Feminism and Fierce Sexuality: The Real Talk Behind Ginny & Georgia

Posted on by kapatel

The Netflix series Ginny & Georgia follows the complicated relationship between 15-year-old biracial teen Ginny Miller and her free-spirited, thirty-something mother, Georgia, as they settle in a picturesque New England town after years of being on the run. The show delves into themes of identity, family secrets, and social dynamics as both Ginny and Georgia search for their place in the world. Ginny grapples with her sense of belonging, wrestling with issues of race and the pressures of adolescence, while Georgia is determined to secure a better future for her family by any means necessary, even resorting to murder on various occasions. Beneath its surface drama, the series also offers an exploration of feminism and sexuality, highlighting how both characters challenge or conform to societal expectations around gender roles.

One of the show’s central themes is how both characters confront and challenge societal expectations of femininity and womanhood. Georgia embodies a pragmatic, survival-driven form of feminism, using her femininity and sexuality as tools to navigate a patriarchal world. While her methods are morally complex—sometimes involving manipulation or unethical decisions—Georgia’s actions reflect the reality of a single mother who has faced abuse and poverty. In the show, after witnessing her older, wealthy husband Kenny sexually assault Ginny, Georgia poisons him with wolfsbane in his protein shake. As he is on his way to work, he goes into cardiac arrest mimicking a heart attack. Georgia plays the poor, helpless widow at the funeral and later takes the inheritance to start a new life with her family. Her ability to use her circumstances to protect her family demonstrates a form of agency that can be seen as feminist, even as it challenges conventional ideas of empowerment. In society, feminism is often misconstrued as opposing traditional roles like being a family woman, while womanhood and motherhood are generally viewed as making women dependent on their male counterparts. As a young, single mother, Georgia defies traditional views on motherhood, embodying a fiercely protective, self-sufficient, and self-sacrificing matriarch. Her complicated morality, especially when she resorts to questionable means to safeguard her family, raises questions about what it means to be a feminist mother, blurring the lines between survival, empowerment, and ensuring her children do not face the same gendered oppressions she has.

Ginny reflects a more intersectional form of feminism. As a biracial teenager, she navigates the complexities of race, identity, and gender, with her feminism shaped by a growing awareness of social justice issues. Ginny’s journey is deeply intertwined with her struggles for self-expression and navigating the intersections of privilege and oppression. Her experiences offer a lens into the challenges that young women today face as they navigate their evolving sense of self within societal expectations. The biracial daughter of Georgia (a white woman) and Zion (a Black man), Ginny often feels like she does not fully belong in either the Black or white community. Georgia, despite her own struggles, represents a kind of privilege Ginny feels disconnected from. Ginny’s internal conflict around race becomes evident when she critiques Georgia for not understanding what it is like to be a person of color. Her relationship with Zion adds further tension, as he encourages her to more fully embrace her Black identity, leaving Ginny torn between the worlds of her two parents. The show explores code-switching as Ginny tries to navigate her biracial identity, feeling out of place among her white peers who dismiss or fetishize her Blackness, while also feeling distanced from the Black community due to her lighter skin and upbringing in white spaces. To highlight this, the show has Ginny straighten her hair as a symbol of her conformity to her predominantly white upbringing and high school environment. Further, in the scene depicted above, Ginny’s teacher praises her essay stating that it “speaks to her lived experience.” This moment highlights how Ginny feels tokenized and singled out because of her race, which leads to her outburst about being more than her skin color or background. The rest of the show goes deeper into how Ginny learns to express her identity authentically, challenging the societal norms that impose strict definitions of race and womanhood.

Both Ginny and Georgia also explore their sexualities in ways that reflect their generational differences and personal circumstances. Georgia’s use of her sexuality to manipulate men for protection and advancement brings up questions about the intersection of sexuality and power. While her actions could reinforce stereotypes of women using sex for gain, the show frames her choices as a form of survival in a world that often exploits women’s bodies and desires. Through flashbacks in the show, it is revealed that Georgia marries several wealthy men as a way to gain financial security. Georgia shows that she is conscious of the benefits her sexuality and charm bring to her by using them as tools for survival and upward mobility. Of note, her most recent love interest Paul is the mayor of the town she recently moved to. Georgia seduces him knowing that a powerful figure like him would provide security and social standing in their town. Georgia’s use of sexuality can thus be seen as both empowering and problematic, as it simultaneously challenges and reinforces harmful stereotypes about women and sex.

Ginny, on the other hand, experiences her sexual identity as typical of many teenagers, marked by confusion, experimentation, and self-discovery. In the media, young girls exploring their sexuality are often portrayed as engaging in dangerous or morally wrong behavior, typically accompanied by negative consequences. They are frequently criticized and shamed for their actions, while young boys are celebrated and glorified for engaging in similar behaviors. Simultaneously, the exploration of sexuality at a young age has become more normalized, and those who choose not to participate in it are often viewed as unusual or out of step with societal expectations. Ginny’s relationships with Marcus and Hunter, her two main love interests in the show, reflect the fluidity of sexual identity in contemporary discourse, while showcasing different dynamics of teenage relationships, including emotional intimacy and issues of consent and power. Ginny and Marcus, both sexually inexperienced, quickly form a deep connection, which they solidify physically early on. Their relationship remains secret for much of the first season, but when it eventually comes to light, it becomes the center of high school gossip, with people fixating on the drama and misunderstandings surrounding them. With Hunter, Ginny also faces criticism. While Hunter is well-liked and praised by many, Ginny struggles internally, feeling as though their relationship is not entirely authentic. She often questions whether she is with Hunter because it is what she is “supposed” to do. Overall, both relationships reflect different pressures young girls feel as they try to figure out who they are sexually.

