BACKGROUND REPORT: Transgender Awareness

This was a secret that appeared on the postsecret.com website this weekend. Post Secret is a project started by Frank Warren where anyone can anonymously send in their secret/s on a postcard and he will post them to his website or publish them in a book. This is just one example of how prominent the subject of Transgender is in our society. Something that is often overlooked.

So what is Transgender?
This is a very straightforward and informative website from the American Psychological Association that answers questions people have about Transgender people, gender identity, and gender expression. Take some time to look through the site and get a background for the topic. http://www.apa.org/topics/sexuality/transgender.aspx

This is a representation of the Transgender symbol; it links the universally accepted symbols of male and female into one entity. It includes everyone, and excludes no one. The butterfly symbolizes transformation.

Why do we care?
Stories of transgender individuals are popping up all over the media. These cases are raising questions and sparking debates all around the country.

The Case of Thomas Beatie

In 2008, society was confronted by some startling images and news stories; a pregnant man.

Thomas Beatie is a Female-to-Male Transsexual. He legally changed his sex to male, and has now given birth to three children. This is a fascinating interview by Barbra Walters after the birth of Thomas’ first child. http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video?id=6259840

Transgender is one of the taboo topics in society. But there are many concerns especially regarding discrimination in the job market and at work. Even in the interview, Thomas Beatie received numerous hate messages.

Offensive tampon ad?
Check out this article describing the controversies surrounding a new tampon ad (which has since been removed from YouTube). http://www.nzherald.co.nz/television/news/article.cfm?c_id=339&objectid=10776378

Some important questions it raises:
-what defines a woman?
-is this offensive? why or why not? (the comments section is pretty interesting)

Our Position:
There should be more public awareness and recognition for transgender people to nationalize anti-discrimination laws as well as possible insurance coverage for sex change operations and treatments.

Pros:
-a higher employment rate for transgender individuals.
-potential better mental health and well being for transgender people.
-lower poverty rates for transgender people.
-less harassment toward transgender individuals, and more understanding about them for everyone.
-stability and equal opportunity for transgender people to get housing
- insurance coverage for individuals requiring a sex change

Some links to check out:

http://www.transgenderlaw.org/ndlaws/index.htm#maps
(Here are some cut and dry laws regarding transgender individuals in various states and cities.)

http://transequality.org/Resources/NCTE_prelim_survey_econ.pdf
(Take a look at this National Transgender Discrimination Survey, it states more statistics to get an idea of the number of people affected.)

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/07/lgbt_discrimination.html
(This article is good to glance through, it states some discrimination examples against gender identity in the housing market and health care.)

Cons:
- Transgender individuals should not be allowed insurance coverage for sex changes and treatments, because it is an elective surgery.
- Transgender people should not be allowed to live wherever they want if it makes those around them uncomfortable.
- Employers should not be obligated to adhere to anti discrimination laws involving transgender individuals.

This will be a good background for Thursday’s debate, and a supplement to Sexing the Body.

Written by The Ghosts in the Machine: Quinn Carr, Elissa Mann and Andrea Kerrigan

Seven Deadly Sins Explores Sexual Disorders

Statement from the Seven Deadly Sins: Sex addictions and sexual disorders are products of psychological and physical abnormalities within the human brain and body. They are not products of society, but are in fact perpetuated and scrutinized within social paradigms for the purpose of evaluating the people that they affect.

This background report is a profile of several sexual disorders, including sex addictions and paraphilias, restless genital syndrome and sexsomnia. These disorders are controversial and the subject of debate amongst medical and psychological professionals as well as to social scrutiny as to what qualifies a sexual habit to be a “disorder.” These issues encompass many of the constructionisms and assumptions as well social paradigms, conflicting beliefs on causations of disorders and the underlying implications for society that a sexual disorder can present.

Sex addictions and paraphilias are controversial due to the social implications that they create. Sex addiction is a debated topic amongst psychological professionals, and currently it does not meet the DSM IV paradigm for a “mental disorder,” leaving it unclassified as an addictive behavior. This relates to the material covered in Anne Fausto-Sterlings “Sexing the Body” for it is a direct example of how certain facets of sexuality fit certain paradigms, while others fail to be approved by society for a particular paradigm. It affects roughly 8% of the United States male population and 3% of the female population.

Causes

Sex addiction can be described as addictive behavior manifesting itself as the insatiable desire for sexual intercourse and other sexually fulfilling activities. A majority of studies are indicative that sexual addictions begin in adolescence and young adulthood and are typically the product of sexual abuse or rape during the victim’s childhood.

