into this crazy idea of the perfect body that the media is putting out there. If you're interested in reading the article and seeing the mannequins I have posted the link below!

http://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/swedish-mannequins-cause-a-controversy--192108535.html

Childrens' Roles in Feminism

               The existence of an unequal world, where gender determines life chances, is the result of not educating the young. Now, you can agree or disagree with me, but it is my full belief that part of childhood should be dedicated towards learning opposite gender roles, educating children on feministic ideals, and encouraging success no matter what stereotypical "gender label" is being associated. Women are still in a state of minority when compared to men because as we grow, we are filling in the gaps of our parents; mothers take care of children, fathers go to work, etc. Children learn and grow from the experiences presented to them. I urge that every child be given the great opportunity to end oppression against women. All it takes is a change.

               In this video, Amy Poehler [comically] sits down with a young girl and discusses a wide range of topics surrounding feminism. Sure, this video may be scripted. Really, it suggests that children, like Ruby, are capable of being reiterating the factors associated with being a girl, without straying away from her youth. Ruby talks about the struggles of her mother as a single parent, expresses her opinions on feminism, and even writes on a song that says, "boys can play baseball... I can too".

               To be honest, coming into Women Studies, I hadn't a clue as to what it meant to be "feministic". I figured that we would converse over hippies, walk around barefoot, and learn to hate men; when in fact, feminism is so much more than that! If I had been educated at a younger age on the significance of being a girl, I probably would have stuck up for myself more often. Being a women should be empowering, not a burden. Because inequality, discrimination, and violence all occurred outside of my home, outside of "my world", meant that I never understood the sickening truths that go on every day.

               Don't you want to fight for our future- our children's future?

               One of the biggest things that I would like to reiterate it the importance of spreading feminism to younger generations. There is no way of solving gender-based violence, misrepresentation from the media, the gender-wage gap, or all-over oppression of women without educating children. If we start implementing these ideas of equality, love, and acceptance at an early age, then those children are going to grow up with an entirely new mindset for what it means to be a woman/man. It is very important to remember that change takes time. It is no easy task clearing out what history has already set in stone. However, I feel that with a big enough push, women will (one day) meet equally along the lines of men.

Abortion Law & Reproductive Health Policy

         This week in class we discussed in detail a the right that women should have when it comes to reproduction and abortions. After reading the article An Overview of Abortion Law I feel I got a more well rounded view of the subject. Quite a few things stood out to me, one of these was how different each state views abortion. Even states right next to each other can have completely different regulations. An example would be Kansas, which requires all types of counseling and a 24 hour waiting period, versus Colorado where none of that is mandated. This stood out to me because it seems as if states are close geographically then in turn they should have somewhat of the same views but it doesn’t seem this is the case.

I clicked on some of the links as part of the Overview of Abortion Law and learned some new information. One that I found to be particularly astonishing was that  “About one in three American women will have had an abortion by the time she reaches age 45.” It seems with these figures abortions wouldn’t be as controversial as they are. In the same respect I think it’s interesting that the majority of these women have some sort of religious affiliation. The reason these new facts stood out, especially the second one is because it seems that religion has a huge impact on this topic. If you look at the states that are more strict with their abortion policies most of them are more conservative and religious than those who are lenient on their law. As I continued to look at the state by state abortion facts I found that states such as California which has no real restrictions has a noticeably larger percentage of abortions than most other states. In the graph that shows the state vs. country average, California was way above and that state alone accounted for almost 20 percent of all abortions. When trying to find another connection between the states and their averages I found that states with major cities (Los Angles, New York City) had much larger rates then more rural states. One last piece of information that was new to me was that the amount of abortions in the early 90’s vastly out number the current rates. I believe this maybe due to increased restrictions, but also teaching people about pregnancy, forms of contraception, and more knowledge being available.

I spent the majority of my life in Connecticut, so I did some extra research on Connecticut and its abortion laws. I saw that the rate of abortions there are steadily increasing and unlike most other states the averages have remained fairly constant in the past twenty years. Connecticut doesn’t have any major restrictions, which I was slightly surprised by since it seems like a semi conservative state. On the main page for the laws it shows that Connecticut doesn’t require any kind of parental involvement and that no counseling is needed. The state also funds most medically necessary abortions and there is no limit on private insurance coverage. One last piece of information that I found to be interesting was that 13 percent of counties in Connecticut didn’t offer abortions, this caught my attention because it is such a small state (45 minute drive from north to south) so for one area to not offer these services seemed unusual. Overall, it seems that Connecticut has a relaxed view on abortions and is open to helping women have a choice of whether or not they want to keep the fetus.