Can a Girlboss really be a Tradwife?

Posted on by nimasterman

Growing up my own mother was a stay-at-home mom and she worked incredibly hard. More importantly, she chose that lifestyle when she and my dad decided to have children. I am beyond grateful and extraordinarily privileged to have had a mother who was at home when I got home from school, around to take me to sports practices, and take care of me when I was sick.

Picture of a social media tradwife, posting for her followers

One day when scrolling on Instagram, I was introduced to the term tradwife. On the left is a screenshot of a similar video, where a woman promoting to her followers to be guided by her actions, which were aimed at a more “traditional” view of what a woman should be doing.First of all, this post is pushing heteronormative ideology onto the following, assuming that a wife is dolling herself up for a husband. Language like “doll” is derogatory towards women, assuming that they need to alter their appearance just for their significant other. Additionally, assuming the husband is coming home from work emphasizes patriarchal societal standards.

According to Google, a “tradwife (a neologism for traditional wife or traditional housewife) is a woman who believes in and practices traditional gender roles and marriages.” Traditional refers to performing actions like women did in the 20th century, when they were seen primarily as caretakers and cooks for the family.

This view seems to be backwards from the modern 21st century view on what women are capable of doing both as mothers and as professionals. In no way do I think that it is bad or wrong to want to be a tradwife but, there is one issue I have with them and that is what the article The Surprising Convergence of Girlbosses and Tradwives aims to convey.

Example of the style of women tradwives are attempting to replicate

This article links the tradwife to the girlboss, which is a woman who is hyperfocused on her career. You might be asking how would a tradwife, a woman who is primarily taking care of her husband, children, and house, also be able to be a girlboss? Well, like my introduction to tradwives, many opt to film their tasks or thoughts and post them on social media. The article states that being a tradwife in modern society is nothing like the 20th century lifestyle.

“We might assume that tradwives hearken back to an earlier “backward” mode of femininity and marriage. But this way of being in the world is unmistakably modern because it involves “choice” and entrepreneurship. It is not enough for a tradwife to simply focus on her husband and kids, she must be entrepreneurial about it. She must blog about it, vlog about it, become an influencer. This is where the “girlboss” mentality comes in.”

(The Surprising Convergence of Girlbosses and Tradwives 2024)

The quote above highlights another aspect where modern tradwives are problematic. As soon as a tradwife becomes an influencer, her main objective has moved from caring for a family to influencing their following and pushing their ideals onto others. Because these women chose to utilize social media and display to the world their ideal way of life, they are using their influence as a powerful tool. They still attempt to attain the unrealistic beauty standards that are concurrent with the “backward” mode of femininity, yet they feel the need to post about it on social media as well. Social media tradwives, like the one in the screenshot before, preach putting family above all else, but at what point does the necessity to cater to a following dictate the actions of an influencer? Moreover, the need to both be entrepreneurs and caretakers and mothers takes away crucial time and energy necessary for each role. Being a social media influencer takes the demands of a full-time job by having to record, re-record, edit videos, brainstorm new ideas, etc. To balance those demands with the already strenuous lifestyle of taking care of a family is counterproductive.

I think that this article is a great read for those that care about the portrayals and standards of women in modern society. It highlights the backwards thinking of social media tradwives, who inherently believe in strong family centric and patriarchal values, but still feel compelled to post their lifestyle on social media. The article dives further into the reasons many women have to become tradwives, especially for women of color. The article cites black tradwives as saying, “we have decided it’s way too exhausting to run the family and corporate America at the same time” (Girlbosses and Tradwives 2024). There is definitely truth to this statement, especially since women of color are valued less in the labor market. For these women, who are paid less and discriminated against in the corporate workplace, the appeal to live as a tradwife is apparent.

Overall, the overlap between tradwife and girlboss is a real phenomenon in the modern age of social media. But when and where is the blurry line drawn between the two labels and at what point do the goals of and priorities of one overtake the other?

“Real” Men: How Toxic Masculinity Factors into HBO’s Euphoria

Posted on by matate

The HBO series Euphoria often comes up in discussions about contemporary representations of queerness, specifically trans representation, because one of the main characters, Jules, is a trans character played by a trans actress named Hunter Schafer. Jules is one of the few characters I have seen on screen who is a trans person played by a trans actor/actress, instead of a cis person playing someone who is trans or vice versa, so I think that her character deserves all of the recognition she receives. However, the aspect of the show I want to focus on, which is actually intertwined with Jules and her plotline, is the strain of toxic masculinity surrounding queerness that we see portrayed by the Jacobs family: Nate Jacobs and his father, Cal. 