Symptoms

Addictive behaviors include extramarital affairs, excessive masturbation, visits to strip clubs and massage parlors, prostitution, hiring of prostitutes, high risk unprotected sex, porn addiction, multiple partners and in extreme cases, molestation and rape.

The neurological approach to sex addiction views it as a manifestation of addictive behavior in the form of uncontrollable sexual impulses. Sex addictions can be attributed to chemical imbalances in the brain, namely the hypothalamus, the pleasure center of the brain. Administration of antidepressants as well as other psychotropic drugs has yielded positive results for the afflicted in the control of their urges and symptoms. This is indicative that the problem is simply an imbalance within the brain and is treatable with the appropriate medications. The psychological approach to sex addictions is based primarily in talk therapy, where the victims of the disorder are encouraged to talk about their urges and discuss methods of controlling them. Talk therapy often seeks to discover underlying psychological causes for the addictive behavior, such as sexual abuse suffered by the addict during childhood. There are also variations in the social viewpoints of sex addictions. Sex is a huge part of social culture, and as demonstrated in a Billion Wicked Thoughts, there is a high availability of porn and other sex tools for addicts that can cause a subtle problem to proliferate, thus making sex addictions products of a sex-centric society. These various approaches to sex addiction as a disorder make it a highly controversial topic that has yet to be fit into a paradigm in the medical and psychological spectrum of disorders, but we believe that sex addiction can only be perpetuated by the availability of outlets such as porn and strip clubs, the root cause of the problem lies within the addicts brain, and is not created by exposure to sexual imagery or encounters.

Case Studies

1. A minister in his 50’s had spent over 10 years of his career having sexual affairs with female parishioners who had come to him seeking counseling. He eventually stopped the affairs, but several women came forward and exposed him, causing him to lose his standing in the church and suffer public humiliation

2. A homosexual man in his late 20’s spent several hours every day walking around parks and other public areas in search of sexual partners. His obsession was having sex with as many anonymous partners as possible, and despite his fear of contracting HIV and eventually getting aids, his addiction to sex was too powerful to be overcome by these fears

More stories and accounts available at:

http://www.jenniferschneider.com/articles/family_disorders.html

Paraphilias are described as the perversion of sexual desire as well as abnormal sexual obsessions.

Examples of different paraphilias:

Pedophilia (desire for children) exhibitionism, fetishism (desire for or attraction to non-sexual, non-living objects), masochism, voyeurism (peeping), sadism (pain or humiliation) and necrophilia (attraction to corpses).

Paraphilias are highly controversial due to the potential threat that they can pose to society as well as the unorthodox, socially unacceptable behavior that they envelop. Pedophiles are seen as a menace to society due to their sexual desires for children, and other paraphilias are often utilized in gritty TV shows, notably Law and Order SVU.

Paraphilias and Society

Recently, the Internet has allowed some pedophiles to justify and normalize their feelings by offering them chat rooms and social networking abilities to share their problem with fellow pedophiles. This allows pedophiles to challenge social constructions that their urges are “bad” and instead offer justifications for their sexual feelings by being able to identify with others that have the same urges.

Treatment

Paraphilias, unlike sex addiction, are defined by the DSM IV and have concrete criteria for their diagnosis. Treatment of paraphilias include various forms of talk therapy and drugs to control sexual desires including hormone therapy.

SexsomniaWe are limited in the way which we view the world because of language. However, despite languages obvious limitations, is there a creative force behind words? So your partner seems to have--or want to have-- sexual relations in their sleep (consistently)? What potential consequences could arise? Is this a far reaching epidemic? In 1996 language used its inventive powers and the sex “disorder” Sexsomnia was born.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZh7F_YHfSc

Kinsey describes a wide range of variation in human sexuality that is present even when we are asleep. Sexsomnia is caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain or previous psychological damage; the physical pleasure of sleep sex is hardly of concern, as the patient is completely asleep. Evidence of this problem being purely psychological, and not pleasure based, is evident in many cases:

1) A 34-year-old married man would spontaneously masturbate to ejaculation every night after he had been asleep 2–3 hours, and was not arousable. Nightly sleep masturbation occurred while he continued to engage in sexual intercourse with his wife every night before falling asleep.

2) A 26-year-old married woman had a history of abruptly tearing off her clothing and masturbating violently during the first half of the night. Her masturbation was associated with soft to loud vocalization and occasional vaginal discharge. If her husband interrupted the episode of masturbation, it might recur a second or a third time during the night. Any attempt to initiate intercourse after she was awakened was rejected, and she denied the behavior

3) A 26-year-old woman would initiate foreplay with her bed partner while they were both asleep between 02:00 and 05:00 and would utter sexually provocative phrases while fondling him. Whenever he responded positively to her involuntary sexual overtures during sleep, she would then awaken and accuse him of forcing sex on her while she slept.