The next reading was on the new laws that affect reproductive health and rights, most of which take rights away from women and their choice of whether they want an abortion or not. The new restrictions enacted in 2012 take away important rights according to the article “Abortion Rights And Reproductive Justice” which states that “Access to safe abortion is both a fundamental human right and central to women’s health.”  (12) By taking away the opportunity completely or making it so hard it’s nearly impossible for a woman to chose what she wants to do with her body the state is striping them of their basic rights as human beings. Something that goes hand and hand with abortion and reproductive justice is a women’s right to birth control and other contraceptives. Some of these products can be extremely expensive and therefore some people cannot afford them. In 2012 some states made provisions which limited the ability for a low income woman to get contraceptives through her insurance or employer. After reading this I looked back to the “Birth Control and Gender Justice” article which elaborates on  how once birth control came about peoples lives improved and more women were able to succeed because they didn’t face unwanted pregnancies. After reading the new laws it seems as we are regressing back into a time like the fifties were people are being “trapped into marriage by unintended pregnancy” (10). I personally know of many young 19-21 year old girls who are had babies and in a few months to years find themselves to be single mothers or stuck with a partner they are completely happy with. It seems to me that if there was more information available on sex ed and contraceptions these women could have made a choice they maybe happier with later in life. This leads into the next topic, which is the sexual education provisions made in 2012. Some states decided to teach an abstinence only type of sexual education which only promotes not having premarital sex but doesn’t teach about contraceptives or any information on HIV/AIDS. The reading “Abstinence-Only and Reproductive Injustice” would argue that this way of going about sex ed breeds misinformation and is not beneficial to the student. It’s stated in this article that “Access to complete and accurate HIV/AIDS and sexual health information has been recognized as a basic human right and essential to realizing the human right to the highest attainable standard of health.” (7) This means by taking away these teachings the students aren’t able to fulfill their human right to information on how to be safe and responsible when it comes to sex.By taking this knowledge away the states are ultimately harming these children and teens rather than protecting them, as they might believe they are.

For those women who do decide to go to full term and have their babies there is still a plethora of reproductive injustice. In accordance to the new previsions in 2012 women may have to be tasted for HIV before giving birth and can get in serious trouble if their baby has any indication of substance abuse during the pregnancy. From the reading “Reproductive Justice for Women of Color” I learned that there is not sufficient help for pregnant women who have substance abuse problems. One of our readings even stated that some rehab places refused to serve pregnant women who have drug problems. From this knowledge and then reading the new provisions it seems as the woman is destined to fail with no outside help. The article stated above would argue that the new previsions “serve to further a white supremacist agenda that is still very much intent upon controlling the childbearing of Black women and other women of color.” (15) One last important set of provisions that’s important to look at are the ones which discuss reproductive health and exposure to toxins. After reading the provisions I must say that these seem like positive changes, not only in reference to pregnancy but in general I believe it’s important to keep these materials out of our bodies. The reading “Reproductive Justice Issues for Asian and Pacific Islander Women” discusses the amount of toxins that can lead to birth defects or miscarriages that these women face in their work environment. Some of these women are “exposed to phthalates and other toxins, and workers in electronics manufacturing plants are exposed to chemicals and heavy metals that lead to miscarriage and birth defects.” (16) If we could make provisions to ensure that these types of situations are dealt with correctly and reduce the amount of obstacles they have to face during pregnacy I believe it would be a step in the right direction.

Overall, from this week I learned about the amount of laws that make it nearly impossible for some women to make their own choice in some states. Also that if we had a better sexual education then we could possible reduce the amount of unwanted pregnancy and rate of STDs in our country.

Black Women and "Reality" T.V.

Current Event: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB4jC1r5OKQ. 

