Sex Positivity, Feminism and Health Implications

Sex Positivity, Feminism and Health Implications 

Deirdre O'Donnell

I attended the lecture about Sex Positivity, Feminism and Health Implications by Deirdre O'Donnell on March 24, 2016.  The lecture took place in Donovan Dining Center at 12:30 to 1:50.  The main issues that were talked about during this lecture were:  Libertarianism vs. interventionist politics, intersection, feminism and the economic and political equality of the sexes.  

I was worried going into this lecture because for me personally I don't like talking about this kind of topic, but it was actually interesting and I was involved in what O'Donnell was saying.  If it wasn't for this class I wouldn't have even attended this lecture.  I didn't know what to expect when I walked into this lecture but I had Nicole, Grace, Amy, Kate and Jordyn that came along with me.  I defiantly felt awkward, but I also laughed and enjoyed what she had to say even though half the topics were things I didn't think she was going to talk about.

Some of the topics that were discussed were:  

-   Women's rights

-   The U.S has the most expensive health care in the world with the worst outcomes.

-   Pro-Life= Anti-Abortion

-   Sigmund Freud was the first person to talk about sexual repression 

-   Pro-Choice= Women's Choice

-   Woman make $0.75 to the male $1.00 and it is even less if the woman is not white.

-   The word "sex" is not easily define, it could mean multiple things such as intercourse, gender, oral, anal, and vaginal sex

Some topics that stuck out to me were:  less an 1% of rapists see time in jail; condoms, tampons/feminine products are not tested by the Food and Drug Administration because they are legally considered "cosmetic" products.  Tampons and feminine products have bleach and sugars that shouldn't be allowed in our bodies.  One big thing that stood out to me was that abortion is not legal is every state, but in some states they are requiring an ultrasound for the mother to go to before officially deciding to terminate the fetus.  

Deirdre did a great job with this lecture and I definitely enjoyed it because I learned so much!  As Nicole states in her blog, "Deirdre discussed what 'Sex Positivity' really is, she explained that it is 'Consensual (enthusiastic, verbal or gesture, absent of drug/alcohol, safe and sane, of age and of ability to consent), judgement free, intention of inclusitivity, (LGBTGAP+) and issues of women's health like porn, rape/assault, consent, sex work/sex trafficking, sex toys, safe sex, menstruation, masturbation, anatomy and many others." 

This lecture relates very well with SCWAAMP by Grinner, August, and Delpit.  It relates to to SCWAAMP because of the "ideal norms" that everybody believes is right for women.  And for the money issues, white women make more than women of color whereas all men make more money than women (WHITENESS & MALENESS).  This lecture also relates to August because it talked about LGBTQ and what it means and how sometimes it can effect women.  O'Donnell discussed with us what "sex" was and what its meaning was.  O'Donnell told us that every person thinks of "sex" as something different, there is no one answer for that word.  Some people think of it as gender, while others think of it as an act of intercourse where some people thought of intercourse as an act between a male and woman.  But okay now think, what if there was a woman and woman, or a male and a male that perform "sex"- that is not exchanged between a male and woman.  "Sex" is performed many different ways, and each way is okay.  This lecture also related to Delpit which talks about the "rules and codes of power" and how it relates to women.  Delpit formally relates to this lecture because society see's women as a respectful woman who obeys.  But, men take advantage of women by using them as sex objects or that man don't respect women.  

This lecture was something that I would prefer to many people, especially women activists.  But, I would also recommend this lecture, if given again, to any lady because it is very descriptive and helpful of things that relate to women; things that many women probably don't know.  It was defiantly an experience! A knowledgeable experience!  

O'Donnell's presentation.

   

                                                                        What society thinks about women's clothing. 

Literacy with an Attitude

Literacy with an Attitude
Patrick Finn

Reflection/ Quotes

This was probably one of the best readings we have done in this class.  Patrick Finn is such a great writer, and he goes so in depth in his work.  Patrick Finn writes about how children receive different education based on the social class that they are in or raised in.  Finn starts off in the Preface by saying..

"When rich children get empowering education nothing changes.  But when working-class children get empowering education you get literacy with an attitude." 

There are two types education:  empowering and domesticating education.  Empowering education "leads to powerful literacy, the kind of literacy that leads to positions of power and authority."  Domesticating education "leads to functional literacy, literacy that makes a person productive and dependable, but not troublesome."  Finn than goes on by describing the four different types of education and what each student is getting for education.  The four types of education are:  The working- class, the middle-class, the affluent professional, and the executive elite.  Each area learns and get taught a completely different way.  I feel as if each child in each type of school should be taught the same way and when they leave school, every child should have the same amount of knowledge as the other.

