Media Part II

Part II of Chapter 11 discusses who is represented in the media. Women are underrepresented regardless of form in the U.S. media. male characters outnumber female characters in books, news, television shows, film, and video games. male characters outnumbered female characters and appeared more often as lead characters in children's books. These findings suggests to children that female characters are less important than their male counterparts. In news , women are less likely to be guest on Sunday morning public affairs shows, be apart of the local television news workforce, and the local radio news workforce. In the 2012 presidential election, women played a deciding role in the election but did not figure prominently in news coverage of the election or on issues that most directly affected them. In Entertainment, women are only 41% of all fictional characters on television and only about one in six films depicted 'gender balance' in an analysis of the top-grossing films from 2007-2008. Minorities are underrepresented in the media as well, in an content analysis of prime-time television shows from 2000 to 2008, the researcher found the appearance of Black characters declined and the representation of other minority groups and Hispanics were "nearly invisible. Video games underrepresent women and minorities as well. There is an over-representation of males, whites, and adults with the most popular games being the least representative of others such as the elderly, children, and minorities. When the underrepresented groups were represented it was usually only in secondary roles, social identity theory suggests that they will be seen as less important. Along with who is represented, the book discusses how people are represented. Sexualization occurs in many forms in our society, dolls being dressed in revealing clothing, children wearing underclothes intended for adults, and sexy Halloween costumes are examples. Television plays a key role in the sexualization of culture and has increased over the past 10 years. Men and Women's bodies are not sexualized in the same way, women are presented as sexual objects far more than men. In music videos, women are more likely to hyper-sexualized. Women are more likely to wear sexy clothing, depicted partially nude, and to be referred to as attractive. Women are sexualized 3 to 5 times more often than men. The book points out Cosmopolitan magazine which is directed towards women but also sexualizes women. Also, Cosmo only offers examples of heterosexual femininity, which presents a hegemonic message that a women's self-worth is influenced by the way she looks and how she dresses. Sexualization has also affected young girls. studies show that young girls oftentimes prefer the sexualized doll over the non-sexualized doll for their ideal self and equate sexiness with popularity. Exposure to sexual content on television contributes to young peoples sexual knowledge, beliefs, sexual attitudes, and behaviors but the number of hours of television watched also plays a significant role. When mothers teach their children to be critical of media, the child may be less likely to be affected by viewing sexual content. Also understanding that one's body is an agent of action and not just as an object of gaze can lessen self-sexualization. Sexualization Occurs even in children's books, and most often books aimed at young girls. Beauty standards are not the same for everyone though and race, nationality, and sexual orientation play a role in how messages are internalized. People self-objectify through the act of Sexting, which is sending sexually-explicit images via cell phone. Rresearch shows that sexting tends to be indicative of teens' sexual activity and potentially risky behaviors. Moving Along, Men's masculinity has been a topic of discussion. In advertisements, men are being encouraged to take back their masculinity. Men's magazines show men as being confused and insecure. The taking back of one's masculinity presented by certain advertisements show's that there are pressures put on men to be manly by over-performing a particular type of masculinity. Hegemonic masculinity is easily identifiable in the media and reinforces heteronormitivity. Video games portray hypermasculinity by the over-performance of masculinity. Although women make up 47% of gamers, games are dominated by male characters. Grand Theft Auto is a great example of the over-porformance of masculinity and violence by male characters. Also, the only roles women play are as prostitutes or pedestrians and women are not main character. Dominant media images unfortunately reinforce the gender binary of heteronormativity but many of us still consume. The danger is that people do not think critically and act as passive agents. It is important to be an engaged member of the cultural conversation, this is how you'll learn to employ an oppositional gaze. 1. In the figure on pg 239, pie charts show that during the 2012 presidential election, men were quoted far more than women on issues that directly related to women. Why do you think men's quotes were used more often than women's? 2. How do you think the underrepresentation of women in news, books, television, film, and video games can be changed/How do you think women can gain a voice in these forms of media? 3. Do you think the overperforming of masculinity in media has been detrimental to young men? If so why? If not, why not?

