These examples just shows how confusing it is in identifying sexual harassment today. How would you answer Limbaugh’s points if you were arguing for the opposition to each of the two points you have selected? For the first point, I would argue that women should not have so much power over men because men were created as the head and as such women should respect their authority. For the second point, I would say that sexual harassment should be limited to only sexual behaviors that are forced unto women and not be based on a man trying to win a woman over by his advances. Sexual harrassment refers to sexual actions.
Do you agree that Shakespeare presents Beatrice and Katherina as “offending against society’s expectations about women”? The idea that both Beatrice and Katherina offend against society’s expectations of women in the plays Much Ado About Nothing and The Taming of the Shrew is open to personal interpretation. We must take into account which society it is we are suggesting they are offending against, if we are judging it on Shakespearean society’s expectations we could, in theory, agree with the statement, due to the fact that at that time, women were largely expected to be submissive, quiet and respectful to the superior sex, males. However, it would not be correct to say that Beatrice and Katherina offend against modern day expectations of women. Further to this, it would also depend on at which point in the play we are making our judgement.
Liberation is seen to be achieved through raising women’s consciousness of subjugation. Feminists believe that women have accepted inferiority to men subconsciously, and thus need to realise this before becoming liberated. Millet argues that women are in a “power-structured relationship…whereby one group of persons is controlled by another”, thus suggesting that feminists believe that in our current society men control women. Although there is controversy between feminists as to the extent of advancing a woman’s role within society, as first-wave feminists demand that women should enjoy the same legal and political rights as men, whilst second-wave feminists have greater focus on the personal side of society and call for complete social revolution. Whilst this presents a clear divide within the doctrine, it
However, this definition was too restricting and messy because people are inevitably going to have differing opinions on what is and is not considered to be sex. With her new definition, she is able to include many more instances to be sex, and furthermore it does not limit sex to be only between a man and a woman. To further her definition, she states that sex must be both conscious and consenting. This eliminates both rape and any sexual activity where one or both of the individuals are unconscious for any reason as sex. She also states in her definition that the sex should involve sexual pleasure for at least one
Serial killers are rarely thought of as women. Perhaps this fallacy is based on the stereotype of women being delicate and sympathetic. For these barbarous killers, often the pretense of nurturing minimized any and all suspicions, but these women are just as immoral as their male counterparts. Patriarchal society is, by definition, male-centered, male-identified, and male-dominated (Johnson 24). Within the notion of male domination is the approval of male violence to implement male domination (Hooks 48).
Accompanying the civil rights movement and women’s rights movement, the sexual revolution changed the way America treated individual sexual choices. Medical reforms were made which addressed a woman’s right to make sexual choices by using contraception, sexually charged media became available with help from the hippie counterculture’s trends in music and movies, and the line between women’s and men’s roles became thinner. The sexual revolution was a symbol of America breaking free from the constraints of social norms, and embracing the choice of an individual
The language that is presented in this essay is that we all have familiar traits as humans but as soon as something changes or you see that is something isn’t in your liking then you want to change it. The writer’s main point in his essay is that he wants to review the recent cases of transgender victims of violence. When we acknowledge that the hatred directed at “faggots” is usually less about sexuality and more about transgressing gender norms. When you think of violence the first thing that comes to mind is foreign terrorists or intolerance. But when Riki Wilchins became the founder and executive director of Gender Public Advocacy Coalition she wanted to inform the public that it comes in any shape and form.
The U.S. Supreme Court did acknowledge in its holding that tort liability might result from its decision but that such liability was often used as a guise or cover for gender discrimination. The position of many of the employers is that even if there were evidence linking the toxins to birth defects, the women took the jobs with knowledge about the risk and agreed to that risk. Any employer will have difficulty trying to reconcile antidiscrimination laws against risks of exposure as concerned by Sam, the Title VII bans sex-specific fetal-protection policies. The best an employer could do is to fully inform the women of the risk and not to act negligently. Congress has left this choice to the woman as hers to make, thus, Newcorp should allow Paula to make her own informed decision and allowed to transfer if she pleases (Net Industries,
However one could also argue that Larkin seems to justify violence against women by suggesting that access to women is something men have been unfairly deprived of. This becomes evident in the first stanza where Larkin presents the girl in ‘white satin’ suggesting her purity and virginity. One could disagree with this statement and interpret the de-feminizing of women differently. It could be suggested that Larkin combines masculinity and femininity together, ‘moustached lips’, to show his view that men and women should be viewed more equally in society. However I disagree with this alternative interpretation as I feel Larkin tries to portray the attacks ‘snaggle-toothed’ and boss-eyed’ are sadistic and grotesque but he does not disagree with
The freedom women had during this time was apparent. Women seemed comfortable on the outside but felt that they had to look perfect. Before the 1920s, women had to look pure while women in the 1920s had to look sexually appealing and had to wear the right makeup and clothes. This movement was supposed to make women feel comfortable with their sexuality, but it ended up with women seeing themselves and being seen by men as sexual objects[29]. The fierce competition of getting a man’s attention emerged in this decade and women were