Reflection on The Male Myth, 12/17/2016

As a woman living in this contemporary world, I have hands full of problems. The society keeps pressuring me into the standard of "femininity" -- an ideology that has no real use but to make one's life miserable -- and having to fight back is a time-and-thought-consuming process. It is only natural to forget that women are not the only people on the battlefront for their identity. Men, similarly to women, are held to a fabricated, unrealistic expectation of "masculinity".
Paul Theroux reflects on the expectations men are held to in the NY Times article "The Male Myth".

He provides with some insights on how this myth of manliness traveled from his youth to his adulthood, becoming more and more demanding and toxic. While Theroux did bring up an important issue that needs more vocalization -- as Throux did mention, it is unusual to think of men as "weak", but they are human too -- he lost me, as a female reader, when he brought up feminism.

What a good author would do is show sympathy to both sides, We, as people, are all pressured into acting or looking a certain way, regardless of gender. Though we do have different societal expectations to live up to, we are in this together.

What Theroux did, however, was bash women and the feminist movement. Feminists were the ones who brought issues like this to the light. They were the ones who started the deconstruction of social pressure and how we're raised to fit the mold. Feminism is not about reducing the struggles of men and emphasizing the struggles of women, it's about doing both. But it seems like Theroux doesn't quiet understand that. And for that reason, I found his piece to be extremely one-dimensional and underdeveloped. 

Reflection on Pillow Angel Ethics, 12/3/2016

The controversial case of Ashley, a brain-damaged six-year girl who, as willed by her parents, has undergone numbers of hormonal and surgical treatments to "deal" with her disability, has spurred many conversations and debates nationwide. One of these conversations was held in Midwood High School, as I and thirty other students deliberated whether or not the "Ashley Treatment" was an ethical, according to American values, decision. The article we had to base our response on, "Pillow Angel Ethics" by Nancy Gibbs, brought into the light both sides of the coin. While the author cautiously underlined the treatment as unethical, she respectfully discussed the benefits that come along with this decision, such as better mobility, lack of menstrual cramps, and the ability of her parents to take better care of her due to her smaller and lighter frame. On the other hand, the treatment violates basic human rights, is not safe due to a lack of proper research and practice, and does not involve Ashley consent. In the beginning of the debate, I had no real opinion on the treatment. But as I got to argue the side of opposition, I began to feel more and more intolerable of Ashley's parents and what they have done to her. I found their actions to be extremely selfish. While it "makes her life better", it was initially done to make it easier for HER PARENTS to take care of her. They wanted to remove discomfort that comes from her size and female nature, so that they can carry her around easier. This makes me think of Ashley as a chihuahua - the "mini" version of a full sized dog that doesn't take much space and is easy to carry in a purse. Of course, Ashley is a human being and not a dog, but her parents' attitude is somewhat similar to that of pet owners'. Why going through the struggle of taking care of a full grown woman, when you can freeze her in her childhood and never have to struggle with the "fallouts" of her adulthood. On the down side, Ashley is deprived of ever having a chance to express what she wants, since this treatment has most likely stopped any natural development of her brain. Well, I guess it did get easier to "provide her with needed comfort, closeness, security and love", right ?