In 2010 HLN’s Richelle Carey talked to an assistant professor who has written a book on the images of black women in the media. In this news clip they are talking about reality shows such as “The Real Housewives of Atlanta” and how they portray black women. While one reporter lies claim to the fact that all reality TV can make women look like fools, the reporter claims that it is overly so with black women and that included is catty violence (the overturning of tables and such). 

I thought this current event was very interesting because it ties in with this week’s subject of the portrayal of women in the media. We watched “Miss Representation” and it discussed women in reality TV. It is very damaging in and of itself because we are taught that women are manipulative and catty through this medium. What wasn’t taken into account was black women specifically. How is sexism and racism tied together? This is the idea of black feminism. This is a slightly different framework. It explained that as women they are already considered catty but there is also a drama and violence to it that wouldn’t be seen with white women. As the author put it, there are all these women fighting over some good for nothing guy and she is sick of seeing it. 

Unfortunately, media in and of itself is a piece of the cycle of oppression. It helps form opinions which feed the mind of the young and easily lead. Even for those of us that are really smart it still is a little bit of a battle. We don’t even know what is being feed to us until we enter a class like this that opens the window a little bit further. It teaches people that black women are catty, overdramatic, and violent which is not true in general. The author was talking about a black organic dairy farmer in Vermont. People like this would never be shown in the media even though it may be a huge part of the black community. It is so unfortunate because media could be used for such much good. It is a great instrument for change (as Catie Couric said). There is so much we could do with it to teach people and entertain them at the same time. There needs to be a major revolution in the media in order for this to happen though. 

Reality T.V. is a huge issue. For one, companies need to stop marketing reality T.V. as “reality” T.V. It is nothing of the sort and by saying that it is we are feeding the cycles of oppression. People need to know that what you see is not necessarily what is happening. A lot of things are staged and many things are controlled. What about post-production too. No one should underestimate the power of a good editor. A good editor could turn a comedy into a horror movie. Why couldn’t he (or she) shape reality T.V. I just wish the companies would be honest with their audience and tell them what is really good. They just don’t want to ruin “television magic.” Or that is what they claim, but really the white middle-aged man just doesn’t want to lose his grip on the power that is already in his hands and the money that comes with it. 

I am not a black woman myself but by watching this video I could see where they are coming from. I think that the cattiness, manipulativeness, and dramatization of women (in general) need to stop. The violence of black women also needs to stop. We are so much more than the cattiness we see on television. Reality T.V. on the whole just relies on these age old systems of prejudice and fear. We need to open up and show something intriguing but smart that will blow the cover off of some of these terrible shows. A revolution needs to happen in the media. Preferably now.

Money see Money do, media violence turns int actual violence

I read an article that discussed how the violence that young children and teens are viewing on T.V and through playing video games is turning into real violence against other teens. The article gives the statistic that before teens are 18 that they would have viewed 200,000 acts of violence. This is a staggering amount. Now i am not saying for parents to go crazy with parental controls and block any thing and every thing that has violence but what i am saying is to really pay attention to the ratings of the t.v shows and video games that young children are watching. An example is made of a group of young boys age 11 to 13 acting out some thing  they saw in an episode of "South Park" which viewed the main characters beating up a kid for being a " ginger".  Now i have seen this show and know very well that it is way too mature for an 11 year old to be watching. The article expresses that the episode of the show discussed did in fact attack the issue of how hurtful bullying and violence against others for outward appearances but these messages are often not picked up by young teens and so the only thing that caught there eye was a kid getting beat up for having red hair.  SO this is a connection we can make when viewing all of the violence influenced ads and what is does to young children who are not yet able to disconnect what is t.v acting and what is accepted behavior in society.  Violence through media such as t.v and video games gives especially young boys an outlet of how they think they should act, it shows them early of how to be powerful, dominating  and also violent but in media being these things comes off cool and bad ass. so maybe by removing extremely sexual, extremely violent and dominating images in mainstream media will at least help to assist in giving a better view of how to treat people. This is not just targeting at how men treat women but also how men treat other men. but i say again a big part of this battle is young teens viewing too mature images, video games and shows are given ratings for a reason so this is where it is a parents responsibility to show a child what is ok to watch and what they should watch at their age level. I hear about way too many ten year old boys that play shooting games and graphic violence based video games that really gives them a false view of what is acceptable in the real world  because at such a young age it is very difficult for their brains to differentiate between what is fake and what really happens outside a video game.