Gender and the Media

            Media

            Gender communications scholars have theorized that media in a variety of forms ranging from video games, television, cinema, advertisement, online and print news media, and art are discourses and symbols that mirror and maintain our understanding of gender, sexuality, race, ethnicity, religion, class, ability, and so on. The textbook argues that a communication and rhetorical focus to understand how media constructs, symbols that reinforce our understanding of gender. DeFrancisco and Palczewski partition the discussion of Media and gender within the following way:

1. Defining Media and How They Function:

            The textbook provides an exhaustive, yet open-ended definition for media, which ranges from print media, tweets, art, music, and even tweets. It is critical to point out that DeFrancisco and Palczewski avoid using the term The Media in favor of media to demonstrate that media is not mono-causal from one particular source, but rather exists within a complex process.

            The media is a bi-product of the cultural industry, which was first coined by Horkheimer and Adorno. The cultural industry constructs messages that generate demand for particular products, and in return, the cultural industry can provide back towards the public. This particularly applies to the advertisement industry.

            According to scholars, the average individual spends over 2.8 hours a day watching television. Dependence on media, more specifically, demonstrates the ways we view ourselves refers back to television as a way of understanding ourselves.    Since the digital age, media has become more complex and offered new avenues for individuals to express themselves and their personal identities.

A. Media Hegemony or Polysemy

            The text book argues that the ways social groups can make its beliefs seem logical, normal, and common sense is through appealing representations of the media, since it’s the basis for people to understand and formulate their social realities. However, it is argued that media messages are polysemy. In other words, they can be interpreted in many different ways at different times.

B. Media Polyvalence

            Scholars such as Celeste Condit disagree that media representations should view as Polysemy. Instead, she argues that these messages should be Polyvalence, having a multitude of valuations. This process occurs when the public shares a common denotation with a text, but they disagree about the valuation of these to denotations that they result in different interpretations.

2. The Gaze(s)

A. Ways of Seeing

            Scholars have been interested in examining how visual art is constructed for a particular audience and spectator. For example, Berger argues that European art of nude women was created for a male gaze. This constructed women as objects, which hurt their agency because women were seen as objects rather than agents with the power to act. This criticism spans beyond European art criticism, the visual images that are seen within advertising, film, and even the photos we post on Facebook. From a gender perspective, these ways of seeing shape of understanding of gender, such as, the European Art framed women as passive objects.

           

B. The Gaze

            Scholars such as Laura Mulvey continued the discussions surrounding the ways of seeing women in media. She agrees that these images construct a particular vision of women and gender, but believes that these views are always of the white male, which prevents the possibility of non-white gazes. Scholars argue that multiple gazes can exist within film and provide us with means and methods for resistance. Such as Brenda Cooper argues that women can mock these gender roles and the audience can willing choose to not identify with the man, but instead the female that resists these norms.

C. An Oppositional Gaze

            Scholars such as bell hooks argues that the media can no longer determine the position of the audience if they are conscious and refuse the act of positioning, which she defines as the oppositional gaze. She argues that we can all look through each other eyes and can refuse those visions. The oppositional gaze is comprised of four main elements. First, we must be conscious that we view culture from a particular perspective and as why we identify with that perspective. Second, the individual must acknowledge their participates in culture. Third, the oppositional gaze begins as a social critique and then becomes a political critique, once we understand the current and flawed representations, then we are able to move to create alternatives. Fourth, the oppositional gaze understands how media engages in the commodification of culture to supports its discrimination.

I provide the following three questions:

1. Bellow is a link to a super bowl snickers commercial. My question is, how does this text demonstrate a Polyvalence view on culture?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gjsoSY18kg

2. According to Bulter, gender is not scripted onto the body, but rather is performed. If we agree that media creates our understanding of gender, then does that mean gender is not performed?

