I hate you women's studies paper

[Laudenum]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

The OP is indeed a she, although AFAIK men are not barred from Womens’ Studies programs at most US colleges.

They aren’t barred in Ireland either - but you’d get funny looks.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

I know at least three guys who signed up for womens’ studies classes without reading a syllabus to make sure they were about what [del]we[/del] they (ahem) really thought they were about.

[Ogre]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

I know at least three guys who signed up for womens’ studies classes without reading a syllabus to make sure they were about what [del]we[/del] they (ahem) really thought they were about.

I know guys who did so explicitly to hit on the women’s studies majors. Some of them had remarkable track records of success at it.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Yeah, there really weren’t any lesbians. Either that or they were just… fickle.

[Ogre]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Yeah, there really weren’t any lesbians. Either that or they were just… fickle.

The most devoutly iconoclastic LUG I knew in college is now a sworn Catholic and mother of four. :rolleyes:

(I’m sure she had a hell of a good time in college, though.)

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

LUG?

ETA: Never mind. Looked it up.

[Ogre]

A politically incorrect term: Lesbian Until Graduation.

[The_Tao_s_Revenge]

@Smeghead

Can’t you just pay some chick to do it for you?

@The_Tao_s_Revenge

And a free ride when you’ve already paid.

Because that’s why.

[Spice_Weasel]

@DanBlather

All I read is blah, blah, blah.

Really? If you couldn’t even deign to read what I said, then why should I take anything you say seriously?

Really, race theory? I understand the need for statistics, but is there a special kind of statistics for dealing with racial issues?

No, but statistics is a good tool for comparing populations and understanding the concept of systemic inequality.

I think the idea that the most important thing about a person is their race or gender is part of the reason that inequality persists.

Okay, but nobody has made that claim in this thread, so it’s irrelevant.

If we spent more time trying to teach math, English, and science than trying to deal with the kumbaya bullshit we’d be better off.

I’m not sure what you mean by kumbaya bullshit. If you mean acknowledging different social needs of different populations based on race or gender, I find that opinion disturbingly irrational.

The weird thing is, part of acknowledging social needs is acknowledging educational needs. There are some fucked up school systems in inner cities that disproportionately affect minority youth. Perhaps one of the reasons they find it so difficult to succeed is because they are crammed into classrooms full of 50 people, denied access to basic knowledge (one school in Philly I know of recently dropped SCIENCE from its curriculum), and spend their school days being told they won’t amount to anything and shouldn’t bother trying. And if they do manage to graduate, they are vividly aware that they’ve got a better chance of dying young than soldiers in the Iraq war and that their high school degree means absolutely nothing in terms of better opportunities for employment.

Let’s start treating people as individuals and look at what they need to do to get ahead. There isn’t black math and womens’ math. It’s patronizing.

Nobody claimed otherwise.

We need to be vigilant that we don’t literally “white wash” history, but when you have things like Black History month and Women’s Studies it makes it seem like black people and women are not part of society.

To some extent, I agree. Ideally these concepts would be integrated throughout all subjects – economics, history, philosophy, etc. But unfortunately the realities of race and gender inequality are subjects that are all-too-often excluded from national discourse and standard law, economics and history curricula. We study slavery as if it were some kind of anomaly rather than the economic foundation of our country. We study the Social Security Act as if it changed the game for ALL people and leave out the fact that it deliberately excluded black people. We talk about the problem of inner-city violence and urban ghettos but we don’t talk about redlining, the Rockefeller laws, or urban renewal.

We’ve had years of this crap and the gap between black and white income is getting worse.

I know. I learned that in my useless classes about racism.

Did it ever occur to you that your attitude that race theory is ‘‘kumbaya bullshit’’ is just as responsible for the fact that inequality is a worsening problem in U.S. society? I mean, if you look at U.S. social policy over the last 30 years or so, it heavily favors ignoring the social context of an individual’s actions or situation. Social policy until very recently has grown increasingly more conservative, with one of the most significant changes being the transition from AFDC to TANF in the mid-nineties.

So what’s more likely to REALLY have an impact on the wage gap – a handful of blowhard liberal academics that the vast majority of the country dismisses out of hand, or the way our government and economy is actually structured?

@Shodan

The thing is, if you want to decide if globalization is a problem or not, you don’t take Women’s Studies, you take economics.

Regards,
Shodan

I absolutely agree with you there. In the very least, I feel that a lot of fields such as Women’s Studies would benefit substantially from a core curriculum that heavily emphasizes economics, statistics, and research. I would also welcome more interdisciplinary instruction – my most informative classes this year were taught by law professors.

[Ludovic]

@olivesmarch4th

No, but statistics is a good tool for comparing populations and understanding the concept of systemic inequality.

Yeah, but I thought you were talking about race studies?

[Shodan]

@Dangerosa

If you want to understand whether globalization effects women disproportionally (for better or worse) you study economic theory as it pertains to women. That coursework is often co-sponsored through both departments.

