Gender in Victorian Britain – Lecture notes for Sep. 30, 2014

by   •   Academics
 

This post is over 9 years old and may contain information that is incorrect, outdated, or no longer relevant.
My views and opinions can change, and those that are expressed in this post may not necessarily reflect the ones I hold today.
 

History 364-0-01: Gender and Sexuality in Victorian Britain; Northwestern University, Fall 2014

Prostitution and the Child Prostitution Scandal, Day 1

  • Rape is the forced penetration of the female sex organ by a male sex organ, but in Victorian times, the female must prove that she physically struggled throughout the event
    • This is why there was some form of chloroform or opiate involved – because she can’t physically struggle (it wasn’t only to protect them)
    • It was nearly impossible for a woman to accuse her husband of rape because, in Victorian language, it is assumed that a woman gives consent through marriage
  • The age of consent is the age at which a woman can legally consent to sexual activity; in the 1880s, the age of consent in Victorian Britain is 13
    • Stead refers to 13-year-olds as children and wants to increase this age to 16; he and his allies are furious because this legislation has been dormant
  • “Victorians Uncovered,” a British docu-drama
    • There were brothels that specifically catered to men who liked children
    • It was a sexual fantasy to take a virgin, and it was considered safe from diseases (some believed the myth that it would cure the man of other diseases)
    • The aristocratic members of the parliament declined increasing the age of consent because they thought male privilege was being challenged
    • Children were kidnapped off the streets and imprisoned in brothels
    • Stead believed the wealthy were being abusive because wealth is power and poverty is weakness
    • Those who engaged in child prostitution believed that it wasn’t rape, it was a contractual exchange of a child’s virginity in return for cash
    • Stead required more evidence, so he decided he needed to go into the underground, where people saw as the place corruption festered
    • Stead posed as an aristocratic libertine with an interest in children in order to research; at first he was uncomfortable, but became more accustomed to the environment
    • Stead was fully committed to exposing all the details of the exchange, but in the process, became more drawn to the exchange
    • A warning was included in the newspaper letting people know that they should not read the newspaper if they are not ready to get shocked, and advised men to keep it away from their wives and children; this warning only increased the value of the sensation
    • The publication enraged members of the establishment and they tried to cover up what was revealed
    • A lot of people included in the publication disliked how they were portrayed in the article
    • One person who was particularly insulted was the mother of the girl that Stead had purchased for 5 pounds, and he underestimated how far she would go to protect her reputation
    • Although Stead followed through with the entire purchase process of the girl, he did not engage in sex; he did this to demonstrate the entire process that is done
    • Stead returned the girl he had purchased for the publication, but that didn’t stop people from wanting him prosecuted; he was convicted of assaulting the girl and sentenced to 3 months in prison
    • He was treated as a class-war prisoner
    • Five years later, he discovered he was a spiritualist; radical journalism and spiritualism don’t go well together
    • Stead thought the end was near, and it happened on the Titanic; he helped others get onto rescue boats, but didn’t try to help himself as he accepted his death that he had anticipated

 

—§—

 

Gender in Victorian Britain – Lecture notes for Sep. 23, 2014

by   •   Academics
 

This post is over 9 years old and may contain information that is incorrect, outdated, or no longer relevant.
My views and opinions can change, and those that are expressed in this post may not necessarily reflect the ones I hold today.
 

History 364-0-01: Gender and Sexuality in Victorian Britain; Northwestern University, Fall 2014

Introduction, Day 1

  • Alexandrina Victoria (1814-1901)
    • Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (1837-1901)
      • Most of the men think she’s going to be a pushover because she is so young, but she ends up being intelligent
      • She was very protected during her childhood by her mother – she had to sleep in the same bedroom as her mother until she became queen
      • Once she became queen, she worked to diminish her mother’s power in court
    • Empress of India (1876)
      • India was considered to be the jewel in the Imperial Crown
      • The queen was in love with India, even though she had never visited
      • India was a huge source of wealth
    • Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha
      • Alexandrina married her cousin Albert
      • Alexandrina married out of love, but Albert expected power share
      • She has nine children spaced out at about once every two years
      • It was considered improper for the queen to even know about birth control
      • In 1861, in his 40s, Albert died, possibly from typhoid
      • The eldest son went against the grain

 

—§—

 

Response to Tolman’s “Dilemmas of Desire” (2002)

by   •   Academics
 

This post is over 10 years old and may contain information that is incorrect, outdated, or no longer relevant.
My views and opinions can change, and those that are expressed in this post may not necessarily reflect the ones I hold today.
 