References:  http://www.californiafamilycouncil.org/Media-Violence-Cause-and-Effect

"The Full Spectrum:" Games and LGBT issues

Over the past year or so, the issue of LGBT representation in videogames (or specifically, the lack thereof) has become a topic of interest in the gaming community, especially with game developer EA, who has been the most vocal of the game companies on this issue.  Indeed, EA is talking about making LGBT-based interactions available for players who wish to utilize them in future games.  This is a great step in combatting the issue of heteronormativity, which has an extraordinary presence in games.

EA's stance on this issue has been received critically by some gamers and organizations, and the backlash is to be expected.  Games are not often seen as mediums of social progress, which makes EA's recent announcements all the more interesting, yet unexpected.  Historically games have also been for the most part free of non-heterosexual interaction.

In 2012, EA participated in the "It Gets Better" project by uploading a video of employees talking about how their sexuality has impacted their lives.  As evidenced from many the comments on the video, heteronormativity is still a very relavent issue, especially among Internet users.

Just recently, EA announced what they are calling "Full Spectrum", which will be an open-panel and dialog discussion of:

• "The origin of homophobia in games;
• The development of authentic LGBT characters and scenarios;
• The difference between exclusive and inclusive language;
• Creating and promoting inclusive work environments for LGBT employees in the digital entertainment industry."

Despite many gamers not being fond of EA as a game company in general, we should applaud their efforts to raise awareness of the lack of LGBT representation in modern gaming.  Heteronormativity as a societal disease is itself also a symptom of heteronormative reenforcement in media, of which gaming is a very large component.  Thus, if we decrease the depiction of heteronormativity in media such as games, we can help decrease the prevalence of compulsory heterosexuality across all mediums of social interaction.

Click here to read more about EA's recent announcement.

For examples of just how strongly heteronormativity permeates gaming, both historically and in a modern context, check out Anita Sarkeesian's new Feminist Frequency video series: "Tropes vs Women in Video Games".

College is a place for students to learn and socialize with peers. However, rape is common on college campuses. With 54% of all rape instances not being reported, you’d hope that colleges would work to make the whole process better at helping victims. This is not the case at many colleges, where victims can be made to feel at fault and punishment of rapists to be mediocre. As an article on thenation.com illustrates, statistics of rape are being changed by schools to reflect a more positive view of colleges. Another article by Allie Grasgreen speaks specifically about UNC and their battle with a student who reported a rape. Student Landen Gambill is being charged with violating the honor code because by reporting her rape she is displaying “Disruptive or intimidating behavior that willfully abuses, disparages, or otherwise interferes with another”. Gambill already had run ins with the high honor court at UNC when she reported her abusive boyfriend. The peers on the court blamed her for staying with the abuser. Other girls have experiences at UNC dealing with their mishandlings of rape reports. The school often blames the victim for the rape and in one case told a girl she was lazy for withdrawing due to PTSD. Colleges should be advocates for their own students, but are being influenced by societies’ skewed views on sexual assault. As an institution they are also trying to downplay the amount of sexual assault happening among its students which furthers misconceptions about rape. Another startling fact at colleges like UNC is that when rape reports are investigated, the rapist almost never gets expelled and their only punishment is to “write a research paper on rape or have the rapist pen a letter of apology to his victims”. Hopefully as more people are educated about rape, students themselves will push for better sexual assault policies on their campuses.

Below are the links to the two articles referenced above:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/02/26/unc-charged-student-honor-code-violation-discussing-her-rape-allegation

http://www.thenation.com/blog/172299/no-justice-college-rape-victims#

Violence Prevention Should be for EVERYONE!

I came across this article talking about violence against adults and children with disabilities. This is a topic that is near and dear to my heart because I work is a caregiver at a facility where people that have disabilities live. It really gets under my skin to even think that people could be violent to those who have disabilities.

The statistics are unbelievable with how much more likely people with disabilities are to be exposed to violence, than those without. This is true in many different types of violence, and it is sickening.

People with disabilities are not anything different from those without disabilities. There are too many people that do not care and think of people with disabilities. What people need to do is realize that they have feelings, and they know what is going on even if they are not able to communicate. People will take advantage of people with disabilities because they take advantage of the fact that they may not be able to communicate as well.