Doesn’t seem to be in this case. The assignment was “write a paper on some women’s organization working against globalization”. Not “is globalization good or bad”, not “does globalization affect women disproportionately”, not even (heaven forfend) “might globalization be good for women?” Just taking it for granted that it is a bad thing, and seeing what organizations are doing against it.

And, as it turns out, mostly they aren’t doing anything concrete - just talk.

If you approach the topic from the basis of economics, it is possible to ask those kinds of questions (and maybe get some real answers). If you approach if from the Womens’ Studies point of view it is just “Find the Grievance 101”.

If the OP is brave enough, maybe she could write a paper on how organizations working for free trade benefit women in the Third World. It depends if the professor wants education or indoctrination.

Regards,
Shodan

[moejoe]

@Rhythmdvl

How narrow is “globalization” defined?

There are a lot of excellent organizations working to ensure that globalization’s gender-specific impacts on women are minimized and to protect their rights during various processes.

For example, reforestation is becoming a source of carbon credit generation (don’t get sidetracked into the pros/cons of the example, just recognize that it’s happening), creating incentives to alter land use. Some nation’s property laws are constructed such that women’s ownership and titling of land is nonexistent or weaker in relation to men’s. Is an organization working to prevent such dislocation–ostensibly making the process more expensive and less attractive as an outcome–fighting globalization?

You also seem to be painfully unaware of the rationale behind simply “raising awareness.” While it’s awfully fun to gripe about classes and shit on assignments, what about taking a moment to find out what it’s all about? Unless you’re talking about groups that work exclusively in Scandinavian countries, there is a tremendous disparity in access to information in the developing world. Information on upcoming votes, information on how to register for political candidacy, on how to run a campaign, on how to get health, safety, and security assistance, on the benefits of vaccination… the list is enormous.

And if not direct outreach to the individuals, there is room for “awareness raising” at the community and national level. Similar to carbon sequestration, it doesn’t matter if you think women should be able to vote or should be able to hold property in their own name post-marriage, assume for the moment that there are a lot of people out there who think of things like these in terms of universal human rights. And what are they supposed to do? Just wish it? Or raise money to conduct lobbying and public interest campaigns (i.e., raise awareness) within the nation to change attitudes or outside the country to add pressure.

It’s a shame you took a challenging assignment and let the educational opportunity pass you by. Beyond educating yourself about the non-hyperbolic pro and cons of globalization, just finding out about the issue itself and what the missions of various organizations are is a research project alone. It’s one you’re obviously unfamiliar with and one that’s far from threadbare. I hope you don’t have large student loans, because it sounds like you’re not taking advantage. (Of course, this is just one post about one class about one assignment, so it’s fairly absurd to read into it and suggest that you’re wasting your time, but you fuck one goat… )
Oh, as for recommendations, I’d start with an organization such as UNIFEM (the link is to their section on women, poverty, and economics). Look to see what projects and programmes they’re funding, and who their partner organizations are. You should find all sorts of practical, pragmatic, and concrete initiatives that will satisfy a range of criteria.

again, le sigh.

You seem to have assumed that I harbor some ill will towards groups that are raising awareness and or money rather than throwing bricks through windows. Rest assured that I do not. I think these organizations do great and important work, they simply don’t meet the needs of this particular essay prompt.

On the upside you may be glad to know that I am reaping huge intellectual benefits from my course work (with the exception of this one annoying class) and that not only do I have no student loans, but I’m not really the goat fucking type.

so there’s that.

[Punoqllads]

@moejoe

8 pages on a feminist organization that is fighting globalization.

Well, maybe you could ask your professor if you could instead do it on a feminist organization that is improving womens’ lives through globalization? Some professors appreciate out-of-the-box thinking. A quick Google search on women microloan pops up a few good starting places.

[Spice_Weasel]

@Shodan

Doesn’t seem to be in this case. The assignment was “write a paper on some women’s organization working against globalization”. Not “is globalization good or bad”, not “does globalization affect women disproportionately”, not even (heaven forfend) “might globalization be good for women?” Just taking it for granted that it is a bad thing, and seeing what organizations are doing against it.

And, as it turns out, mostly they aren’t doing anything concrete - just talk.

If you approach the topic from the basis of economics, it is possible to ask those kinds of questions (and maybe get some real answers). If you approach if from the Womens’ Studies point of view it is just “Find the Grievance 101”.

If the OP is brave enough, maybe she could write a paper on how organizations working for free trade benefit women in the Third World. It depends if the professor wants education or indoctrination.

Regards,
Shodan

I strongly agree with your point here. There is not enough ‘‘critical’’ in the ‘‘critical theory’’ fields. As a social work student I’ve seen too many articles that start with begging the question. I fucking hate it. And I hate that we’re asked to read a lot of things that many of us don’t have the requisite economical or statistical knowledge knowledge to evaluate critically. God damn it makes me mad. I have seriously considered getting a second master’s degree or Ph.D. for exactly this reason.

[DanBlather]

@olivesmarch4th

We study slavery as if it were some kind of anomaly rather than the economic foundation of our country. We study the Social Security Act as if it changed the game for ALL people and leave out the fact that it deliberately excluded black people. We talk about the problem of inner-city violence and urban ghettos but we don’t talk about redlining, the Rockefeller laws, or urban renewal.