Here’s another paper I wrote for my adolescent development in social contexts class for your reading pleas­ure.

The assignment was to write a response paper as a reflection on one of the class readings. The content of the response paper is pretty open ended: “they may be a critical response to or exploration of a portion of the readings, a comparison of the issues raised in two or more readings, or an analysis of reading in light of broader issues that have been discussed in class.”

In “Geographies of Desire,” a chapter of the 2002 publication Dilemmas of Desire: Teenage Girls Talk about Sexuality, Deborah L. Tolman addresses the differences among perceptions of sexuality between teenage girls who grew up in urban and suburban areas. One of the primary overarching themes is that most teenage girls in both environments are conscious about themes of sexuality, and act in ways that demonstrate their understanding of the consequences and implications of engaging in sexual activity. They also showed that they were not naïve of sexual violence, and those who have experienced personal cases of sexual violence in the past have changed how they feel about sexuality in response to the encoun­ter.

One particular thing that stood out to me in the article is how the interviewed teenage girls responded to male sexual aggression: “virtually all of the girls held themselves responsible for what occurs in heterosexual relationships, especially sexual events; with the exception of Paulina, few in either group held boys or men accountable for their sexual aggression” (172). I was surprised to read this as their response, as I generally believed most people were split about half-and-half between blaming the victim and blaming the aggressor, with some holding a balanced position between the two.

During my time as an undergraduate student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, there was a widely publicized case of some fraternity members raping a young woman. This set off a movement that resulted in some people blowing the case out of proportion and attempting to force penectomies onto sexually aggressive males. These two cases – the teenage girls taking full responsibility, and the witch hunters placing fully responsibility on the males – seem to be the two extreme ends of the argument. Although it’s generally a good idea to let the over-enthused demonstrators do what they want and attempt to ignore them, I feel like letting the teenage girls maintain their current thoughts is not a good idea, and those who act as guidance figures to them should make sure they don’t feel they are fully responsible in the case that they are raped.

When explaining the concept of who is at fault at rape, I like to make comparisons to other crimes that are less stigmatic to the victim, such as theft. For example, a teenage girl might leave her purse and other belong­ings exposed and unattended in a public location while she goes to get a snack at the vending machine. Upon her return, she realizes that her belong­ings have been stolen. In this situation, it is important to understand that the teenage girl is partially at fault because she should have been more cautious with her belongings. How­ever, it is also important to understand that the criminal is also at fault, because (s)he should not be stealing in the first place and has committed an immoral act. Tolman’s findings during the interview with the teenage girls suggests that, in a situation like this theft, the girls only blame themselves for being careless, and do not think about blaming the criminal for being a bad person.

It is vital for sexual health educators to implement this into their curriculum because teenage girls who experience sexual violence have shown signs of long-term sexual health damage: “suburban girls who had not reported sexual violence were almost six times more likely [than urban girls] to tell a narrative about their own desire with a central theme of pleasure” (182). By ensuring that victimized girls understand that they can safely blame the perpetrator, rather than keeping all the blame to themselves, it will allow them to achieve a level of absolution and comfort that will help them mature in a more positive direction.

In summary, I was surprised that the girls Tolman interviewed for her piece did not have a clear perspective on who is at fault in a case of rape. I feel it is important for educators to instill into teenagers the ability to form a balanced judgment about the level of guilt of both parties. I believe this improved awareness will lead to better sexual health, as well as a decreased likelihood that a case of sexual violence will cause harmful long-term effects on sexuality.

 

—§—

 

Response to Steinberg’s “We know some things…” (2001)

by   •   Academics
 

This post is over 10 years old and may contain information that is incorrect, outdated, or no longer relevant.
My views and opinions can change, and those that are expressed in this post may not necessarily reflect the ones I hold today.
 

I wrote this paper for my adolescent development in social contexts class, and decided to throw it up here.

The assignment was to write a response paper as a reflection on one of the class readings. The content of the response paper is pretty open ended: “they may be a critical response to or exploration of a portion of the readings, a comparison of the issues raised in two or more readings, or an analysis of reading in light of broader issues that have been discussed in class.”

The article to which I decided to respond is “We know some things: Parent-adolescent relationships in retrospect and prospect,” a 2001 work written by Laurence Steinberg, published in the Journal of Research on Adolescence. In his piece, he reviews the most important research done in the past 25 years in the realm of adolescent development in the family context – what’s considered a normal relationship, how variations in relationships affect the family, and how parents and other adolescent guardians can learn from this research.