The violence prevention should not just be for women, but rather for women, men, children, and all of the above even if they have disabilities. There is no reason to not include everyone when it comes to violence prevention. Everyone across the board should NEVER have to put up with violence.



http://www.who.int/disabilities/violence/en/index.html

Shaming Teen Mothers

Most of us have at least heard of shows like Teen Mom, depicting the ‘realities’ that young moms face as they raise their new babies and try to succeed in life. Regardless of their factuality on all aspects of teen motherhood, one thing that resonates with young mothers away from the camera is the idea of being ashamed.

While in many cases getting pregnant before graduating high school isn't ideal, I absolutely do not think that those who find themselves in the situation should be shamed by anyone. A new campaign launched by the Human Resources Administration of New York City does not seem to agree.

The administration under Mayor Michael Bloomberg has recently launched a poster campaign to “send a strong message that teen pregnancy has consequences – and those consequences are extremely negative, life-altering and most often disproportionately borne by young women.”

The posters are very blatantly shaming young moms and I think it’s uncalled for, as does the NYC Planned Parenthood. The organization has voiced its opinion and stated that not only do the messages promote shame they also “ignored the racial, economic and social factors that contribute to teenage pregnancy…”

As the daughter of a teen mom I understand the importance of support and sensitivity when handling the situation. If a woman will be following through with a pregnancy (whether by choice or lack of choice) I think that instead of being told that her child will inevitably fail to thrive in life, she should be supported; if not by her own family than at the very least the community in which she lives.

These messages have a further reach than the women who have teen births. They are being seen by peers, family, and other community members. By promoting the shaming of these young women they are subsequently saying that it’s okay for everyone to do the same or worse.

Making it through high school can be challenging enough. When faced with this situation one does not need any additional pressure or stress. Words are powerful and I think that public institutions should be using them more wisely.

To read the article published by the New York Times you can find its here.

Infantry skeptical about women in combat units, says Marine commandant

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/01/infantry-skeptical-about-women-in-combat-units-says-marine-commandant/

This article talks about women in combat and how men are more qualified for certain positions compared to women. This article ties into our theme this week because it is still touching on gender roles and really shows a prime example of the gender wage gap. Not only are these women getting paid less, but women are being completely ignored for certain positions in the military because it is believed that men can preform better. This article talked a lot about how women want to apply for infantry positions which are more violent positions in the military. 

“Military officials say they will not lower standards, but they are reviewing them to ensure they are necessary in making a warfighter and not just difficult to be difficult”. Many people assume that they are making it difficult for women to get into the military because they think men are more qualified. A leader of one of the branches said he wants to know how much interest there is from women to join infantry positions and then figure out if the women would be able to pass infantry school because it is such a difficult task. Depending on if women would be able to pass the course, they would make adjustments to better fit women. 

I think this article still somewhat made it seem like women were less qualified then men. The article still reached out to leaders of the military and they commented on how it was really difficult for anyone to pass infantry school, especially women. I think this article shows that no matter if we make it possible for more women to enter different parts of the military, people will still have doubts about how far a woman can make it. Even though we addressed the issue of the limited positions of women in the military, we still need to address the fact that many people look at women as a downgrade from men when it comes to fighting battles. 

The Connection Between Violence Against Women and HIV/AIDS

http://www.forbes.com/sites/skollworldforum/2013/03/08/ending-violence-against-women-is-critical-to-ending-the-aids-epidemic/ In this day and age, issues rarely have clear cut solutions and more often then not the issue in question overlaps with other issues that are just as important. This article brings an example of this phenomanon to light. Both HIV/AIDS and violence against woman are important and are issues that plague the whole world, but I didn't realize until now how linked they were. By their own right, they are both costly issues. Violence against woman, especially intimate partner violence, is a wide-spread occurrence that a majority of woman will deal with sometime in their life. This violence can result in long term physical and psychological issues, or even death. HIV/AIDS has similar costs, and is obviously not a pleasant thing or a thing that anyone should have to live with. For years now people have been striving to reduce the number of new HIV infections. That is an impressive and important goal, but many things stand in the way of that and one of those things is violence against women. When a woman is subjected to violence, she often loses control of many (if not all) parts of her life. She may not be able to say no to sex, or negotiate safe sex, or get treatments that she may need. This makes it very hard for her if she does contract HIV because she has no way to prevent it or get treatment. If she gets pregnant in this relationship, she may also have less options for pre-natal care and HIV testing for her baby, which increases the risk of the child getting it too. A common feminist lens states that we have to look at the big picture in order to solve an issue. This is a perfect example of that. We can't just look at HIV/AIDS and find a solution; we have to look at the issues that are connected to it. By helping reduce violence against women, a lower transmission rate of the disease might be accomplished as well. This would be an amazing goal to reach. Another important idea that could help with this is the idea of everyone being under a big tent to help solve an issue. These are not just issues that affect only woman. They hit home for everyone regardless of gender, race, class, ect. By looking at one, we have to look at both and be united together to help come up with a solution. No one should have to live with HIV/AIDS or have to be subjected to violence of any kind. By looking at this big picture together, hopefully we can get to a place were we can fix both of these issues.

