No one questions this satire (second video) or even catches the video as a satire, mostly because people associate black people with welfare and laziness till this day. These associations can stem from Durkheim’s ideas about symbolism or symbols. Many people may view a black female with the idea of the “Welfare Queen”. This intersects with the color-line, because it is known that after slavery and colonialism, people associated white with good and black with bad. If such symbols in terms of race were worshipped and stigmatized for so long, it is as if people have only ritualized them throughout their lives subliminally. For every time one sees such colorism and racism in his or her daily institution, or sees internalized attitudes of stigmata or scorn towards darker skinned person, the racist associations are even more becoming. Today many Americans deem that the use of welfare by blacks is their fault. They never think of the Tusla Oklahoma riot or other reasons behind the poverty and unemployment of African Americans. Nobody would deem that the slums or section 8 areas as shock worthy or even a problem, because for so long black people were a symbol of problems. Du Bois was a genius of his time, he used data analysis and qualitative measures to get at the heart of the “Negro Problem”, he was able to find racism, another form of oppression as the source. He mentioned that blacks were no different from once French Peasantry, probably alluding to the fact that oppression and pain projected onto one group was for the benefit of another. This pain was racism this time, not sexism or other tribal pains. We can measure the black slums by comparing them to richest the whites, and conclude that this projection of racism was arbitrary. Maybe the once Bauer and the peasants became magnificent. If sexism dissipated in the past allowing the woman to work and give American 11 trillion dollars in commerce, can one imagine the riches and the glory, as well as the solution to the Negro Problem …if Black Wall Street expanded? We can leave that to imagination, for people will deny any racism and imagine that it was other reasons that made black poor, or that even the Black “mini” Holocaust never existed. It “may” be evident that slavery or race tribalism created awful symbols of blacks, so awful that many remained arbitrarily racist. Whether it was the greedy institution or the individual, none aided the Negro in doing his or her best. “when one group of people suffer these little differences of treatment and discriminations and insults continually, the result is either discouragement, or bitterness, or over-sensitiveness, or recklessness. And a people feeling they cannot do their best” (343, Du Bois) such racism not only prevented blacks from doing their best, but isn’t obvious, if one was to be discriminated against before even work or even hated while working, wouldn’t that one end up in welfare. Many White Americans of today shake their head at welfare usage of blacks not knowing that it was that very discriminating stigma and racist view that led to the Negro problem in the first place. There are reasons why this holocaust had to kept secret, how silly and inconvenient would it be to lose so much money over racism? Maybe some said, “let them die” so that they can keep their riches, or gain cheap labor. Many black men born from single homes and welfare homes go to the Prison system later on in life. Maybe if we realize that there were real reasons by any Negro problem, we as a country could make billions upon billions of dollars, especially since the Negro is here to stay.
Charlotte Perkins Gilman had some very thought provoking ideas and perspectives on gender inequality for her era that are still relevant today. I found her ideas on the division of labor interesting. She stated that women’s economic status is based on the men in their life and that their labor does not equate to their wages. The higher the status of a woman, the less she works. The lower the status of a woman, she more she works. The traditional patriarchal family structure ultimately exploits women. Our class discussion on how men and women are socialized differently on how we take up space led me to notice over the past week examples of this in my daily life. A few days ago when I was at a coffee shop, I noticed three men taking up a whole table that could seat six. They were all spread out, having a seat in between each of them. I immediately thought about our class discussion and how if it were girls, they would all be sitting close together. In addition, my roommate sent me this video the other day of switched gender roles, where women publicly made sexist comments to men in London. It admittedly is humorous, but has a deeper meaning, showing how women are over sexualized and disrespected on a daily basis. All the comments made by the woman in the video are real life examples taken from The Everyday Sexism Project. Another relevant article I found was on a matriarchal society known as the “Kingdom of Women” in China. In this society, they have no words for “husband” or “father” and the women are in charge, making every big financial decision, having ownership of the land, and choose as many or as few sexual partners as they want throughout their life.
MATRIARCHY ARTICLE: http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/dec/19/china-mosuo-tribe-matriarchy
What I think that Gilman have tried to indicate in her writings is that the women in the home sphere are not represented in the labor field because her labor is her husbands. That defines the reason that no matter how much the women works in the home, the housewife social and economic status or standings are her husband. Also, Gilman mentioned and emphasize the difference in the socialization that leads to gender inequality. In example that she brought into this idea is how children, both boys and girls, are taught to dress differently and act and think differently because of their gender. In addition, these children around these age are the same because their needs and thoughts will be the same.
Gilman did not disagree with the differences that exist between men and women. She understood the different biological of men and women and the unique capabilities that women have which gave women good social value. I want to bring an example of the difference that men and women are portrayed in our world, if you go to Target or a toy store you will see the water guns and ships for boys and vacuum and food market toys for girls. This distinction that has been going on before the time of Gilman and now in our society that women are different from man. I think that there are people thinking that why would women work outside of the home if their are parents, while their husband have good jobs. I think that it is best for both people to work to have what life gives you and even if women are paid low doing the same jobs as men, I believe that women now in modern age are trying to be step closer to men.
