Just Advocacy?

Women’s rights activists have been searching for evidence of human rights abuse for decades, in attempt to reclaim women’s rights. Across the globe they have been seeking testimonies and additional representation for women, trying to make the world a more welcoming place for women and a better place for all. It has been a long and difficult journey, one that will continue for a long time to come. Many people see or hear of the violence and oppression happening to women elsewhere in the world, and they sympathize with the women who are facing such injustices, but too often do nothing to prevent it. The book “Just Advocacy? Women’s rights, Transitional Feminism, and the Politics of Representation” taught me the importance of being more than just an advocate for a good cause. When I read this book I also learned the importance of doing research and not instantly victimizing women in such situations, as there is always more than one side to a story. In order to come closer to gender equality, women need to have more representation, which in turn can help change policy and also make impacts on cultural level.

 There are different ways that problems of gender inequality can be tackled. When facing the problems in Muslim regions, religion is a large factor to be considered. Many women feel that they have to choose between religion and rights. Women Living Under Muslim Law (WLUML) uses internal advocacy to empower women to understand their rights and options, and help empower themselves to obtain equality. With the tools of knowledge, this well-intentioned organization effectively helps women reject oppression. External advocacy is not as effective for this situation because of the global north’s tendency to lack understanding and have stigma against the Muslim religion, as well as the perceived notions of victimizations towards the Muslim women.

Following 9/11, the political strategy of the U.S. was to depict Afghanistan under the Taliban and al-Qaeda as breeding terror and suppressing the rights of women based on religion, and that these are contrary to American values.  Muslim women, particularly of the Taliban and al-Qaeda, were victimized through these agents of representation. This has caused the oppression of women and terrorism to seem interconnected to viewers, which helped the “war against terrorism” gain more support. This strategy of war politics was completely derived out of self-interest to justify military action, not for the well being of the Afghani women. There are numerous examples of such strategies of representation throughout Bush’s presidency, which promised liberation and a safer civilization through military action. Even when a horrible injustice towards women is seen and understood as problematic, there is often not much done to change it. The U.S. military does provide some aid to women living under the Taliban who have been beaten or sexually assaulted, but that does not prevent the problem from continuing to happen like internal advocacy can.

Prostitution is a global problem that is driven by economic disparities and objectification of women in patriarchal societies. “The commonplace that sex workers or consumers of commercial sex are passive victims of patriarchy assumes a static notion of gender identity attached to victimizations-an injury or wound-and ignores the myriad forces and range of identifications (race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.) that shape human agency and subjectivity.” Only trafficked women are considered to have had their human rights violated, not the majority of women that have gone into prostitution for other reasons. Anti-sex slavery campaigns have been applying their agency on reforming laws and even attempting to abolish prostitution, but they have only had limited success and are in need of greater scales of intervention.

          During WWII, the Japanese government bought women from mostly Korea for “comfort stations” for their military. These women were used as sex slaves, approximately 2,000, and least one-third of them didn’t survive. These women filed a class action suit against the Japanese government for their treatment during WWII.  They demanded an apology, reparation, prosecutions of perpetrators and a commitment to educate successive generations about these crimes against humanity. The year after this suit was filed, the history of WWII sex prisoners hit the international news when two NGO’s brought the issue to the United Nation Commission on Human Rights Sub commission. These trials offered the survivors a way to claim some social justice for what they had suffered. When they returned home they endured social disgrace; many had to be given a new name and they were forbidden to talk about their sex slavery. These trials gave these survivors new identities along with the ability to call their experiences “rape” rather than “prostitution”. Their storytelling also gave a voice to women’s rights, which helped motivate and reconstruct history. As of 2005, when this book was published their has been no official apology from the Japanese prime minister nor any acceptance of legal responsibility for military sexual slavery. A private fund was started for a

Alienation in the Workplace

Lauren Berg

SOC 310

Reading Response #1

10/11/11

Alienation in the Workplace

In the essay Alienated Labor, taken from the Introduction to Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Karl Marx discusses the conditions of the labor market, the effects of labor on the laborers, and issues of money in capitalistic society.  Marx uses many very harsh statements about people working in miserable conditions, where they do not feel a sense of accomplishment and wellbeing from their labor. In many ways, his alienation philosophies still are relevant in today’s society.

            One of my favorite lines from Alienated Labor is that “working just for money--and not for the creative potential of labor itself--is akin to selling your soul”. In modern consumerist society, it seems that a very large amount of the world’s laborers are doing just that. With industrialization and large factories and sweeping across the globe, it is inevitable that people are being disconnected from not only from the people purchasing their product, but disconnected from their labor its self. Increased control over nature has caused an increased amount of alienation within society. The prevalence of alienation in the workplace has grown substantially since prior the industrial revolution. In today’s society the majority of workers are alienated in the workplace, with select few actually enjoying their job.

            As human beings, we spend a very large portion of our lives at work. If we career somewhere that makes us feel alienated and unhappy or unfulfilled, that is a large portion of our lives that we are have to feel that way. People take alienated jobs anyways, just as a way to earn money, because often people don’t have any better options to earn a living.

            The only way to change this unfair system is through the employers. They can give their employees opportunities for personal growth and to learn, they can allow them to interact with each other, and they can pay them a fair wage. The employer has enough power to help make their employees not feel alienated, but most of them choose not to because they are focused on self-interest.

