Nirmala Sarabdial

Psych of Women

[nirmalasara092]

Reflection Six: “How Doctors Take Women’s Pain Less Seriously: Joe Fassler

How Doctors Take Women’s Pain Less Seriously

The Atlantic, Joe Fassler

Reading this article was quite shocking however, it wasn’t all that surprising in today’s health care system in hospitals. Rachel’s story was relatable in that going to an ER room is just as much as her husband Joe described. Agonizing waiting and dismissive responses from hospital staff with the reassurance of “you will be seen, you just have to wait”. What surprised me most in reading this woman’s story was that a majority if not all of the nurses Rachel interacted with, were female and they weren’t concerned with the obvious pain Rachel was experiencing.  It is completely understandable that in an environment like the ER there are going to be patients who require immediate attention and patients who are not in a dire situation but still need medical attention, however Rachel was obviously one of the people who required immediate medical attention but was overlooked and why is still a big mystery to me. The nurse who surmised that she was just having “stones” made that assumption based on basically nothing to go on besides Rachel’s cries of pain. When Rachel was asked how bad her pain was, why was no one reacting to her answer of an 11? Surely that means something is seriously is causing serious discomfort and pain and should be examined immediately. The first doctor who “examined” Rachel probably took the nurses assumption and agreed with it without checking for himself and that in my opinion is horrendous! Doctors face one of the most demanding and stressful jobs however, that doctor regardless of how busy or how tired he was should have at least performed the standard tests to assess where Rachel’s pain was coming from. Add to that, he should have done this but for some reason didn’t. This makes me wonder just how many people, females specifically, are diagnosed the way Rachel was without actually being seen by a proper medical professional. I wouldn’t consider that doctor a professional because it can be said that he didn’t even do the bare minimum in assessing Rachel’s situation. Regardless of their assumptions, how can they tell her how she is experiencing pain and on what level? She is a person, it shouldn’t matter whether male or female and should have been seen right away, its scary to think about what could have happened if her pain kept being dismissed as something not as serious as it was. Even if someone’s situation was not as serious as they suspected, their right to seek medical help shouldn’t be brushed away because how is anyone to know the seriousness of their situation without proper medical attention? In my opinion it is better safe than sorry and if that means “crying wolf” …well then hear me howl!

[nirmalasara092]

Reflection Five: “African American Women and Abortion: A Neglected History” Loretta J. Ross

African American Women and Abortion: A Neglected History

Loretta J. Ross

In this article by Loretta J. Ross, she brings to light the substantial lack of knowledge of African American women and their history of abortion and reproductive rights. African American women dating back to the 1800s have tried to take control of their own lives by resisting control by their superiors by not having their choices being made for them when regarding their fertility. In this time, these women were nothing more than child breeders and if they couldn’t produce, they were useless. I find it ironic that in these times they wanted the growth of African American women to further their own selfish purposes but in later times, they wanted nothing more than to restrict the growth of the African American population because they felt threatened. It seems like no matter what choices the African American community made, everyone else had a negative say in the matter. The Colored Women’s Club Movement seemed like a gigantic step for African American women in defining their sexual and reproductive rights. This club brought informed information of the wants and needs of these women that should be known information to all. The importance of birth control and contraceptives should be taught to all women and should ultimately be their own choice whether to utilize it or not. However, in reading this article and what has been discussed in class, not all women can afford to have access to this kind of care. This lack of access to this kind of health care made a lot of women seek alternative methods that wasn’t always the best. As someone who has had trouble accessing health care in the past, I can understand the helpless feeling of not being able to have the benefit of basic needs and trying to find other ways of getting medical help. Times have certainly changed but this is still a major issue for women everywhere and the change we need to bring is more awareness and having the neglected history of women everywhere be known to all.

[nirmalasara092]

Reflection Four “Our Bodies, Our Crimes The Policing of Women’s Reproduction in America” by J. Flavin