3.  Is there a particular time you have viewed a text that was problematic because it was intended for the view of a white male, heterosexual, and other hegemonic views? If so, what alternative views did it exclude, and how could including those views remedy the text? Or is it impossible to remedy those representations?

Religion and Gender Communications (Part 2)

In the second part of Chapter Ten, the book discusses gender communication and religion through sexuality, liberation, and empowerment. We will first look at the “Religion and Sexuality” and how religion and can be an influence on an individuals sexuality. Then we will look at “Religion as Liberation and Locations of Empowerment.” This deals with gender and spiritual equality in the eyes of their supreme deity. It will discuss how individuals try to find a balance between their sexuality and religion. Also it will look at how individuals try to find empowerment in their religion through different religious practices.

Religion and Sexuality. Certain religions offer teachings on sexuality and directions on gender and sex. Religion also plays a big role in political issues when it comes to sexuality. For example, the legalization of same sex marriage can be viewed as a secular, public issue. However, decisions on whether or not it should or should not be legalized, has been influenced by religious views. My personal experience with how sexuality can be influenced by religion is through my Christian beliefs. In my Christian beliefs, I am encouraged to restrain from any type of sexual contact that is outside of the laws of marriage. I was encouraged at the age of 16 years old to make what is called a purity pledge. This purity pledge was my agreement and choice to remain abstinent until marriage. Through the years I occasionally held on to this idea that if I can maintain that promise I made to God and in my Christian religion then that would somehow reconcile my faith and sexuality.  That is just my personal experience of how my sexuality has been influenced by religion.

Religion as Liberation and Locations of Empowerment. The book talks about spiritual equality amongst gender and religion. In Christianity, Christians believe that no matter what race or gender, all are equal and are one in Christ. You are viewed the same as the next person. “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28) In Islam, all Muslims are encouraged to “seek knowledge.” No matter if you are man or woman, you are considered capable of doing so. People try to find empowerment and fulfillment through their religion and religious acts.  “Religions and divinities are more than a source of violence;… religions are also a source of resistance, hope, and struggle.”(Thie, p.232)

African Americans and Religion. Religion has been a source of empowerment for African Americans throughout history. Their faith and trust in God has given them the strength and courage to take risks and fight for rights. The book gives an example of how woman like Harriet Tubman found courage and motivation in God to get through to freedom from slavery. This is an example of how individuals use religious institutions as a location of empowerment. Their religious institution, for example, church, can be a place where they can go to grow spiritually in a way that frames their everyday lives. Spirituality is not a system of religious beliefs but a way of life. In my personal experience, within my Christian faith, we are encouraged to not have a religion but to instead have a relationship with Christ. We are encouraged to not habitually participate in the actions of religion but to do these acts as a service to God. We are encouraged to live our lives for Christ. The book also discusses how religion can serve a purpose of to create a sense of community. Gender still defined certain roles that men and women play in the religious community. Usually, men played the roles of hierarchy within the church community while women tend to play roles that are seen as an invisible service in the church. I personally feel that has changed in today’s age. At my church, women are ministers/evangelist and occasionally sit in the pulpit. They even preach sermons. I know of some churches that have female head pastors.

Veiling Practices. The book discusses the practice of veiling amongst men and women and Christians and Muslims. Unfortunately, the use of the veil has been misinterpreted by western society. “Veiling practices provide an excellent example of how religion is a site of resistance and emancipation but also can be used as a justification for subordination.” (Defrancisco, 2007) According to Fadwa El Guindi, “veiling is a language that communicates social and cultural messages.” Wearing veils can provide an example of nonverbal, bodily communication. Western society sees veiling practices as a sign of oppression for women. Before the 1960s, Catholic women were required to wear head coverings to church. Islamic women practice veiling as a form empowerment and not oppression. Veil Practices are not solely connected to religion and Islam. Veil practices are also seen in wedding ceremonies. Veil practices are not solely for women either. Even men in the Islamic religion are encouraged to practice in body coverings.