            There are many great examples of alienating workplaces in the world, but I believe one of the most alienating environments to work in are the sweatshops in developing countries. In the film China Blue the story of people working in jean factories is revealed. Teenagers are often economically forced to move from rule regions into a city to search for a job in a sweat factory. They get there with the intentions of making money and sending some home to their families to help them live a better life. Their dream is usually undermined by extremely low wages, long work shifts without overtime pay, and horrible work conditions. They are forced to live in small rooms with many other people, eat horrible food, live under extremely strict rules, and spend the majority of their time in a production line doing the same thing over and over again. They aren’t allowed to socialize with each other while working or they may be punished. They don’t know if their part of the production line is important to end product, which causes them to feel as if their labor is unimportant. They also are not acquainted with any of the costumers, which causes them feel even more disconnected from their labor. To know that people are forced to work under such conditions is a very wretched feeling, but there is no way to stop such factories with consumerism putting such a high demand on them.

The video footage presented in China Blue was an extreme case of alienation in the workplace, but there are an endless amount of other examples of alienation in workplace around the world. In call centers employees are timed for how long it takes them to answer each call. In fast food restaurants costumers often hardly pay any attention to the employees at all. Any place where the employer doesn’t treat the employees with adequate respect, the feeling of alienation is often felt. In an alienated workplace the “worker’s activity is not his spontaneous activity. It belongs to another; it is the loss of his self”(Marx).

Karl Marx was right when he theorized that with an increased amount of control over nature there would be an increased amount of alienation in the workplace. The current trends of global society have caused a large portion people to work in alienating and miserable positions. This is a very big problem for the world. The world is still becoming more developed and less in touch with nature, so alienation is going to become an even larger problem in years to come. With our should and sanity on the line, I feel that it is important that people attempt to revolt against the modernization of the workplace and demand to be treated fairly and to not be alienated. After analyzing this article I have concluded that Karl Marx has developed important theories that are relevant to todays society and are worthwhile to study.

Bibliography

China Blue. 2005. Teddy Bear Films.

Scott A. Appelrouth, and Laura Desfor Edles. Sociological Theory in the Classical Era, Second Edition. Pine Forge. 2010.

Class, Status, Power

Lauren Berg

Reader Response 2

SOC 310

10/20/11

Class, Status, Power

            In the paper The Distribution of Power Within the Political Community: Class, Status, Power, Max Weber critiqued past theories on economic determinism arguing that social stratification is not based completely on economics. He believed that social stratification was based more on a person’s status and power in the society. Weber believed that the wealth a person obtains is not directly related to the amount of social and political power they have. He believed that person could have power and dominance over a more wealthy person because of their social status. Weber’s theory is believable in some situations, but is not valid in many arenas of today’s contemporary world.

            The United States power system is based on legal authority. Looking at who has power from a legal standpoint, it is obviously the republicans and democrats who are highest on the government’s hierarchy of authority. That is, the president, the people of the senate, the house, congress, generals, the secretory of state, etc. These people make important decisions that are enforced throughout the country affecting everyone. These are the people who should have the most status and political power in our country, but do they? Quite frankly, I believe that a large amount of business owners, CEOs, television stars, and even drug lords have more power than government officials do.

            Warrant Buffet is a great example of a wealthy person who has shown dominance over people of higher social status. He has made a huge fortune through his business partnerships and investing in stocks, and has used his money to exercise power and dominance. Buffet is not as well known to the general public as one may think the third richest man in the world would be. He doesn’t have a great amount of status, but he certainly does have a great amount of power. For an example of how he exercises his power, he has defended a bill to tax the rich to the point that it became to be known as the “Buffet Bill”. Anyone that has an U.S. national bill named after them obviously has power. He also has helped finance Barak Obamas election, he was the finical advisor for Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and has been heavily involved in politics for a

long time. Buffet is one of the top decision makers for our government, and he isn’t even a government official. The example of Warren Buffet directly contradicts Max Weber’s theory of class status and power, because it proves the power of class and economics over the political and social spheres.

            Most celebrities, on the other hand do not completely contradict Weber’s theory of class, status, and power. Oprah Winfrey is extremely rich and powerful, but her power does not come from her money alone. She has a great status among the people of the U.S. and the world mostly because of her talk show. She has such a great status that many people idolize her, buying any book or facial product that she recommends and gobbling up her advise as if it is fact rather than opinion. She is a loveable person that has great power because of social status, not because of her wealth. Some even argue that it is because of her great social status that Obama was elected into presidency instead of Hillary Clinton. She is a very influential person because of her status; if she says that something is good or bad, people tend believe her. So Winfrey and a handful of other celebrities are examples that reinforce Weber’s theory, but that isn’t enough to prove it to be correct.

            Wall Street and stock markets are specifically economical industries, in which the fate of the economy of the U.S. is determined and the entire global economy is affected. Mostly greedy old men, who are looking out for themselves rather than the welfare of the economy, run Wall Street. There have numerous issues and scandals with this system, because the people who run Wall Street are seeking and gaining power for themselves rather than running the stock exchange fairly. The people that run Wall Street don’t have a good social status, but they do have a lot of money and power.

            It seems to me that it is the people who have money who are the most influential, powerful and dominating in the political arena. Sure it is true that having a good social status helps a person gain power, but I do not feel that it does so as well as having wealth. The phrase “money talks” I feel is definitely true in the political sphere, as it is the billionaires and the large corporations who are the ones funding elections, bribing politicians, and protecting their self interests. It is true that good social status gives people, such as Oprah Winfrey, power, but it is also true that money gives people power. I do not completely disagree with Max Weber’s theories of class, status, and power, but I do not think that it applies to contemporary America as well as it did in Weber’s time and age.