Log 1B

The first hotspot for me was on page 128 when the author described patriarchal societies and the common view of them. I find it interesting that this view is commonly accepted despite there being almost no support that men work to ensure that women don't gain power. The thing I find most peculiar is that there is any support at all for this theory, which I feel comes from the Gender Feminists out there. I'm not denying that there were patriarchal societies in the past but to suggest that the world is still like that is foolish, as women have equal rights to men in most developed societies today. The next hotspot that caught my attention was the section about rape on page 131. I found it quite insulting that people commonly agree that rape can only be committed by males and is considered “the universal crime against women”. The idea that only females can be the victims of rape is simply wrong, as the book clearly states that men are frequently raped in prison. I find that rape is more often a tool used by Gender Feminists to support their belief that all men are evil. If Gender Feminists are still fighting for equal rights, which I feel they already have, then they have to accept rape as a crime that women can commit against men. This is very similar to the idea that child and spouse abuse can only be caused by men, when it is more likely that child abuse is caused by women. It also upsets me that there are shelters set up for battered women but none set up for battered men. I'm not saying that these shelters are a bad thing, just that the Gender Feminists seem to only want the positive rights men have without the obligations that men have such as the draft.

The first hotspot I found in “There Is No Unmarked Woman” when the author mentioned the titles that women carry, such as “Mrs.” or “Miss.” on page 143. I never really took notice to this until I read this section. I feel that the fact that women specify whether or not they are married by simply their title is perhaps the one of the biggest ways that women are marked by society, as they are answering a question by simply writing their name. Men do not share this problem, as the title “Mr.” is the same for all men whether they are married or not. I feel that if a woman wants to use the title “Dr.”, it is seen as a a bigger deal than if a man wanted to use the same title. The next hotspot that caught my eye was on page 145, the section that talked about when Deborah Tannen was on a talk show. She had taken steps to ensure that she did not sound like a Gender Feminist in writing a book about gender differences, but was still painted as a Gender Feminist simply because she was a woman saying things about men.

There are a lot of examples where I did not fit into my gender's role, primarily because I am a nerd, and I don't really fit in with the normal male stereotype. One big example was my high school's homecoming, which I managed to avoid for my first three years but got coerced into going by my friends in my senior year. The funniest thing is that I went the entire night without dancing once, instead I managed to basically spend the entire night talking to people who I never really talked to during school. I didn't really stand to gain or lose anything, except I did feel rather uncomfortable. Me being there was akin to releasing a freshwater fish into the dead sea, the environment simply does not agree with the individual. I wasn't in any real danger either, and I was no different when I walked out of there from when I walked in. I can't say I really regret the experience, as I lost nothing by being there, but I did learn that my belief that I would not have fun at a dance was true. I'm not saying that homecoming or prom are wastes of time, they just aren't my idea of a good time. This is because I prefer to have a small group of close friends as opposed to a large number of people who I barely know. I know that most people they're probably had a good time and if I wasn't such a solitary person I might have as well.