Brody PHIL 285 Blog

Collins writes: "Just as the traditional family ideals provide a rich site for understanding intersectional inequalities, reclaiming notions of family that reject hierarchical thinking may provide an intriguing and important cite of resistance." In light of the arguments that Collins makes about gender and race in the context of what she calls the "logic of the traditional family ideal", what could resistance of this sort look like? How effective do you think that sort of resistance would be, as compared to the efforts of other strategies political movements use in attempt to bring about change? The article of It's All in the Family: Intersections of Gender, Race, and Nation really opened my eyes to this concept of intersectionality. One thing worth noting is that this article was published in the summer of 1998 which is a considerable time ago and needs to be taken into consideration when talking about the topic. As I was reading this article I couldn't hel...

  What do you think, are moral decisions merely rational decisions, as Wollstonecraft thought, or do they have sensual or emotional aspects too?   All in all, reading this chapter was very interesting to me. Especially hearing Mary Wollstonecraft's thoughts as a female philosopher in the eighteenth century. I'm not too aware of the fundamental differences in education several hundred years ago between men and women, but some of the insights she makes are magnificent. She argues, "the best education, for man or woman, should have the aim of cooperating... with the supreme Being. It must strengthen the body and form the heart. Virtuous beings are virtuous because of their capacity for reason." Never would I have thought about education in this light; to "cooperate with the supreme Being." Wollstonecraft believed that the way women have been educated draws them out of this rational realm as oppose to men by "false refinement". These writers on women...

  Are some mental illnesses natural, as opposed to socially constructed? How might we discern “real” mental illnesses from ways of being that are wrongly pathologized in order to reinforce social norms? I do believe that there are mental illnesses that are just natural. We're all different humans so I'd like to believe that our brains are made up of unique chemical compositions. I'm pretty far from an expert in this subject but it is something I'm always looking to learn more in. While I believe that certain mental illnesses are natural, the events that transpire throughout our life can definitely cause a socially constructed mental illnesses. Most of us are fighting a war with ourselves in some shape or another and it seems as if no matter how hard you fight, this war may never come to an end. Possibly, the natural mental illnesses we have can be altered or worsened through a person's life through what they experience. I have no clue as to what the difference betwe...

  Is it possible to meet or interact with someone without performing a gender attribution? Have you ever done so? (page 26) To fully understand the question at hand, I need to fully dive into what a gender attribution is. Dea writes, "Gender attribution is the term that Kessler and McKenna use for the decision we make about a person's gender when we first see that person. They argue that we are constantly attributing genders to people. We do so without really trying, and are often unaware that we are even doing it"(19). This means that we are attributing genders  subconsciously all of the time. If this is true then am I determining genders when I first see people? It's very tough to understand my own subconscious yet alone control my subconscious thoughts. However, Dea makes the point that we only become aware of the gender attribution process when we encounter difficulty in making the attribution. I will admit that sometimes I fall victim to this. But why do I need t...

 Do you agree with Dembroff and Wodak's "Radical Claim"? Explain. The reading of He/She/They/Ze was very eye opening for myself. While it was very complex, I now have a slightly better understanding for the matter. As for the "Radical Claim" of, "We have a negative duty not to use any gender specific pronouns to refer to anyone, regardless of their gender identity", I feel as though this is the claim I am leaning to agree with. Keep in mind, one of the reasons I took this class is to better understand the role of gender in society in the past, present and future. I feel as though I am so ignorant to this matter because it has never affected me to the degree that it does for some people. However, I want to understand and empathize with why this is important to people. So, for me to have a legitimate stance in this matter I would love to hear and learn from people that are hurt from not only my ignorance, but society's itself. Sure, I can read this a...