Women in Combat

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/01/24/women-in-combat-briefing/1861887/

This week’s topic in class was gender in the state, law and social policy. We talked a lot about women in the military and that linked closely with an article I read on USA today. The article is about how men and women have to meet the same combat standards in the military. In class on Monday, we had a group discussion about how it’s offensive to hear “you throw like a girl” or gender based terms like that that are meant to be degrading. The article says, “The new order, signed Thursday by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, will open as many as 237,000 new jobs to women. Women comprise about 14% of the 1.4 million active military personnel.” It talks about how the military will not need to lower standards in order to accept women, both genders will have equal treatment and requirements to meet. One of the readings we did called “How Much Must Women Sacrifice to Serve?” talks about the trauma women face in the service when they are already putting their lives on the line to protect us. The reading says, “Despite their contributions and sacrifices, the military continues to be a hostile -- and often dangerous environment -- for women.” Women in the military often face a lot of extra trauma such as rape, assault and verbal harassment.

By making requirements and expectations equal between men and women, it will start to decrease the power role and the difference in power between genders. That power is often what leads to other problems like the oppression women face. Another article I read by SWAN called “Women in Combat” says, “The disconnect between what the U.S. government and military says women are allowed to do and what they are actually doing is not only a blatant act of gender discrimination, it fosters a hostile work environment where women’s capabilities are assumed rather than assessed.” This links to the current event I read because by creating laws preventing division of labor and gender discrimination, we can start to close this gap in the military between men and women. 

Native Eugene, Or. student involved in rape

This article is about a now former quarterback from the University of Montana is being acquitted of sexual assault charge. Jordan Johnson, 21, from Eugene, OR originally, forced himself upon a female student last year. The student claimed that after she and Johnson kissed and took their shirts off, she told him no to having sex. Then, she claimed that the athlete took off her leggings and underwear, pinned her to the bed and forced her to have sex with him. She said that he changed: “changed into a totally different person.” The next day, she went to the university’s Student Assault Resource Center and had an examination done. She suffered injuries to the head, chest, clavicle, and genitals. Since she was in shock and terrified, she couldn’t scream for help for her friends who were in the same house. 

                The reason why Johnson got acquitted from the charge is because the female student wanted to be with the star quarterback. Then she realized that a relationship was not part of the deal, and she turned on him. “The fact that he didn’t give her a relationship does not make what happened that night a crime.” 

                I think was an interesting article to read and write about because it is about a rights of a man and a woman. We’ve been talking about a lot about women being the victims, not the other way around. Men can be the victims as well. Women, just like men, can trick people so they can get what they want. Most cases end up sending the rapist to years in prison. But in this case, the rapist got out of a 100-year sentence. He was in there for a year or so, but his case was brought up back to court. This article represents what I believe. I think that everyone involved should be considered. For instance, I don’t think it’s fair if the rapist is sent to jail and the victim wasn’t under consideration. Like in this case, the victim was the one who ‘wanted’ Johnson. She probably saw him as a popularity contest, and that isn’t right, in my opinion. People who use other people on purpose is not right and is wrong. I sure hope that women and men both come to justice about sexual violence and abuse. It is wrong doing and doesn’t prove anything. Nothing positive comes out of abuse or violence. 

  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/02/us/jordan-johnson-ex-montana-quarterback-is-acquitted-of-rape.html