The Yellow Wallpaper that Gilman wrote I was very interesting. First, her “hysteria” was diagnosed both her husband and her brother (both doctors). She mentioned that her remedy was stay away from “tonics, and air and exceeds, and journeys” and was “forbidden to “work””(Edles & Appelrouth, 234) until she was well again. However she denied that this was the case, she felt that her husband and brother ideas was wrong because her brother and husband believe that Gilman was not sick but was the “temporary nervous depression…slight hysterical tendency” (Ibid, 234). of what women goes through after giving birth. I debate the idea further more just because it is hard to have a child in an era that does not understand what women undergoes when they have a child. In addition, her thoughts about not following what they wanted and how she felt within herself and what she really needed to be socialize. As I remember Durkheim mentioned that if a person doesn’t have enough or have any social bonds then they tend to commit suicide. When reading this it looks like her husband put her in a room to somewhat enforce her not to do anything that might be work related. However the reason she wrote this, in my opinion, is because she suffered nervous breakdown multiple periods of time and this is an example of what some doctors think women should be doing rather than trying something different to be better.
As mentioned in the beginning Gilman discusses the women in the household doing the housework however it doesn’t matter how much effort you put in the work, your status is gain from your husband. Also, the work that is done in the home benefits the husband as well. She mentioned that a woman with many children do not earn a lot of money because their husband are working class men while wealthy men wifes do not have to work hard inside the home because of they have other people to take care of the households. However, it is hard to do all the housework and not get compensated for it because it is the property of your husband/father.
There is a youtube video that I found that talks about the inequality of women in the workforce. Women in China who works in the business world actually earns 69% of what their counterparts make. Also promotion is difficult but recently there were changes in how many women are working in the business world and the becoming CEOs. In addition, due to the increase gap of economic wealth between women and men because there are preset discriminatory against female. In China, females are discarded because parents prefer males and this indicate the increase of stay home women, increase of domestic violence, and increase of not having the benefits as their male counterparts.
After watching “Land of the Free, Home of the Poor”. It was shocking to see the reality of our income inequality. I would of liked to have seen more people realize the issue than a bunch of seemingly oblivious drones. Being that I work in the Financial industry it’s easy to see how the rich seem to get richer and those not at the level are stuck struggling just to scrape by.
I especially enjoyed watching “Wealth Inequality in America” since it broke it down in several graphs and images which make it simple to see how skewed income inequality actually is in the U.S. The chart of the U.S. income breakdown is a clear example of Marx’s idea that capitalism causes inequality. Also, since Sweden’s “chart” was among the favorite as an ideal breakdown of income, maybe we should be taking notes as to how they run their society. All in all, it is clear that the U.S. has a major income inequality problem that seems to only be worsening. Hopefully some change is able to occur to relieve the issue.
The videos “Wealth Inequality in America” and “Land of the Free, Home of the Poor” show the unequal distribution of money in the United States. I always understood there was a gap between the top 20% and the bottom 20% however I did not realize it was such a wide gap. I would have fallen in the category of what people “think” it is. The “actual” middle class closely represents what we think “poor” distribution is. Marx’s ideas of a ruling class owning the means of production and a subordinate class that lacks the means of production and the ability to sustain itself without selling its labor power to the ruling class lives on. The statistics are especially surprising, it is jaw dropping to see that 1% of America has 40% of all the nations wealth, and the top 20% holds 84% of wealth! This adds to Marx’s theory of capitalism, we can clearly see how capitalism produces inequalities. A complete equal society in a capitalist nation is unrealistic, however the reality behind the inequalities should produce alarming attention.
The video makes you question the reality and the American Dream. Can we still call America the land of opportunity? The first thing that comes to mind is that the people at the bottom of the social triangle are resistant to work and the people at the top are the ones who have worked hard to reach their wealth. However, the video shows how this is not the case, its unlikely that the CEO is working 380x harder than the average worker. After learning the reality it is amusing to see everyone so confident about what they think the distribution is. Naturally we don’t notice these inequalities on an everyday basis, it seems as if everyone is more or less equal considering the packed malls and designer clothing many people have. The truth of the matter is the inequalities are present and corporate profits continue to grow and the inequalities continue to grow with them.
After learning this information, one thing I wondered is how to overcome this class struggle and reduce the differences and inequalities.
Gilman an early feminist, describes inequality seen in the division of labor. Gilman states that the traditional division of labor is rooted in patriarchy. Patriarchy is the system that which males are the primary authority figure, and all systems of society are based on masculine gender norms. The male has the power over the women, children and property. Men are virtually the breadwinners as where the women stay home to cook, clean and care for the children. According to Gilman this ultimately results in women becoming economically dependent upon men and undermines their freedom.
I believe that the picture above is a great example of how traditional division of labor is rooted in patriarchy. The picture illustrates a mother teaching and reaffirming her daughter that her place is in the kitchen, to stay home and care for her husband and children. She then confirms that there is no room for dreams and aspirations outside of the home ( “Satan’s way of distracting you from making dinner”), because outside the home is the man’s world. This illustration shows the suppression of women’s goals and dreams to act accordingly within the society norm of the traditional division of labor.
Although women have made great strides within the workforce and we rarely see this type of depiction of woman in modern day, there is still an inequality in the division of labor. More women are getting rid of the apron and going to school to become professionals in the workforce, this of course is a great advancement, but women will always have to deal with certain inequality (wages for example) in the workforce due to masculine gender norms that have been deeply rooted within our division of labor.