But so fucking what? People all over the world are oppressed, but then go on to succeed. The Jews were almost exterminated but they went on to excel in all fields. Should Einstein have taken classes in Jewish Studies rather than math? We had the Irish potato famine and diaspora, the Cultural Revolution in China, my people were kicked off the crofts in Scotland, we bombed the shit out of Vietnam, and on and on. Sure, let’s acknowledge it, but in the end you get out of poverty by being better at something useful than someone else. The chattel slavery in the US was horrific, and it has created scars, but it’s more important to have in demand skills than knowing the details of the slave trade. We have people arrive in this country from villages without running water, who don’t speak English, and have no cultural ties to the west. They seem to do fine with the SATs and don’t have any problem with questions being culturally biased. They don’t need pictures of famous Chinese people in the wall, or Korean history month, or other bullshit.

Let’s make classrooms smaller, pay teachers what they deserve, make the school year longer, have equal access to after school enrichment programs, and make sure all kids can afford college. But this stupid notion that it’s more important to be culturally sensitive than to educate people has got to stop. It’s patronizing and counter productive.

[Rhythmdvl]

@Shodan

Doesn’t seem to be in this case. The assignment was “write a paper on some women’s organization working against globalization”. Not “is globalization good or bad”, not “does globalization affect women disproportionately”, not even (heaven forfend) “might globalization be good for women?” Just taking it for granted that it is a bad thing, and seeing what organizations are doing against it.

And, as it turns out, mostly they aren’t doing anything concrete - just talk.

If you approach the topic from the basis of economics, it is possible to ask those kinds of questions (and maybe get some real answers). If you approach if from the Womens’ Studies point of view it is just “Find the Grievance 101”.

If the OP is brave enough, maybe she could write a paper on how organizations working for free trade benefit women in the Third World. It depends if the professor wants education or indoctrination.

Regards,
Shodan

So, basically, replace one set of predetermined assumptions with another. Great learning experience that. Fight assumed indoctrination with Shodan’s indoctrination.

Maybe globalization isn’t the cat’s fucking pajamas. Maybe unfettered and unregulated globalization (within each county’s purview) has been detrimental to women’s rights and equality. But since it’s a chick thing to study it instead of engineering, fuck recognizing that.

It’s not a black and white world (and you don’t need critical race theory to know that). Globalization is not all good–it’s not unassailable and shouldn’t be a ultra-libertarian implementation. But its unassailability doesn’t necessarily mean the extreme opposite end of the spectrum.

Maybe there’s been so much Limbaugh and Beck cultural crap that there’s an assumption that the prof is looking for the one straw man viewpoint above all else. Maybe there is a huge lesson in the works that is being missed in misguided attempts at shoving other preconceived notions forward. Put the straw men away, do some research, and maybe learn something.
ETA: didn’t see moejoe’s post before replying. Also note the goat-fucking reference is the punchline to a joke; no bestiality intended. Rather, it was acknowledging that all I had to go on was one post, so it’s not quite right to draw sweeping conclusions.

[moejoe]

@Shodan

The thing is, if you want to decide if globalization is a problem or not, you don’t take Women’s Studies, you take economics.

Regards,
Shodan

Amen

[Drain_Bead]

@ajb867

I’m here for the free booze.

Jock #1: [at a party] What’s up, babes?
Womynist #1: Pack up your rape culture and take a hike!
Jock #1: [holds up a beer] You want a brewdog?
Womynist #1: We’re not interested in your penis!
Womynist #2: Wait, wait, I think he’s offering us a beer.
[turns to jock, speaks slowly]
Womynist #2: Um… Yes. We, would like, a beer.
Jock #1: Okay!
[turns around to get a beer]
Womynist #1: So it’s like, if you’re nice to them, they bring you things?
Womynist #2: Exactly.

[Dangerosa]

@DanBlather

These days, to get a job at a major company out of school you pretty much need to have a masters or better from a top school. When I started out in software we had tons of English and History majors from liberal arts schools. Made lunch time conversations more interesting.

I work for a major company (Fortune 500) and our last hires have not had masters or better from top schools. My husband works for a Fortune 100 and he’s been hiring through a recession - without masters or better from top schools.

[Shodan]

@Rhythmdvl

So, basically, replace one set of predetermined assumptions with another. Great learning experience that. Fight assumed indoctrination with Shodan’s indoctrination.

Right - asking the question "is globalization good or bad for women?’ instead of assuming “globalization is bad - study how to fight it” is indoctrination.

This kind of thing is why olivesmarch4th’s point -

There is not enough ‘‘critical’’ in the ‘‘critical theory’’ fields.

is a good one.

If the purpose is to teach you to think analytically and clearly, and to supply you with tools that enable you to do so, it’s education. If you just want your students to spout the correct cant and hold the correct opinions, it’s indoctrination.

Unfortunately, actually learning to think critically involves learning to use analytical tools like statistics and logic. and, as Barbie tells us, “Math class is tough!” Much easier to teach a class full of freshmen to chant “Fight the power!” in unison.

Regards,
Shodan