Our Bodies, Our Crimes, The Policing of Women’s Reproduction in America

In J. Flavin’s book Our Bodies, Our Crimes, The Policing of Women’s Reproduction in America, abortion is discussed. Abortion was and still is a very controversial topic in the lives of women everywhere. In my opinion, abortion should be up the woman in question because it is after all her own body and she should know what is best for herself and her future. In this reading there were several things I disagreed with. The first was the idea that medical professionals were the ones who could decide if an abortion was necessary. The idea of a therapeutic abortion in which a medical professional deems it better to perform an abortion to preserve a woman’s life or health in theory sounds like a good idea but is ultimately not. In all other cases abortion is seen as wrong or immoral but, in this case, I see it more as medicals trying to make “acceptances” and being selfish because they still need to perform abortions to advance their own professional goals. So, the reliance on medical professionals to make the “right” decision only lured people into a false sense of security and trust. The question of performing an abortion should not solely be up to a medical professional but up to the woman. The woman should discuss and decide with her doctor whether she sees having an abortion or not is harmful to her health or life, not having the choice being taken directly out of her hands by someone who thinks they know best simply because they have a title of doctor in front of their names. The other thing that I should bring up is that when abortions finally came around to kind of/sort of being accepted, it was only offered to middle class white women, not people in the minorities or in a different social class. Poor women found it much harder to go about having an abortion because government help just wasn’t there to help them in a substantial way like it was for women who resided in different social/racial classes. The last thing is the idea that women can’t want an abortion if she didn’t get pregnant in some horrific way like rape, or incest or “being done wrong by her lover” Basically this sounded to me like a woman couldn’t be sexual or embrace her sexuality. Getting pregnant by some way other than the ones that were mentioned is quite normal and wow an even bigger shocker, not all women are ready to have children or even want children! This shouldn’t mean that they shouldn’t embrace their sexuality because of their fear of getting pregnant and not being able to have access to an abortion. Like most of the things I’ve learned from these readings, it's completely ridiculous.

[nirmalasara092]

Reflection Three: Undoing Gender (Doing Justice) Judith Butler

Undoing Gender (Doing Justice)

Butler, J

After reading a new article in this class, I become more and more appalled at the behavior and rationalizing some people and medical professionals use to put labels on human beings. In Butlers reading, the story of David/Brenda was certainly something I found hard to read. Reading about David’s choices being taking away by figures who insisted they knew best was ridiculous! Immediately from the start where we read about the doctor who “accidentally” permanently altered the life and body of a young child, I felt a strong outrage that someone who should be expertly medically trained to perform an operation was trusted to do something that he couldn’t. Due to a doctor’s carelessness, David/Brenda grew up in a life that was under a microscope for countless nameless faces to examine and scrutinize. Something that upset me while reading this was David’s own insistence that he didn’t want to partake in the things they made him do but having no one hear his voice. He fought against what other people wanted him to be and only until he was much older did someone finally begin to realize that David can make his own choices. His choice was taken away when he was only 8 months old because someone said he would have an easier life and he would grow up “normal” if he looked like what a normal person should be. I thought the parents of David were much too willing to have their child be “normal” rather than stop for a second and consider that David was a human being with emotions and thoughts of his own that he could formulate himself. David didn’t need “professionals” telling him that he’s something that he’s not. The world which David grew up in were much too concerned with him being having a normal childhood that they didn’t see that he was living anything but. I felt helpless for David when I read the part about him refusing to partake in an operation to officially gain a “real vagina”, the fact that his simple no wasn’t taken for an acceptable answer and he had to go screaming just shows that these people weren’t listening to what he wanted! The use of his own twin brother to perform mock coital exercises was disgusting! How anyone thought that that was okay, I will never understand. The fact that the public reports didn’t include his real accounts was a big indication that these researchers were more willing to release reports which showcased the supposed success of David’s case rather than share what he felt and spread the truth about the faults of sex reassignment.

[nirmalasara092]

Reflection Two: “The Humiliating Practice of Sex-Testing Female Athletes”