Behind the Veil. In the article, Behind the Veil, Hebah Ahmed discusses her decisions to wear a veil. She discusses the reactions of people in America that made comments towards her new choice. Her parents didn't push her to wear veils. ''I do this because I want to be closer to God, I want to please him and I want to live a modest lifestyle,'' said Ms. Ahmed, who asked that her appearance without a veil not be described. ''I want to be tested in that way. The niqab is a constant reminder to do the right thing. It's God-consciousness in my face.'' But there were secular motivations, too. In her job, she worked with all-male teams on oil rigs and in labs.''No matter how smart I was, I wasn't getting the respect I wanted,'' she said. ''They still hit on me, made crude remarks and even smacked me on the butt a couple times.” “Wearing the niqab is ''liberating,'' she said. ''They have to deal with my brain because I don't give them any other choice.'' (Ali, 2010)

1.     What other ways can you think of that religion has had an influence on sexuality/gender besides the decisions on same-sex marriage?

2.     Why do you think western culture has a narrow-minded view on veiling practices?

3.     Do you have any experiences that can relate to gender communications and religion?

After a tour of Catholic nuns researching 400 religious institutions across America, the collective consensus of the nuns was of universal faith, joy and hope; in regards to their undying initiatives of anti-poverty and social justice. Their on going initiatives even went so far as having had meetings with legislators to fight spending cuts in social programs; whereas, because of the deep historical masculine gendered church, the doctrinal congregational authorities felt this was pushing radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.

This gendered divergence was described by one nun this way: the Catholic church believes in the patrimony of God in Vatican Rome and conflicts with the religious nun’s beliefs that man and women are created equally. I guess this gendered constraint towards equality would be understandable being that if we were reading the scripture in the Christian bible; Complementarianism; which their view is "historic;" the "old testament" narrates in the very beginning, the female (Eve) was responsible for the weakness of disobeying God with tempting Adam to bite the apple of good and evil; and then mankind being subjected to the consequences. This also sets a tone for future writing judgments in Corinthians and Timothy where it's said a woman shouldn't teach or needs to submit to the man. If further researched and as it turns out in our studies, there a host of reasons historically why religion is masculine gendered.

Oddly and interestingly though, is that the traditional view of Judaism (also old testament), even though scripture writes both man and woman were created in the image of god, and man was created (built) in Genesis 1:27 with dual gender, and was separated into male and female. Most Judaism scholars suggest the idea that God has never been either male or female in gender; unlike most Christian views. At the same time, with my "somewhat of" a Christian upbringing, I can say my positive experiences and teachings were enveloped around women. The nuns were sweet hearts (although I have heard of nasty ones) but, the positive biblical figures of: Ruth, both Mary’s – mother of Jesus and his disciple, Rebecca, Sarah, Rachel and of course our modern day Mother Theresa, all were excellent role models of a spiritual Christian rhetoric.

Sadly, women aren’t allowed to be ordained in the Catholic because like stated in Kristy Maddux (2012) article; "The feminized Gospel" (supplementary art.), women don’t exhibit the same masculine gender as Jesus and therefor can’t represent the gospel. Hogwash I say; if noted in my earlier post when we were writing about family, I referred to the lord and I intentionally didn’t give the lord a masculine gender label even though the lord is written as a he and is referred to as he, and we assume a masculine gender but do we really know, especially if the lord supposedly never made any sexual orientations, that we know of.

Nevertheless, the Christian church is the major affiliated church in the United States and takes up a third of the world’s affiliation. For those reasons we have major influential gendered perspectives from those institutions and the like, and that of the other religions that might follow close behind. For example, Islam is not that different in the way they come into understanding of women and men’s roles, and have been coming together to slow progressive language, and to promote gendered roles. Meanwhile on a collective analysis level, according to writing by Fred Kniss suggestions in the book God, Science, Sex, Gender 2010, chapter 3; "We must attend to how groups (religions) define and prioritize various factors of human sexuality; how that might position them ideologically and philosophically; what ethical issues arise and what social consequences of conflict outcome might be." Or in addition, predict what the terms of debate are likely to be. Where potential allies or opponents might be found; how shifts in ideological or theological stances may affect relationships to other groups.