Further examination of sexsomnia being purely a psychological disorder is evident in other case studies where heterosexuals engaged in homosexual behavior during an episode of sexsomnia.

This leads to the basic question of whether sexual orientation is inherent or developed, Nature vs Nurture. Anne Fausto-Sterling’s commentary on Nature vs Nurture is especially relevant to this topic. When we aren’t conscious (asleep) are we concerned with societal rules that define a gender construct permanently? What does this tell us about true sexual nature? If heterosexuals are engaging in homosexual behavior, is essentialism or constructionism a more fitting model (AFS 17). Examining homosexual acts exhibited by those with sexsomnia offers more evidence for a culturally derived definition of desire and sexuality. Furthermore, it gives evidence that these sexual disorders do stem from chemical imbalance and possible previous psychological trauma. Modern stigmas associated with homosexuality make it very difficult for people to come out and live their lifestyle, therefore, why would a heterosexual knowingly engage in homosexual behavior (homosexuality is a choice opinion)? This shows that the physical pleasure aspect of sexsomnia is irrelevant because of the enormous risk a heterosexual takes by performing homosexual activities. The problem must be psychologically derived and bears little notice to received pleasure.

Society’s views on sexsomnia also legitimizes it as a psychiatric illness. The anti-anxiety perscription drug clonazepam is considered the common cure. This drug is also used to treat bi-polar and depressed patients as well. Sexsomnia has also been cited in legal trials. There have been people that have used sexsomnia to defend rape and molestation allegations. The first paper to identify and coin the term “sexsomnia” described a few of these cases in which people were charged with sexual assault (initiated while sleeping) and after data showing “sexsomnia” tendencies, they were aquitted! Mentally ill aquittals require specific standards to be met and can be seen here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/crime/trial/faqs.html

Could sexsomnia lead us to more realizations about our sexuality and human desire? Although the majority of victims of the sexsomniacs had negative response to their partner (or assailant), some positive outcomes were noted:

1) A woman who slept with a sexsomniac boyfriend commented on how he was a “different person during these activities—apparently, he is a more amorous and gentle lover and more oriented toward satisfying his partner when he is asleep.

2) One woman commented that her boyfriend's sleepsex was more “aggressive and dominant” than his waking sexual behavior, and she “found some aspects of the sleepsex pleasurable…and a little kinky,” such as “forceful albeit playful biting and ‘talking dirty,‘ but “nonetheless she requested that the patient incorporate some of the nighttime sexual practices...into their conscious daytime lovemaking.

What could the above two examples tell us about our own sexual nature? As Ogaddam reiterated, we are a culture where the majority of us (based of porn searches) have a kinky sexual side or a curiosity into the unordinary. Many of us in class brought up the point that statistics cannot generalize humanities sexual desires. However, sexsomnia offers a unique view into the unconscious and has reinforced Ogaddams generalization, in this specific case at least.

Sexsomnia’s recent emergence has left much up to debate, as extensive testing and case studies has yet to be done. The leading researcher, Carlos Schenck, is from the University of Minnesota! Sexsomnia has been prevalent in the media as well. Hopefully, with more people being informed on sexsomnia, more case studies will emerge providing us with a better understanding of this psychiatric disorder. Or are these people just horny?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15427247/#.T0WpT5i0Tao

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sleepless-in-america/200902/sexsomnia

http://www.lifeinthefastlane.ca/sleep-sex-or-sexsomnia-it-could-happen-to-you/weird-science

Restless Genital Syndrome Very little is known about Restless Genital Syndrome or ReGS. The syndrome was originally named and diagnosed only 11 years ago in 2011. ReGS is a syndrome that effects only women and can reach a point where it effectually rules a woman’s life and in some cases has caused bad consequences in their lifes.

So what exactly is ReGS? It is a disorder that affects a woman’s genitals, usually her clitoris, and the genitals are in a constant state of arousal or stimulation. While this may sound like a positive side effect it is actually quite the opposite. It can be painful and distracting for the woman. The constant stimulation is completely unwanted for women and there often isn’t a way to get rid of it. The biggest struggle can in fact be the diagnose of the disorder.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,352357,00.html

This article on Fox News has two women’s stories about the struggles they went through with diagnostics and the consequences that it had on their lives. As Jeannie stated, for a long time this disorder was either written off as a psychological disorder as diagnosed as a sexual addiction. For most women this didn’t fit because the symptoms they were experiencing were purely physical and did not correlate to any sort of emotional or mental response they were having to sex.