The Humiliating Practice of Sex-Testing Females

 I am not an athletic person, so I have never paid much attention to sports related news because it just wasn’t relevant to me; however, after reading this very shocking article by Ruth Padawer, I believe it has changed somewhat. I must admit that reading some of the things mentioned in the article did make me pause and think about the cruelty and unfairness of it all. The I.A.A.F and the I.O.C have completely backwards and unethical methods when it comes to “gender-identifying” women who seem to have more athletic capabilities than they should. Reading about the invasive exams, testing, and questioning these women went through was hard to imagine experiencing. It is absurd to think about having to present a certificate to prove if one’s gender really is what they say it is or carrying around a card like Veronica Brenner to show her “femininity” as if a woman can only be measured correctly with that term. These groups went to the extreme lengths to perform these tests and I find it ridiculous that with more important things out there, why was there such a big speculation to gender test women simply because they were athletic and darn good at it? Was it so farfetched that a woman could be excellent at anything other than being a homebody that it required extensive testing and scrutiny? Maria Jose Martinez Patino was ruled completely female on the outside and even reported in having less testosterone than an average woman should. All the evidence the groups desired was there and it still wasn’t enough to prove Patino was “female” enough. I also found interesting that poorer women who had great athletic ability were still subject to gender tests more so for the reasoning that if they did well, something must not be right. Most of the things the women were disqualified for was something no one can control. No one gets to pick their genetic makeup or what body parts they get so it’s very unfair to discriminate against someone for something that wasn’t even their choice! Being scrutinized in the public eye and essentially having your identity and body being picked apart and judged impacted many of these women’s entire life and well being negatively. This article left me with a lot of questions like, who determines what is female, who set the guidelines of being female enough to participate in sports? These groups were probably so threatened that a woman could be better at something a man typically is, they just simply couldn’t believe it and set out to do everything imaginable to prove otherwise.

[nirmalasara092]

Reflection One: “Gender Education” Fine, C.

Gender Education, Fine. C

This article was an interesting read for several reasons. The article tackled issues that recently I have been seeing pop up in my everyday life that I haven’t taken into consideration until somewhat recently. Gender to me before reading the official definition in Matlin Chapter 1, was simply just a word that described either a male or a female. Now I know that there is more to the word gender than just a simple task of assigning stereotypical traits that has two options. “Gender refers to the psychological characteristics and social categories that human culture creates.” (Matlin, 2012)  In the article Gender Education, it really shows how society plays a huge role in determining what is classified as masculine or feminine. Children specifically are more susceptible to being conditioned to assigning gender roles at a young age due to their environment and upbringing. Psychologists Sandra and Daryl Bem’s approach to raising their children in a gender neutral way was a surprising twist on the “normal” way we normally see children raised. There is nothing to suggest that something like playing with trucks is deemed a boyish activity or playing with a tea set as a girly activity, however the question is why does something as simple as playing with toys, need a gender label? From young ages, children are taught that you can’t be boyish if you’re a girl and you can’t be girly if you’re a boy. It extends even further as you age as you witness these gender roles in the workplace, like seeing more female preschool and kindergarten teachers than males, or seeing more male police workers than females. Even characteristics have an assigned gender role. Female means to be dainty, emotional, the nurturer of the family and to be a male means to be manly, strong, and the provider of the family. The Bem’s approach to their gender neutral parenting was refreshing because today, when a new baby’s gender is revealed that normally means that their characteristics and traits are also determined at the same time. Baby showers mean either getting everything in blue if it’s a boy or pink if it’s a girl. Also worth mentioning is the fact that in the article it mentions that in picture books, gender ambiguous animals that are meant to be gender neutral are almost always assumed to be a male. This brought to mind something that I had seen on social media, the speculation on the gender of Winnie the Pooh. I hadn’t thought about it before but unconsciously I assumed Winnie was a boy too but Winnie could also have been a girl and I do have to agree with the writer of this article that trying to call gender ambiguous animals, monsters, and even robots a “she” does feel quite weird for reasons unknown. This article really opened my eyes as to how much the word gender really applies to things in everyday life. I think if people tried the Bem’s approach to teach gender neutrality were practiced by more individuals, children would be raised to be open minded, not sexist and to not always feel the need to put things into only two categories of male or female. Other factors like school and peers will obviously play a role but if children are taught that they don’t have to fit themselves into just one category then it’ll be a step toward improving gender neutrality.

[outofcontextpkmn]

[staff]

Our Community Guidelines are changing

To keep Tumblr the constructive, empowering place it should be

It was a little more than 10 years ago that we introduced the humble reblog, not knowing how much it would change the growing Tumblr community. The ability to take one person’s idea, build on it, and share it as something new transformed Tumblr from a simple blogging site into a place where people were talking, exploring, learning, and growing through reblog chains.

We’ve been thinking about that a lot recently—the kind of place we want Tumblr to be, and our responsibility to you here and out in the world.

At its core, Tumblr is a place to express yourself and connect with others who share your interests. Over time a knot of diverse, kinetic, passionate communities sprang up. You can jump from things you love into things you didn’t even know existed. And it’s on all of us to create a safe, constructive, and empowering environment where you can continue to do that.

Our Community Guidelines need to reflect the reality of the internet and social media today and acknowledge that the things people post and share online influence the way others think and behave.