On an individualistic level, according to our studies, religion informs on not only peoples personal relationships with their god(s) but also peoples relationship with their gender/sex. Religious institutions communicate messages about gender and sex. So religion is an important institution to study on how to do gender and how to be sexed.

Egalitarians got it better in understanding in my opinion. They believe like Aimee Semple McPherson believed in the Maddux (2012) article, in that leadership and for that matter, higher spirituality is not determined, exercised, manifested and or dominated by gender but by the gifting and calling of the Holy Spirit, and that God calls all to submit to one another. So I must say, how’s that for real rhetoric? The Buddhist religion believes that we are all on this this earth for the sole purpose of helping others. Confucianism’s highest virtue is humanness toward others; to give you similar other perspectives.

Lastly, even the title of Muscular Christianity sounds too physical to have any spiritual diplomacy to me. In Maddux (2012), the analysis of McPherson’s innovative feminized personae as a preacher showed the strength against the masculine gendered culture of the time even though the a masculine preaching style would be the ideal because of the masculine gendered Jesus and a connotation to being manly or not emotional affected. When in reality, compassion is very much at the top of attributes of spiritual leadership and is very much intertwined with emotion and a compassionate responsability. Conversely, it is odd that the Puritan tradition in the mid-nineteenth century viewed muscular Christianity as an immoral waste of time. The justification of trying to win men back to church membership or any other phony rhetoric in regards to gender might explain some poor procedures and policies and sloppy Christian ideology in the church today.

Questions:
1) How do you think the religious future will hold up as an institution regardless of how it is gendered?

2) If the religious institution falls apart as it may if not supported, how do you think spirituality will be structured, practiced, exercised and carried on for our children?

3) Even though masculinity seemed to play some what of a negative role towards equality by gendering, masculine females and feminine males were the researched to be more the majority of church attendees, What might that suggest of the persons who seem to seek stronger spiritual structure or edification of a principle centered way of life?

Gender in the workplace, a life choice

     While we enjoy doing what we love, our social construct only allows for us to partake in what society deems is ok for us, or so we’re taught.  We often are full of judgment when we see a person doing a job that we feel that they can't normally handle, or if they can handle it, it's because they must be out of the realm of cis-gendered things.  An example that I want to share is the interesting look that was taken at female firefighters.  A job that is primarily filled by men, and not just any men, men that enjoy being in a very tough and dangerous job.  Men are known to feed off of the gender or masculinity of other men, in the book it’s known as “performing virility”.  So, it really throws off the masculine growth when we have women enter the field, many egos will no longer grow at the rate they once would’ve.  So it’s very hard for a women firefighter to be accepted as the men are subconsciously thinking, “I have nothing to learn from her.”  It’s well known that a smart firefighter beats a brawny firefighter any day of the week. This really doesn’t fit societies view on what women should do for a living and it really should make us question our stereotypes.  When it comes to communicating, people believe that women in this career would probably be emotional wrecks and not be able to handle the job and would be a strain on the team’s resources.  According to the article I’m using as the supplemental reading,” The masculine heroism associated with firefighting has been attributed to its military overtones according to Greenberg.”  I feel that a lot of the sexual harassment that the chapter speaks about can happen in some less normative ways, ways that are more unspoken and are stagnant in the brains of a lot of people; it’s a feeling that we perceive things and don’t really acknowledge that we’ve done anything.  A good example of the harassment is the original hiring of an individual, why they are in the position is often based on the role that someone feels will fit well at one firm or another.  Firefighting is extremely interesting when learning about how we communicate between genders, many of these women can’t be themselves, or are constantly performing their gender. 