In recent years the study further into what causes ReGS has taken off. Although things are still not perfectly clear, there a few causes that have taken prominent notice. These range from pelvic vein disorders, a dysfunctional nerve in the clitoris, to hormonal changes and getting off of antidepressants. Since there isn’t much known about what always causes ReGS it is hard to treat it as well. Some women report that obsessive masturbation can help to cure the stimulation for a few minutes, but the state of orgasm must be achieved repeatedly for it to help the woman at all. Other medical treatments like clonazepam are being looked into but don’t seem to have a large affect.

In the past 10 years studies have started delving deeper into ReGS and have found that it is linked to both Restless Leg Syndrome and Overactive Bladder Syndrome. These results lead to the conclusion that unlike sex addiction and sexsomnia , ReGS is in fact a physical sexual disorder. The psychological does not play a part in the constant stimulation and arousal of woman. Given the nature of the disorder, women are often embarrassed by the stigma of being “sex crazed” and don’t step forward for diagnostics and treatment. Popularization of ReGS would make it easier and more comfortable for women to approach doctors, or even friends, and describe their treatment and get treated. Breaking this ground would also help the doctors to study ReGS and find new information to help women.

http://www.psas.nl/artikelen/Clitoridectomy.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19732313

In Conclusion:

Sexual desire and the pleasure gained from sex primarily appears to be purely physical and psychological, in terms of the physical and psychological satisfaction that engaging in sexual activity brings to most people. As demonstrated by these sexual addictions and disorders, mental and physical abnormalities are the root cause of the problem, indicating that it is a flaw within the human nature, and not a product of nurture.

Bibliography

Ewald, Roschbeth. "Sexual Addiction." AllPsych Journal. AllPsych Online and Heffner Media Group Inc., 13 May 2003. Web.

Herkov, Michael. "What Causes Sexual Addiction?" Psych Central. Web. .

Hucker, Stephen. "Forensic Psychiatry. Ca." Paraphilias. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. .

Shapiro, Colin. Et al. "Sexsomnia—A New Parasomnia? ."Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 48. (2003): 311-317. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. .

BACKGROUND REPORT: Height Can Hurt

Our Statement: Growth hormones and treatments should only be used when prescribed by a doctor and or when medically necessary. This meaning that all other uses of hormone treatments should be made illegal because of the risks that can be associated with hormone imbalance.

An in depth definition of growth hormone can be found here: http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=16691 “*The average American adult male is 5 feet 9 1/2 inches tall and the average woman is 5 feet 4 inches tall, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.” 

Although most people fall around these heights, many seek alternative ways of increasing stature. Within the past 50 years the use of growth hormones has become a prevalent issue in our society. The reasons for this use can range from the want of physical changes to ones body such as muscle building or height changing, and for other chemical imbalance improvements.

The issue we picked has a pretty clear and simple reasoning. Things that aren’t naturally produced in a human body shouldn’t be artificially put there. The risks and dangers that accompany the use and treatments of growth hormones outweigh the benefits of the desired outcome. Many people who seek the use of these hormones are looking for a cosmetic change to their body rather than a concern for bettering their health. Without a medical need for these hormone treatments it is impossible to know exactly how an individuals body will react with unneeded tampering, like with any other cosmetic decision or drug use.

Another reason that strengthens our argument is the issue of cost and value. As the statistic clearly shows above, the price tag is large one for those who seek it as a ‘cosmetic decision’ instead of a medical need. Most insurance companies do not cover procedures defined such as this and it is therefore a large out of pocket expense for such uncertain results and possible negative effects.

*These treatments come at a cost -- some estimate $35,000 an inch -- and when used in higher doses can shorten life-span by predisposing children to diabetes, scoliosis and cancer, according to some studies.

Even when in need, hormone treatments come with risks and dangers that are still completely unknown to the doctors who prescribe them. This alone should raise caution especially for those who seek it without need. *From 1963 to 1985, about 27,000 children worldwide were injected with human growth hormone (hGH) obtained from the pituitary glands of cadavers. Some contracted the deadly Creutzfeldt-Jakob or Mad Cow disease. In all, 26 out of 7,000 Americans -- and many more in Europe -- died, according to statistics from The National Institutes of Health. 