The following updates will go into effect on September 10, 2018 and can reviewed here.

We won’t tolerate hate speech

We believe in a free and open internet but we can’t ignore that the internet is being exploited by hate groups to organize, recruit, and radicalize with horrifying efficiency. Updating our Community Guidelines and internal procedures is necessary to address a very real threat to members of the Tumblr community.

When it comes to hate speech, we’re redrawing the line between what’s uncomfortable and what’s unacceptable, and have struck 41 words of gray area from this section in the Community Guidelines. It now reads:  

Hate Speech: Don’t encourage violence or hatred. Don’t post content for the purpose of promoting or inciting the hatred of, or dehumanizing, individuals or groups based on race, ethnic or national origin, religion, gender, gender identity, age, veteran status, sexual orientation, disability or disease. If you encounter content that violates our hate speech policies, please report it.

[DELETED: If you encounter negative speech that doesn’t rise to the level of violence or threats of violence, we encourage you to dismantle negative speech through argument rather than censorship. That said, if you encounter anything especially heinous, tell us about it.]

Keep in mind that a post might be mean, tasteless, or offensive without necessarily encouraging violence or hatred. In cases like that, you can always block the person who made the post—or, if you’re up for it, you can express your concerns to them directly, or use Tumblr to speak up, challenge ideas, raise awareness or generate discussion and debate.

While the deleted language was well-intentioned (and we still need your help reporting hate speech) a post shouldn’t have to be “especially heinous” to merit reporting.

We’re also banning the glorification of violence and its perpetrators

Not all violence is motivated by racial or ethnic hatred, but the glorification of mass murders like Columbine, Sandy Hook, and Parkland could inspire copycat violence. With that in mind, we’re revising the Community Guidelines on violent content by adding new language to specifically ban the glorification of violent acts or the perpetrators of those acts:

Violent Content and Threats, Gore, Mutilation: Don’t post content that includes violent threats toward individuals or groups—this includes threats of theft, property damage, or financial harm. Don’t post violent content or gore just to be shocking. Don’t showcase the mutilation or torture of human beings, animals (including bestiality), or their remains. Don’t post content that encourages or incites violence, or glorifies acts of violence or the perpetrators.

Lastly, we’re eliminating any ambiguity in our zero-tolerance policy on non-consensual sexual images

We’re adding a very simple statement (in bold below) to our existing policy on harassment to remove any uncertainty:

Harassment. Don’t engage in targeted abuse or harassment. Don’t engage in the unwanted sexualization or sexual harassment of others.

Posting sexually explicit photos of people without their consent was never allowed on Tumblr, but with the invention of deepfakes and the proliferation of non-consensual creepshots, we are updating our Community Guidelines to more clearly address new technologies that can be used to humiliate and threaten other people.

So what can you expect going forward?

The new Community Guidelines will go into effect on September 10, 2018. After that, if we determine a post or blog is promoting hatred, glorifying violence, or is engaging in the unwanted sexualization of another person, it will be taken down. This includes (for example) posting Islamophobic, anti-Semitic, or anti-LGBTQ+ content to promote or incite violence or hatred; using symbols of hate movements to intimidate or harass others; and the glorification of mass murderers.

Of course, context is everything. Posts and blogs that generate open, constructive debate are always welcome here. A heated conversation about race or gender identity in media is not hate speech, nor is a factual, educational history of Jim Crow.

An overwhelming amount of care and nuance is needed to evaluate reports fairly and accurately, so we’ve increased the size of our team to review the reports we receive.

What should you do if you see content that violates the CGs?

Report it. We’ve added hate speech reporting to the mobile apps. Just tap the airplane icon on any post to open this menu 👇 — then tap Report (flag button) > Something else > Hate speech.

One last note

We are fierce defenders of free expression. We want Tumblr to be a place where people come to be themselves and engage diverse points of view through constructive dialogue. The lines we’re drawing today around hate speech, violence, and non-consensual sexual content are designed to protect that vision.

We’ll continue to review and revise our Community Guidelines to make sure they remain an accurate reflection of our community and its values. And as part of our commitment to transparency, we’ll always make sure previous versions are available on our public GitHub repo.

You’re going to have opinions on these changes and what more we can do. We encourage you to share your thoughts (especially constructive feedback) in the notes. And if you feel that Tumblr is no longer for you, there’s a whole world of internet out there.

❤️ Be kind to each other, Tumblr.

[thedgeofsleep]

you matter.