     Is it wrong to say that some women are doing the career as a form of resistance?  Does it empower some women to go through life working a job that most would deem out of the cisgender norm? Here, Patricia Buzzanell reminds us, “focus more on the ways that people incorporate resistant thinking and behaving into their identities and interactions.  Resistance takes many forms.” (DeFranscisco and Palczewski, 2014. p.4725).   So really, people have a hard enough time dealing with women and their roles in the military; so this job, which is in close relation, in theory, is pretty close to that feeling where women just don’t belong.  A problem that occurs in these occupations is how management goes about meeting the quota for diversity in gender employment.  Since people feel that there must be a fair representation of the female gender, management goes about filling the void with an attitude and aura that says that women are just needed for that sole reason, to fill the quota, not that they would be a good addition to the team; at the same time, sometimes a woman is hired to has very masculine traits and is more like one of the guys, this allowing the team to feel more aligned with safety, as the more masculine female could probably manage to do better work than a more feminine counterpart.  The way that communication goes, people are unknowingly being guilty of becoming a hostile work environment, this is because of the perceived coercive action in that these women have to play the role they were hired for.  So when it comes to communicating, a lot of women in the field feel that they are trapped into playing this role they are hired into.  Often, a more feminine woman in the field would be a victim of girl watching, a trivial thing to men, but a real form of sexual harassment for women, objectifying them in every way.  Since the woman is viewed as a “game piece or object” instead of an integral role in the field.  I posit that, as the book says, norms can be altered, and they change over time, but what’s slower to change is our view on the binary; how different sexes can adapt to a job can be just as inflammatory and hard to swallow in our society as any other issues we have been brainwashed into holding as our own thinking or the “way it should be”.  For some women to come in and intentionally change the way we look at some careers, like these brave female firefighters, we should try to spread the knowledge that any gender is more than capable of stepping out of their societal norms and being able to possibly have a hugely positive influence on very tough jobs.  Women don’t need to become more masculine to do a job, this is society, women who stick to who they are can change the way things are done, for the better, because of fresh thinking, a lot of good can happen.  The reward that a female can get from doing a great job as a firefighter is cut short by them having to play a role, now, doesn’t that sound really wrong?  

1)  Why do we feel that certain jobs don't allow multiple genders to partake?

2)   Heroism, is it masculine?  Why do we feel so aligned with a masculine view of heroism?

3)  Sexual harassment, is unspoken harassment worse than the plainly obvious verbal harassment?

The Social Construction of Gender in Workplace Organizations.

This week, we explored work as a gendered and sexed institution. While we are now aware that family and education are two arenas in which gender is developed and maintained, one might make the error of assuming that work is a reprieve from such gender constraints. That is, once someone transitions into the work force they are no longer a student in a class room, and when  an individual leaves for work their family stays at home. Unfortunately, our social constructions of gender do not yield to the doors of the home or classroom, and gender/sex is thusly mitigated in the workplace as well. As is prominent in the public psyche, DeFrancisco and Palczewski (2014) note the wage disparities between men and women, citing that women make 82.2% of men’s earnings (p.187). Looking through the critical gendered lens, we find that this disparity exists as a function of sociocultural practice, as Madden (2012; as cited in DeFrancisco and Palczewski, 2014) found that it was not that women had inferior abilities compared to men, but rather, the sales opportunities were not duly granted to them by comparison in stockbroking positions. Therefore, it is not that women are less capable than men; patriarchal systems imbedded within organizations do not afford them the same money-making opportunities. I feel at this juncture, it is important to note that patriarchy is not one particular man (or even a particular group of men) actively oppressing women, but rather, a system in which males and masculinity are privileged because it’s simply considered the social norm.