One of the topics Steinberg covers is the changes of family relationships adolescents and their parents experience as a result of conflict. He states that many adolescents, and even professional adolescence researchers, believe these conflicts are trivial, and don’t have much of a lasting impact on their relationship. This appears to be true for adolescents, as they seem (on a long-term scale) unaffected and unbothered by these tiffs, but their parents seem to have a harder time moving on from these fights.

When looking closer at these types of fights, Steinberg concludes that the subject of these fights is perceived differently by the parent and the adolescent: “to a parent, maintaining a clean room is something that people do because it is the right thing to do … to the adolescent, how one keeps one’s room is one’s own business” (6). Thus, parents believe they are arguing about morals, while adolescents believe they are arguing about opinions and preferences.

After reading this, I was able to see a clear connection with another work, “How Not to Teach Morality,” from William Kilpatrick’s 1992 publication Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right from Wrong. After explaining different strategies of moral instruction, Kilpatrick implies in his conclusion that the best way to teach morality is to take what’s right and essentially command children to follow by those guidelines. He also says that this is particularly important for parents because they care the most about their children, while others (including school teachers and the adolescents themselves) don’t necessarily agree with this method because teachers think it’s good for adolescents to engage in Socratic thinking, and adolescents perceive thought-provoking teachers as more fun than teachers who just tell them what to do.

Linking this back to Steinberg, it appears like the parents of adolescents he studied to come to the difference-in-perception conclusion are already employing Kilpatrick’s recom­mended method of moral instruction. However, the core of the problem seems to come from two different sources – first that adolescents refuse to agree that learning by simply obeying commands is beneficial to them, and second that adolescents do not yet understand that these concepts pertain morals and not preferences. Although the first source may be difficult to fix, we may find progress by attacking the second source and being explicit with the adolescents that these matters, no matter how strongly may believe otherwise, do not pertain to opinions, but are instead ways of the society in which they live.

Moving on, at the end of his article, Steinberg addresses the practical and real-world application of the content of his article in the section “Implications for Policy and Practice.” He shares his findings: “parents state that they want information on how to keep their teenagers healthy, but they often do not have access to the best and most scientifically grounded advice. … Misinformation and erroneous stereotypes about adolescence fill bookstores, flood the Internet, and dominate portrayals of teenagers and their parents in the [media]” (15). Although I agree that there is lots of deceptive and incorrect information available, I strongly disagree that parents “do not have access” to good information – instead, I believe the best information is in plain availability if parents know where to look.

Steinberg states that a solution to this would be to develop a “systematic, large-scale, multifaceted, and ongoing public health campaign to educate parents about adolescence that draw on the collective resources and expertise of health care professionals, scientists, governmental agencies, community organizations, schools, religious institutions, and the mass media” (16). However, I feel as if this education is already readily available, but parents are not taking advantage of it. For example, going to the non-fiction section of a library will net plenty of books written by well-known developmental psychologists; searching through local community college course listings will yield affordable parenting classes taught by those who have earned doctorate degrees in their respective fields.

As a result, I believe the better option to address this problem is to inform parents about how to use these already-available resources and why their use is important. For example, health professionals can offer parents lists of books, Internet articles, and videos that accurately outline adolescent development when the parents take their adolescent to the doctor’s office for a check-up. They could also attach some information letting parents know that their adolescent is undergoing natural biological and psychological changes, these changes will affect their relationship, and learning about these changes using the resources provided in the list will greatly improve the transition of adolescence. These two methods will address both parents who believe there is no good information available, and parents who believe adolescence is a myth.

In summary, Steinberg takes the most important recent research and compiles it into a cohesive article outlining changes in family relationships during adolescence. The two aspects I analyzed were how small arguments are indicative of perceptual differences in terms of morals and preferences, and how parents can be better equipped to deal with the troubles that arise during their child’s period of adolescence. Overall, the best solution seems to be clear communication – communicating with adolescents to let them know of their parents’ thought processes and intentions, and communicating with parents to let them know of their children’s change.

 

—§—

 

Course Notes for History 315-2: The U.S. since 1900, the Mid-20th Century

by   •   Academics
 

This post is over 10 years old and may contain information that is incorrect, outdated, or no longer relevant.
My views and opinions can change, and those that are expressed in this post may not necessarily reflect the ones I hold today.
 