In the working- class, which are the "low ability students,"  they don't learn much.  The teachers barely want to be there and neither does the student.  Finn says, "In the working-class schools, knowledge was presented as fragmented fats isolated from wider bodies of meaning and from the lives and experience of the students."  Teachers are told by the principal,

 "Just do your best.  If they learn to add and subtract, that's a bonus.  If not, don't worry about it."  A teacher stated that the children where getting dumber every year.   

I believe that the working-class schools need extremely more work!  They need a better professional staff and a better school system in the first place.  These students are the ones that need it the most unlike the other students that get everything handed to them.  

In the middle-class schools there is kind of a better school system in place, but it could also need improvement.  Many students in the United States attend a middle-class school, but many town are pronounced as middle-class. Knowledge in these schools are

"'more conceptual' than in the working-class school.  It was less a matter of isolated facts and more a matter of gaining information and understanding from socially approved sources."

I went to a middle-class school, and it was what I see as normal.  Than I went to a poverty school, a working-class school, where you can see all of the difference.  My old school and this school where I do my Service Learning at is completely different and in one way I feel privileged because I was able to go to a school like that.  Yes, sometimes I wish I went to a different school, a better one with more money and high-tech technology; but I am glad that I went to the school that I did.

In affluent professional schools students set their goals to creativity and personal development.  Saint Johns is in Massachusetts, and I feel like that is what you call an affluent professional school.

"Teachers wanted students to think for themselves and to make sense of their own experience.  Discovery and experience were important."

I feel like many schools should have a mind-set like this, but in most cases this is not the matter.  Many schools revolve around the curriculum or what is placed in a textbook.  Many teachers don't let the students think outside the box and conceptualize the big picture in most cases.  Students at an affluent professional school would  ask "How should I do this?" and the teachers would answer with  "You decide" or "What makes sense to you?"  I feel like this is a better way for students to learn.  To really use what they know and apply it to everyday problems or use critical thinking to develop their answers.

The last kind of schooling was an executive elite school.  He writes:

"Knowledge in the executive elite school was academic, intellectual, and rigorous.  More was taught and more difficult concepts were taught.  Reasoning and problem solving were important.  The rationality and logic of mathematics were help up as the model for correct and ethical thinking." 

This kind of schooling I feel like is for the geniuses.  This schooling is ridiculous.  I would never want my kids to go here.  I like the mix between middle-class schools and affluent professional schools.  I feel as if a student could use what is being taught at a middle-class school and apply it with terms of an affluent professional school.  If they were combine both of the schools, that would be an ideal school for many students.  

Finn relates to Delpit's reading because it relates to Delpit's "Culture of Power."  A rich child is not going to go to a working-class school, and a poor child is not going to go to an elite school.  If a child was born and raised in a low poverty area, they are most likely going to go to a working-class school because their parents are not going to be able to afford a rich school.  AND a rich child will not go to a low poverty school because their parents will be able to afford a high end school.

Points to share:
What can we do to change this?  To change the fact that their are people "over" other people.  I feel like it will not change, ever.  There will always be the rich and always be the poor.  But is there a way to integrate the two types of people into one place?  It shouldn't be based on money.  And especially the teachers that teach at the lower schools, why do the teachers have to be "sucky"?  Why can't they be great teachers to help the students that are under privileged?

The Problem We Live In: Parts 1 &2

The Problems We Live In:
Parts one and two
By:  WBEZ

Connections/ Reflection 

Even though this reading was extremely long, it was a well- worthy read.  It touched upon parts that we have been discussing this whole semester.  The radio station relates to SCWAAMP.  White people have full advantage of school systems and of having a higher education.  Just by being black or Latino meant that you would have a lower education.

"... that black and Latino kids in segregated schools have the least qualified teachers, the least experienced teachers.  They also get the worst course offerings, the least access to AP and upper level courses, the worst facilities.  The other thing about most segregated black schools, Nikole says, is that they have high concentrations of children who grew up in poverty.  Those kids have greater educational needs.  They're more stressed out.  They have a bunch of disadvantages.  And when you put a lot of kids like that together in one classroom, studies show, it doesn't go well." 

Going along with SCWAAMP means being educated.  IF you are white, you are higher educated, but if you are black you are not well educated.  "Normandy School District:  Points for academic achievement in English, zero; math, zero; social studies, zero; science, zero, points for college placement, zero."  By being at lower poverty school, students are not accepting the need that they need to have a good education.  Just by being a person of color and living in this neighborhood, you don't have the opportunities to have a better life and you the higher up won't give you the opportunity that some of these students need.