A few of the major documented concerns associated with hormone treatments are as follows: pituitary tumors which cause headaches, vision impairment, and the deficiency of other pituitary hormones, prolonged thickness of bones in the jaw, fingers and tows, which results in heaviness and increased size. An increased risk of diabetes has also been noted likewise cancer of many  varieties has been ‘unofficially linked’ to GH treatments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_hormone). 

So with that being said, these risks are just a few concerns to be aware of and although there are a few cases of success without complications, the overwhelming numbers of those who did not have the same success rate trumps those few individuals that did.

*Most research shows that while it's tough being short in grade school, the outcomes of shorter children are no different than their taller peers in adulthood.

*-http://abcnews.go.com/Health/growth-hormones-healthy-kids-increase/story?

*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3UpDOpUHrQ (Does this look like a good use of GH?)

*http://www.news-medical.net/news/2008/02/13/35208.aspx (Additional health risks) id=8571628&page=2#.T0rev2DOQyA

Come See The Bakkhai!!!

This is some shameless self promotion, but hey! Why not come see some FREE (YES, FREE) theater... This is a project me and my fellow 18 company members have been working on for a little over a month now, The Bakkhai by Euripides. I could give you my summary, but why don't you read this one:

Regarded by many as Euripides' masterpiece, Bakkhai is a powerful examination of religious ecstasy and the resistance to it. A call for moderation, it rejects the temptation of pure reason as well as pure sensuality, and is a staple of Greek tragedy, representing in structure and thematics anexemplary model of the classic tragic elements. Disguised as a young holy man, the god Bacchus arrives in Greece from Asia proclaiming his godhood and preaching his orgiastic religion. He expects to be embraced in Thebes, but the Theban king, Pentheus, forbids his people to worship him and tries to have him arrested. Enraged, Bacchus drives Pentheus mad and leads him to the mountains, where Pentheus' own mother, Agave, and the women of Thebes tear him to pieces in a Bacchic frenzy.

Awesome, right? I know it's kind of hard to read the dates and times on the poster... so here they are again:

March 1 @ 7:30

March 2 @ 7:30

March 3 @ 7:30

March 4 @ 2:00 and 7:30 (I think it's 7:00 though? I'll double check)

It takes place on the Stoll Thrust theater in the Rarig Center (West Bank! Represent!)

*Ben or Robin, would you be able to post this on the other blog?!

Internal conflict --from Udi via Robin

In reading Sexing the body, i felt angry with the case of the Olympian who was denied entrance to the game because she had a Y chromosome, the thought of that made me angry at how close minded our society really was and what it may actually be. As a scientist, It baffles me that the society can be so ignorant as to define being male or female as having a particular sex organ and not having that, should disqualify an individual from a particular sex. There are several variations and mutations in science that can and have made it impossible to categorize the male or female based on a particular sex organ!

I felt I was in an internal conflict with as biology major and a cultural studies major, and her tone and argument in the book didn't make it easier to lean on a particular side without conflicting the other. At some point I really agreed and flowed with her idea, the idea that why should one be either this or that? Why can't one be both? Why should one be inherently homosexual or inherently heterosexual? Why should one be inherently male or inherently female? Compartmentalizing sexual identity or gender narrows ones possibilities in the society, and continuously promotes inequality between gender, sexual identities, depicting males as more important and heterosexual as the ideal way.  

A Billion Silly Thoughts

I will be echoing many of my peers' sentiments when I say that I much prefer Anne Fausto-Sterling's book to Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam's, "A Billion Wicked Thoughts". She approaches the subject matter from multiple perspectives... as a scientist, a biologist, a historian, a feminist... she seems genuinely concerned with challenging existing notions of sex and gender, unlike "Wicked Thoughts", which is just like a shitty Cosmopolitan magazine... further misleading those who are silly enough to believe the heteronormative undertones of an oversimplified view of sexuality. I'm excited to continue reading "Sexing the Body" to see how she challenges or matches my beliefs. It is a relief to be reading this book after the frustrations I had with the way in which knowledge and understanding seemed to be reduced in "Wicked Thoughts". Although it may be important to note that although I find tension in my relationship with the content of that book, I found myself, like Ben, reading it like it was some naughty, secretive thing... Well, not really. What I mean is it intrigued me with its provocative title and pretty book cover. Good job Ogas and Gaddam... I know they didn't design the book cover, but...