Part of the way in which organizations become gendered/sexed is related to the way in which we define and assign work. Of particular interest, I feel, is the fact that our definition of “work” is not related to function, physical demand, or required skill, but merely contingent upon whether or not an individual is paid for a particular task or tasks, and is consequently gendered. DeFranscisco and Palczewski (2014) illustrate the gender relationship well in examination of the term “working mothers.” Working mothers are females who have birthed children, yet continue to work at jobs outside of the home. The inference here being that it is the paid labor which is work, and thus significantly different than, and additive to, the domestic duties of a female (or, perhaps otherwise-gendered person) who is raising their children. Moreover, a perhaps parallel term, “working father,” is not only non-existent in western colloquial discourse, but carries with it a sense of awkwardness; it is assumed that the male of the relationship will continue to work regardless, harkening back to the idea of the “nuclear family” discussed in the previous chapters.

Regardless of the gender/sex of an individual, upon entering the work force they are entering a gendered/sexed organization. Those of us working in corporate environments are woefully aware of the position of the abstract worker –a bodiless, sexless, emotionless worker who does not procreate (DeFranscisco and Palczewski, 2014. p.192). This definition explains the way in which communicative behavior in organizations is influenced by gender; while organizations center their ideologies around the abstract worker, in reality, workers do in fact have bodies, sexes, emotions, etc. The abstract worker seems to be the organizational ideal from which men and women deviate and thus expose differences in gender. Perhaps the best example of this is Albrecht’s (1999; as cited in DeFranscisco and Palczewski, 2014) finding that pregnancy is often framed as a “disability.” As such, when women need to take time off to bear and raise children, they thus deviate from the characteristics of the abstract worker and draw attention to differences in gender. Men, by contrast, do not typically take maternity leave and are able (or, rather, encouraged) to fulfill their organizational duties in lieu of child birth, keeping them closer to the schema of the abstract worker.

DeFranscico and Palczewski (2014) further the organizational element of gender in the work place by invoking the situation of transpeople who transition to their identified gender while working. What are profoundly interesting to me are the findings that while transgender men often enjoy higher status in the workplace after the transition is complete, transgender women often experience a diminishing effect on their perceived abilities and status within an organization. It would seem, then, that our judgments about work-place performance are almost inextricably linked to gender/sex, and furthers the rather disturbing, yet realistically visible, idea that employees in workplace organizations are viewed within the framework of the abstract worker.  Vidal-Ortiz (2009) offers a unique perspective on the experiences of transgender women –namely those of color, or ethnic decent. For transgender women, employment upon transition is neither guaranteed secure or obtainable. While transgender men may reap certain sociocultural benefits in terms of their treatment by co-workers post transition, transgender women may experience the opposite effect: having their employment terminated during transition (Tesene, 2012; Vidal-Ortiz, 2002). While feminist debates have excluded prostitution as from women’s labor possibilities, he brings the vast deployment of a female workforce outside of the middle-class parameters of decent employment. Vidal-Ortiz (2009) argues that the negative assessments of transwomen –particularly those of color- may reduce their possibilities to work outside of street economies such as sex work (p.100). Yet, he also brings to perspective the notion that transwomen of color experience similar stereotypes to other nontransgender sex workers, opening up earning potential denied to them by other institutions. Sex work, while reifying stereotypes, also serves as a site for liberation, rather than oppression, for transgender women of color. Drawing from both the text and supplemental reading, I propose the following questions:

1. While “stay-at-home mom” is a rather ubiquitous term, “stay-at-home dads” are now on the rise. When you hear the latter phrase, what are your thoughts? What kind of judgments/assumptions do you make (or think are made, in general) about “stay-at-home dads” based on our culturally-constructed gender roles? How do you think this relates to the “nuclear family?”

2. How does the definition of abstract worker (a sexless, bodiless, emotionless individual who does not procreate) make you feel? Do you agree or disagree that most workplace organizations structure their communicative practices to this effect, and why?

3. At the end of his opening vignette, Vidal-Ortiz asks the reader “what is your figure of the transwoman of color?” Taking an intersectional approach, answer this question, and explain how our communicative construction of gender may influence your answer. How do you think her experiences might diverge from/converge with other transpeople, and/or people in general?