This reading also goes along with Kristof's point of individual vs. institutions. Because of such bad school systems in the Normandy area, teachers did not care able the students.  All they cared about was the pay check that they'd get at the end of the week.  Teachers are supposed to be a second mother, someone who is going to be there when nobody else isn't.  "Mah'Ria usually brought home A's.  But when she got a C, Nedra asked the teacher why she had not been notified.  The teacher told her that she had too many kids in her class in call their parents."  The school and staff, the instituation, did not care about the students.  They didn't care that the students came from bad home lives, and the students aren't learning what they should be learning.

Personally, I feel like this is sad.  Especially because I want to be a teacher when I grow up.  I feel like the students that aren't getting what they should be getting for services should be able to.  They should be the first priority; they should be the students that the government should be focusing on, or even the district.  These students sometimes don't even graduate school, but when they do, it is a huge accomplishment. 

 Going along with all of our readings pretty much is that white people believe that they are higher then people of color.  White people are bias towards the people of color.

"... I want to k now where the metal detectors are going to be.  And I want to know where your drug-sniffing dogs are going to be... I deserve to not have to worry about my children getting stabbed, or taking a drug, or getting robbed because that's the issue." 

Why do white people have to be so critical.  Where I went to school, it was an all white school of middle-upper class students.  When I came to RIC, it was a completely different ball game!  My first class there was 15 people of color and 6 white people.  For me, I was stunned. But, now I understand it all; it doesn't worry me anymore.  Because I knew that going to this school it would be like that.  Some of my really good friends that I met at orientation and during my two semester here are people of color, and they are the nicest and kindest people I know.

It was said that people of color who go to a low poverty school and don't have the money to get out of the district will live and go to the low poverty school

During a court ruling, Hartford teachers "bad talked" their own district. "They described what it was like to teach a classroom of kids who came to school without coats in the winter.  They complained about instructional time lost because nearly every child in the class suffered severe emotional issues, or dental issues, or hadn't eaten.  They said their classrooms were overwhelmed by poverty."

The teachers notice the disadvantage these students have in this poor district.  It saddens me to even know that their are schools like this.  Schools are suppose to be safe and somewhere were everybody is welcomed.  

Herbert states, "... humiliating dancing around the perennially uncomfortable issue of race.  We pretend that no one's a racist anymore, but it's easier to talk about pornography in polite company than racial integration..."

Points to share/Questions:
Do you think that when we are teachers, there will still be issues in school about being a person of color?  Or being an middle class privileged child?  Do you think schools will improve before we are become teachers?  Or do you think they will get worse?

 

In the Service of What?

In the Service of What?
The Politics of Service Learning
By:  Joseph Kahne and Joel Westheimer

Extended Comments

For this week,  I have decide to do an extended comment blog on Kelsey Woods Blog.  I feel like she did a great job by pointing out two big impacted quotes.  I completely agree with Kelsey that it relates to Kristof's article and when Kristof talks about Rick Goff.

"... Educators and legislators alike maintain that service learning can improve the community and invigorate the classroom, providing educational experiences for students at all levels of schooling." 

 Students participating in a Service Learning Project can benefit from this experience tremendously.  Students that participate in this opportunity can benefit from it because these students are opening their eyes to different aspects that that probably never have.  Such as, "Mr. Johnson's class was able to pick where they wanted to do their service learning and be able to explore the different lifestyles than they are accustomed to" (Kelsey).  I can relate to this because especially during this class, FNED, I was able to experience teaching in a lower poverty school, which I never thought I would.

"... Promote students' self-esteem,...develop higher-order thinking skills, ... make use of multiple abilities, and ... provide authentic learning experiences."

I agree 100% with with this quote.  I feel like Service Learning Projects should be done in high schools, and also in colleges. I feel like these Service Learning Projects are a great opportunity for students to experience different areas that they have never done before.  For me especially, even though I have already worked in a school system and have put myself in front of other peers and have taught.  I still feel like the Service Learning Project that I am doing, I am opening my eyes to a new opportunity on how to teach different students that have a different life style than me.  A Service Learning Project should help students gain confidence and make sure that the student knows exactly what they want to do. 

When I was in high school, I had the opportunity to student teach for 2 hours every day.  During that experience, I knew that I wanted to be a Special Education Teacher, ABA, BCBA in an elementary school.  If I had never been able to do that experience, I would still be a freshman in school, not knowing what I wanted to do for the rest of my life.  

Points to Share:

There should be a way for students in high schools and colleges to be able to experience this opportunity.  It is a great way for students to get engaged with their community.  Even though it may be a pain to add another task to your to-do list, it is an amazing opportunity to help open your eyes and to help a student understand what they want to do in the future.