Okay. The book really made me feel like one of those apotemnophiliacs on their anonymous online discussion boards... i.e. Because I don't like erotica (I prefer porn! visuals!) I'm not like the "majority" of females who do? So, my desires are less feminine and more masculine? And I feel weird or not "normal" when I enjoy watching certain types of videos... even though they reflect a certain type of desire and a certain type of fulfillment that I'm trying to achieve in a specific moment in time... I don't really feel weird, but I'm sure other people do. And just like those apotemnophiliacs they're probably afraid to voice it. Well, I think Anne's book will definitely shed some light on this... whatever "this" is... what I'm only trying to demonstrate is that yes, to be categorized in to a binary is silly (that word silly again...) because clearly, whether we express it or not, our human desires... how we "feel" (in terms of who we are gender-wise, etc.) are so dependent on history, our personal histories, how we were raised, our experiences (...Fausto-Sterling warns historians not to assume that experience contains a self-evident meaning)... so then what is "experience"? Well in Chapter 9 Anne will discuss this, and make the argument that experience is not individual and fixed, but irredeemably social and processual...

So I'm excited for this process... to go on this journey... to unveil some new truths and perhaps reemphasize existing ones...

Playing the "God trick"

I find Fausto-Sterling's admission of her personal biases and explicitly political project to be comforting (surprise!).  When authors (like Stephen Pinker or Ogaddam) attempt to present their work as apolitical or objective, I (as the reader) am forced to do the work of unearthing their inherent biases and underlying assumptions and making them explicit in order to understand the power of their work in a broader social context.  In contrast, when a writer like Fausto-Sterling attempts to make her own biases and sociopolitical objectives explicit from the very beginning, I can more quickly place her arguments in their broader social context and begin the important work of analyzing what her interpretations can contribute to my own personal-political project, that is, the on-the-ground struggle to eliminate political-economic inequalities based on sex and/or gender (and/or race, religion, disability, etc.). 

By revealing her own personal experiences, doubts, and ideological background, Fausto-Sterling attempts to avoid employing the "God trick" of "producing knowledge from above, from a place that denies the individual scholar's location in a real and troubled world" (Fausto-Sterling 6).  Does she succeed?  As an academic, Fausto-Sterling is forced to adhere to a certain style of argumentation built upon a pre-existing body of theory and research.  To gain legitimacy among feminist theorists, she must cite better-known thinkers like Donna Haraway and Michel Foucault to frame her position.  She presents her arguments in a recognizable style within the tradition of feminist theory, summarizing a progression of theories/narratives and then placing her ideas as an advancement for some aspect of this feminist political project.  Both in her summary of previous theories and her presentation of her own experiences and biases, Fausto-Sterling is bound to leave some things out.  However, I believe that the very attempt to reveal herself in a personal manner exempts Fausto-Sterling's book from being just another try at the "God trick."

An example of a minor weakness in Fausto-Sterling's argumentation style can be seen in Footnote 13 (p. 258 in reference to a sentence in paragraph 2, pg. 4), in which she fails to give examples of which "circles" she is referring to in the footnoted sentence, while giving in the footnote some wishy-washy information with an unclear target audience.  In contrast, in Footnote 14 (pg 258, in reference to the sentence beginning paragraph 3, p. 4), Fausto-Sterling gives us some information that I found essential to the strength of her arguments (do read it if you haven't).  In this footnote, by explaining and contextualizing her own aversion to biological explanations of behavior, Fausto-Sterling helps us to bring her political project down to earth and better understand what's at stake in her arguments. 

With both of these footnotes in mind, I am unsure how I feel about Fausto-Sterling's use of footnotes.  The fact that these "footnotes" are not footnotes but endnotes makes the physical process of reading very slow and tedious for me, as I continually lose my place as I attempt to flip back and forth between the chapter and its endnotes.  How did others feel about them?

More than anything, what excites me about Fausto-Sterling as a thinker/writer is that she urges us to explore possibilities.  While Ogaddam seek (under the guise of "scientific discovery") to place boundaries on the possibility of socio-cultural transformation, Fausto-Sterling seeks to break those boundaries and open up a space for envisioning preferable alternative social-cultural-political-economic formulations.

 

[The rest of this is just my attempt to summarize aspects of Fausto-Sterling's position for my own thoughts, but I thought it might be interesting to some of you too]

The basic theory presented by feminists like Fausto-Sterling is that "biological" explanations of behavior are dangerous because they are always produced by scientific institutions which, like any institutions, have inescapable social, cultural, political, and economic biases that lead researchers to equate "the way things are right now" with "the way things always have been and will always inevitably be." 

Individuals who have been favored by the current state of affairs have little to gain by working hard to discover whether or not the status quo is in fact inevitable.  In fact, they might see their pride as being at stake in this enterprise, for if it is demonstrated that another social-cultural-economic-political configuration is indeed possible, their position at the top (or at least as "normal" in the face of abnormality) is denaturalized, and revealed as at least partially the result of societal factors rather than individual, inevitable, biological superiority. 