History 315-2: The U.S. since 1900, the Mid-20th Century; Fall 2013, Northwestern University

September 30, 2013: “The Crisis of the Old Order”

  • Parents were not able to find work to feed their children, an this happened during a time when it was supposed to be impossible for it to happen
  • People like Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Morgan made the United States competitive with others on the Western belt
  • The genius of American Industrialization is taking outside technology and mass producing it
  • Ford mass produced a consumer good, the vehicle – products that nobody had and nobody actually needs
  • American industrial system: making and selling products that nobody needs t live, but becomes so convenient that people become unable to live without it (ex. iPads, vehicles)
  • This created the middle class where people could become financially successful and purchase large homes to fill it with stuff
  • An expanding industrial system penetrates into areas that haven’t been industrialized and gathers from the periphery
  • Small shop owners, such as shoe makers, become outclassed by industrialization because they cannot keep up with mass production
  • Consequentially, people move from the periphery into the core, where the jobs are
  • Working conditions were poor, and work would be relentless
  • Thousands died per year on the job, and those who got injured rarely even got compensated
  • Job security was catastrophic instability
  • People frequently purchased burial insurance because it would be embarrassing to have a family member die and not be able to afford to bury them
  • Employees were able to form unions, but employers were able to stop them, and the power usually swung in favor of employers; they were able to easily shut down strikes
  • Race was color coded and the lines were rigid, ex. slaves were not able to leave slavery
  • Within five years after the Civil War, and the passing of the amendments, slaves, once considered property, now had equal rights as their former masters
  • There was a counter-revolution that created legal restrictions segregating white and colored people; it created a physical separation – it was separate, but equal
  • These were violations of the amendments
  • Blacks were not able to use the legal system to change the laws because they didn’t have access to the legal system
  • The point of this segregation was public, ritualized humiliation of colored people, while white people feel empowered (even if they have no real power)
  • Lynching was the public ritualized murder of blacks, involving mutilation and torture; whites were able to demonstrate their superiority through barbarism
  • Progressives used the Federal government’s power to check the abuses of the industrial system
  • World War I resulted in the slaughter of a million men due to how mechanized slaughter had become
  • A 14-year-old black boy got stoned to death for swimming in white people’s water
  • The Steel Strike of 1919 caused people from the south moving north into the core
  • It took the racial problems of the south and moved them up north
  • Andrew Mellon represented Wall Street and made his fortune by being the financial treasurer for Carnegie; his “trickle-down” method encouraged business investment that would expand, and was accomplished with tax cuts
  • Income ended up trickling up, and became more concentrated in the top who were already wealthy
  • The Ku Klux Klan had immense government power, and disliked all outsiders; they burned down minority neighborhoods, like Tulsa (1923)
  • People in autumn of 1929 began to sell and withdraw investments, which caused a panic, resulting in more people wanting to sell; this caused financial markets to freeze up
  • Corporations couldn’t make income because they couldn’t sell products, had no investments, and couldn’t get loans; so, they lay off workers, who can no longer spend, which accelerates the cycle
  • This cycle was the Great Depression, mainly caused by overproduction
  • From 1929 –> 1932: GNP, $104B –> $74B; real investment, $16B –> $0.3 B; unemployment: 3.2% –> 25%

October 02, 2013: “Nothing to Fear”

