Author Archives: mstanhop

Female Agency in Constructions of Sexuality

Today we had an interesting discussion on the agency of 👩 in 👨 💓. Whereas 👨 bond over the challenge of remaining 🙅, 👩 are expected to be naturally chaste. 👨 are obliged to regulate 👩 💓 to protect this chastity. I hadn’t considered that heterosexual 💒 represent one 👴 giving a 👩 to another 👨. Now I feel like I should re-examine how other everyday occurrences normalize 👨 💓 & regulate 👩 💓. School/business 👚👖👗, social & 💰 restrictions to obtaining 👩 contraceptives, slut-shaming as a scare tactic… Are there ways Bowdoin as a community regulates 👩 💓? What sort of agency do 👩 have in these situations? Is the only solution to reject outright 💒 ,👚👖👗, etc.?

👩 = woman/women/female

👨 = man/men/male

💓 = sexuality/sexual relationships

🙅 = abstinent

💒 = wedding ceremonies

👚👖👗 = dress codes

💰 = financial

Disabled Masculinities

In class, we 🗨 how ♿ is constructed in opposition to 💪. We ❓ whether this was equally applicable to ♿ 👨 & 👩, and whether the acquisition of a ♿ contributes to a 💪 ‼, or more generally an identity ‼. The gendering of 👩 as passive and the gendered division of 👷 may mean a 👩 hasn’t “failed” as a 👩 if she acquires a ♿. This reminds me of our previous 🗨 about how 👩 may use passivity & submissiveness to assert hegemonic 💄. How can we understand the effects of acquiring a ♿ on how one identifies as a 👩? Does ♿ alter the way people understand 💪 embodied by female 🖐?  Would it act as the compensatory 💄that makes female 💪 non-threatening? Or, could ♿ be constructed as an identity outside of gender?

Key:

🗨= discussed/discussion

♿= disabled/disability

💪 = masculinity

❓= questioned

👨/👩= man/woman

‼= crisis

👷= labor

💄= femininity

🖐= bodies