Since "legitimate" scientific research is conducted by people occupying a mid-to-high status in society and funded by institutions occupying a strong position of political-economic power, it is unsurprising that scientific research projects are often framed in a way that naturalizes certain critical aspects of the status quo.  For instance, in "A Billion Wicked Thoughts," Ogaddam strive to use data on internet porn from search engines to support the theory that men's tendency to sexually objectify women is biologically rooted and therefore unchangeable.  When women struggle to be recognized not for the appearance of their bodies but for the strength of their ideas, men can point to Ogaddam and say "Sorry, but it's natural for me to perceive you and interact with you in this way.  I can't help it, it's in my genes."

On the other hand, individuals who have been marginalized by the status quo have a strong personal stake in demonstrating that another configuration is indeed possible.  A young girl whose schoolteacher explains that women can only be nurses and not doctors will be more personally driven to question that claim than her male classmate whose aspirations are legitimated and encouraged by the status quo.  Thus, social change only comes about when oppressed groups of people develop a theoretical framework (and a corresponding vocabulary) through which to question their oppression and the discourses that uphold it.

More than a few thoughts about Sex (as in Gender)

As usual, I am struggling to get all of the thoughts going through my mind together into one subtle blog post. I don't know if it is just me, or my education being immersed with classes such as this one where I tend to look at both sides of any point, case or argument made, but it sure makes it difficult for me to ever actually know where I stand because of my ability to make an idea for any point.

So anyway I want to write this blog as if it were my journal about my feelings and ideas ...

here are the few questions and things racing through my mind when thinking about sexing the body versus a billion wicked thoughts, and what my wicked thought are...

~I am yet again forced to think about whether this concept of sex is scientific, cultural or religious, or waitttt whatttttttttttt?????? Okay so I'm a girl, I know I'm a girl, I have a *blank* and therefore I am a girl? But now that I think about it...why was I a cheerleader in highschool and not a football player?? Because I was a girl right? And thats what GIRLS did. Boys play football and girls are cheerleaders duh. But now that I think about it was it possibly because of society or did I have a passion and talent for it? This leads me now to thinking about where passions come from, because are people born with them or do they develop through reinforcement created from a young age by culture? Talent is genetic right, like in your genes that whole science thing,.... but wait how do we know that? I guess there are cases where prodigys kinda rule that out, but I know pretty good athletes except I also know that they have practiced everyday on that sport since there were little and couldn't even make decisions on their own because of what their parents decided they should do or play at a young age and then became good at it. So now I am questioning this whole talent thing too, maybe there are natural things within us, but it could be debated the other way I guess now too.
Okay anyway so I am a girl, I know that, this is fact, right? My birth certificate says so? Although there are some articles and stories I have read about people being declared a girl at birth but KNOWING they were a boy. People get sex changes because they claim to have been born the wrong gender or with the wrong party. So wait, why am I a girl??? Am I a girl?? I mean who am I kidding of course I am, I hang out with girls, I dress up and put on makeup and like girly things duh. But I guess there are guys who do that stuff to?? But they LOOK like boys, and have boy parts, so they are just abnormal for doing girly things. I am the one who is in the right, right??? I mean I LIKE boys, they boys who do boy things, they are hot and like DUH we go together. Boy and girl, woman and man. My religion says so. I am a christian and thats the natural thing right?? it always has been. I mean the bible says so, and I guess that is my ultimate go to. Culture and science just try to challenge that... but I mean I guess if I had been born in a different country I might not have the same religion?? Wait, I guess I don't even really know what other religions say about women and men and what is right and wrong and natural and .... now I am questioning way more about sex again so back to the point. Okay so the desires I have, like my sex drive(for boys), that can't have been programmed, its so natural and science, I think. but I wonder if I had been born into a world where all girls liked girls, and boys liked boys and that was what everyone did, and my religion said so if my desires would seem different? Do we control how our mind opperates and feels? Can we be programmed to like something and teach ourselves of what we like and gives us pleasure. Now my mind is wondering to things like tastes, and other things of that nature, I should probably get back to men and women but I cant help but think about how families normally have the same taste in a lot of things, most likely because they were all reinforced and strengthen in likes and dislikes together.. Okay so I guess thats kinda the concept of nature and nurture.
Well now I am questioning and thinking about way more things than I ever was. So what is the answer. Religion?? I guess if you are taught that religion is the go to and you never question it than yeah a lot of people are going to say yes. BUT what if science provessss otherwise, and That there iS no god??? Then those people are going to hell, like the people who dont follow a man and woman being together???