  • Mussolini attempted to create the opposite of communism nationalism
  • The template for the answer was fascism
  • In 1922, Mussolini toppled the Italian government and set himself as the new dictator
  • Japanese militarism in performance: …
  • Hitler’s party was on the teeter-totter of being a terrorist group; its main theme was racism, which led to genocide. The officials engaged in street violence, picking fights with German communists
  • The Ku Klux Klan was the closest thing to a fascist movement, but fell apart after its leader’s conviction of a sex crime, undermining their message
  • Ford Hunger March (1932): people marched for Ford to open jobs. Police told them to turn back; when they didn’t, police opened fire
  • There were 50,000 marchers at the funeral procession
  • Bonus Army (spring 1932): veterans of World War I started marching and finding illegal rides to go to Washington, D.C. and demand their money early; 20k veterans showed up at Washington, D.C.
  • The House moved the bill up to the Senate. The 20k veterans death marched in circles around the capitol building. The Senate turned them down
  • The veterans stayed there in tents, so the army was assigned to clear the area; the U.S. army burned the camp to the ground
  • The Senate turned them down because this was extra expenses that were not balanced into the budget; it was due to be paid out in 1945, not 1932
  • Roosevelt was a progressive who believed industrialism could be reformed through application of government power
  • Wilson believed the U.S. was powerful enough to be a part of international affairs
  • If countries form economic ties, they gain political stability
  • Wilsonians believed the U.S. needed ot bring democratic ideals into the world
  • Roosevelt got polio and couldn’t walk. When he felt physically capable, he ran for political power in New York, and year later in 1933, he was inaugurated a president
  • Roosevelt said that if Congress doesn’t act, he will have to take emergency powers, but that’s not what happened
  • The New Deal is a set of coherent and patterned programs; it was a progressive idea of the government to intervene in the economy and do things that businessmen were not doing to help recover the economy
  • The businessmen were unappreciative because they were used to a booming economy, while Roosevelt was dealing with a failing economy
  • Employment programs (PWA, WPA, CCC, NYA): the government employed people, and they gave them a wage so they would spend it
  • Agricultural Adjustment Act: farmers don’t make enough money and were prone to overproduction, so AAA paid farmers not to produce crops so the scarcity increases
  • Social Security Act: at 65, you can retire and the government pays you a pension; it was politically marketed as a pension plan instead of you paying old people
  • National Labor Relations Act: it became illegal for employers to stop people from forming unions; the object of this was to give employees more power, give them higher wages, and more spending money
  • Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: encouraged people to use banks and show it is safe, by insuring bank deposits
  • Glass-Steagall Act: restricted what banks could do with the money
  • The Federal Electrification Plan brought electricity to the countryside to connect them and make industry enter those areas
  • Federal Housing Act: purchasing a house in the 1920s required 50% down payment and five-year repayment, or multiple mortgages; this act extended repayment to 30 years and down payment to 20%, allowing normal Americans to purchase houses
  • Home Owner’s Loan Corporation also contributed to the above
  • Unemployment rate, 1933-1937: 25.2% –> 22% –> 20% –> 17% –> 14.3%; it is still depression-level, but massive progress from 25%
  • Ordinary Americans loved the New Deal because they saw that the government cared about them

October 04, 2013: “Nothing to Fear”

  • Neighborhoods in Chicago were divided by race
  • The church attempted to organize the community into something immigrants were used to
  • Employers attempted to create tension among communities; if employees went on strike, they would bring in strike breakers
  • The employers created ethnic, racial, geographic, language, and other barriers to make the labor movement fail; it was not a problem of poor leadership
  • Progressivism aims to create an ideology that capitalism can be good for workers, and introduces a more democratic aspect
  • Movies are a part of mass culture that bring people together with a common frame of reference, because they were all watching the same thing
  • Radio was a way for family to come together and be a part of the greater community, and was accessible to lower-income families
  • Mass communication becomes a unifier for working-class people in Chicago
  • National party participation: people begin to vote because they are brought aware to the issues due to mass culture and communication, and contributed because they felt the government cared for them
  • The Great Depression brought people together through struggle
  • Critique: the narrative was oversimplified because it doesn’t address all of the unresolved tensions; the author takes being white for granted
  • The narrative acts less as a national overview, but more as a case study for Chicago
  • “Taking whiteness for granted”: not fully explaining what being white in the 1920s in Chicago meant; it wasn’t fully contextualized

 

—§—

 

Adolescent Development in Social Contexts – Notes for Sep. 30, 2013

by   •   Academics
 

This post is over 10 years old and may contain information that is incorrect, outdated, or no longer relevant.
My views and opinions can change, and those that are expressed in this post may not necessarily reflect the ones I hold today.
 

MSEd 404: Adolescent Development in Social Context; Fall 2013, Northwestern University

“Adolescence: The View from Here”

  • Emerging adulthood is the in-between of adolescence and adulthood; it takes the role of what adolescence was to childhood and adulthood
  • It is vitally important for teachers of adolescents to feel like adults
  • “Being adult” – the checklist – does not matter for teaching
  • Feeling and being seen as an adult is important; people who don’t fall under these categories have more trouble with their classes
  • In mentoring, you cannot help someone develop past where you have already developed
  • Development is socially and culturally mediated
  • Adolescents need adults who have something to share with them other than their curriculum
  • Norms exist everywhere and are what actually happen
  • Assignment: what would be an ideal class? What norms (from the list) would make this class possible; which are the most important ones?
  • Spacks talks about two myths: youth is the period of liveliness, and adolescents rae dangerous because they are still ruled by passion instead of reason

 

—§—