 So I guess you kind of get where I am going with this whole a little bit silly idea of what my exagerrated journal entry might look like...

I think that both of the books we are reading bring greats points to think about and interesting ideas about sex and who we are and why we feel the way we do and etc. But bottom line and I am pretty sure I could say this at the end of all of my blog postings, there is not right answer in my mind. I am swayed by the culture which has reinforced me since birth, which INCLUDES science and discoverys made by American scientists for the most part, because well I'm american and that is what the media shows us most of the time. I also believe in certain things because of my parents and their beliefs and been taught what is the right and wrong way, but I also think that my religion and belief in god has come from an innate desire he gave me. I obviously don't know this for sure because I cant remember being a baby obviously, so maybe there is a chance that I was programmed to believe in god and it is all made up. Then again I feel as though there are some innate traits and some we develop just as many arguments make. So sometimes like in this topic of sex and what you are and what you should feel the majority vote is going to agreee on what feels right and what is the NORM, until it is challenged enough as in majority is swayed that it changes and our society becomes tolerant of it.

So once again, I am stuck, Culture or Science? OR RELIGION? which I guess is culture.. BUT the way I was raised Religion goes above everything so.... now,  I just don't know..

Science in Cultural Terms

While reading Sexing the Body, my initial impression was, well, being impressed. Like Jeehye, I found it fascinating that unlike my, and most likely others', expectations, 1) Sterling heavily believes in reality (in the context of Latour) 2) she not only believes in science and a material world, she, rather descriptively, describes science in a cultural context, which is extremely important for the case she is making: that making science is a cultural activity (though fact exists!) and so is the "sexing the body."

Her initial topic is Maria Patino, a 'female' Spanish Olympic athlete who was found to be of an intersex (specifically a female with developed testes). The first thing I thought about was if what happened to Patino undermines having a dichotomy of male/female athletes, who cannot play together or in competition, at least unequally. It is certainly unfair to ban people of intersex or other who do not fall within a sex/gender binary, yet how does this leave the Olympic Committee when judging two athletes? Certainly biological males are, on average, taller and larger, and live their lives under the term "male" - thus would it even be ethical to have a Human Olympics? Sterling brings up the case of men, under disguise, playing as women in the Cold War Era performing worse than their female counterparts, but across all sports, sexes, and genders, there is something that I believe would be unethical about this. This is just a question I felt the text alluded to.

I felt at ease when Sterling brought up the Kinsey scale. The Kinsey scale serves as a very social tool - its scale is nearly common knowledge amongst the LGBT community and probably a significant part of the heterosexual population, yet, Sterling presents it in the context of its scientific roots and its modern usage. Something like the Kinsey scale works well, at least for me, in the way A Billion Subtle Thoughts works - its simple, popular, and a bit reductionist (just a few numbers expresses a vast majority, ideally all, human sexual orientation!). Its also a scale I use in everyday life, so it was comforting knowing she would use the scale, as well as point out that scientists actually use it (though nearly a third don't think the scientific method applies to blurred sexual orientation).

The appeal of Sterling is in her identity: one part scientist; one part past heterosexual / current homosexual. The book subtextually comes off as very personally important for Sterling. It represents a joining of her field: the science of biology, gender studies, and sexology with her life (her culture) as someone who challenges what science (and feminism) has said/done. I admire her for writing a book with such personal significance, but I also admire her for the large amounts footnotes, scientific studies, and creating a air-tight seal of her case in the book. Not only does this disallow critics and her opponents to ignore the book or discredit it entirely, it helps legitimize her cause as something that can exist within the realm of scholarly and scientific thought. The text comes off as very historical and dense (meaning a great deal of time and research is present). The book may have a bit of nudity on the cover, but the text seems separate from pop-science (unlike OGaddam), but she also goes out of her way to put herself and her humor within the pages, asserting she is not like the feminist stereotype, with no humor.

Her political position is explicit, which makes me feel at ease; there is not, for the most part, a hidden political and cultural assumption going on here. In literary theory we might call this a healthy text (thanks Barthes) as it points attention to its stake in the content - she is trying to prove a political point and she also has a personal story relevant to the topic, all of which are communicated in the preface or first chapter. From what we've read so far, the text has a large potential to be really interesting in a way that we can trust Sterling, which, refreshingly, points to "reality" (as opposed to OGaddam science or people who scare Latour).

~Eric Best~

What do you think about this?