First, Nate. Nate Jacobs is, I think, one of the most complicated characters in the entire show. Upon encountering him for the first time, it’s easy to assume that he is a typical straight man – he is in a hetero relationship with a girl named Maddy, and his preferences in women are detailed, extremely hetero-normative, and in alignment with the typical female beauty standard; slim shoulders, painted nails, full lips, high heels, lack of body hair, et cetera. However, there are aspects of Nate’s sexuality that are hidden from most of the people in his life. Maddy, his girlfriend, finds several explicit photos of male genitalia on his phone, and he also uses a gay dating app where he starts an online relationship with Jules towards the beginning of season one. He uses a pseudonym, “Tyler,” while knowing Jules’ true identity, and Jules sends him nude photographs of herself. 

Jules also has sexual relations with Cal, Nate’s dad, in season one, episode one of the show. She told him she was older than she was and he secretly filmed their encounter. When she and Nate finally meet in person two episodes later, Nate blackmails Jules with the nude photos she had sent him, telling her not to tell anyone both about his dad and about their relationship. He is also very aggressive towards her, almost as if his attraction for her angers him because he doesn’t view her as a “real” woman. Jules tells him, “I think you’re a f***ing f*ggot, just like your daddy,” which he responds to by grabbing and yanking on her hair and then storming off.

The above photo is Nate and Jules. This is the scene where Nate reveals his true identity to Jules and blackmails her, and you can see that she’s crying (season 1, episode 4).

This brings us to Cal Jacobs. In season 2 of the show, the writers delve into Cal’s backstory; most importantly, his relationship with his high school best friend, Derek. Derek and Cal are both on the wrestling team, they spend every day together, and Cal feels like he can “talk to Derek about anything,” or “just sit in silence. They were that close.” On one of the last nights of the summer before they go to college, Derek insists they spend one more fun night together, just the two of them. They drive together to a bar out of town, which has mostly male patrons. Cal notices one of them touch another on the shoulder, and he and Derek down three shots each. Derek then puts a song on the jukebox, “Never Tear Us Apart” by INXS, and they start dancing. It’s friendly and performative at first, but as the song goes on, Derek pulls Cal into a hug, then looks into his eyes and kisses him. They hold each other and we see that Cal is crying. 

The lyrics of the song that’s playing are “Don’t ask me what you know is true – don’t have to tell you, I love your precious heart.”  I think this represents how Cal and Derek feel about each other; there is an unspoken love and mutual understanding between them, and they matter to each other more than anyone else in the world. However, they both feel the pressures of a heteronormative world and they know they can never be together. In the culture of sports, in their families, and during that time (the 1980s), there is an immense amount of pressure to conform to the standard of a straight, cis man who doesn’t often show his emotions. As they embrace, Cal is crying and he nods to Derek, as if to acknowledge the strength of their love but also to acknowledge that there is no way for them to actually be together. 

This is the scene of Derek and Cal’s first kiss (season 2, episode 3)

Later on, in the present day, Cal drives out of town again, very intoxicated, listening to INXS again to remind him of that night many years ago. He returns to the same bar, and heartbreakingly imagines himself dancing with Derek like he did back in high school. 

Present day Cal (on the right) imagining himself dancing with young Derek (on the left). (season 2, episode 4)

There are a lot of parallels between Nate and Cal and their struggles with their sexualities. Nate also plays sports and there are scenes of both of them in locker rooms trying not to look at their male teammates’ bodies, out of shame. The gay bar that Cal returns to is cowboy-themed, and there is a scene of him staring at a mural on the outside of several men in cowboy attire. During one of the scenes in season two, Nate puts on “Dead of Night” by Orville Peck as he drives, an artist who is often referenced as a part of the “gay cowboy” scene. The lyrics of this song are “see the boys as they walk on by, it’s enough to make a young man…” And finally, they both have ties to Jules, who is, of course, a woman, but neither Nate nor his dad view her as a “real woman” because of her transness. Nate’s attraction to Jules causes him a lot of shame. This is possibly why he prescribes himself a long mental checklist of the things he likes and dislikes in women; he is trying to overcome his queerness by forcing himself to conform to the typical standards of a straight man. 

I think that this show is valuable for examining the effects that toxic masculinity and pervasive homophobia can have on men, and also how this dynamic can play out intergenerationally. It is probably true that Nate’s character wouldn’t be so angry or messed up if his dad had been more loving and accepting of him, and if he hadn’t known about his dad’s sexual exploits outside of his marriage. I think both of these characters are extremely toxic and that their actions throughout the show have terrible implications and consequences, but I also think that it was wise of the writers to give some explanation as to why both of them turned out the way they did. We are all products of the societies we are born into and the environment in which we are raised, and understanding this can help to break down and dismantle the effects of toxic masculinity on boys and men and the people around them.

Euphoria’s Jules: Sexual and Gender Empowerment

Posted on by asmiller

As a nineteen year old living in America, I enjoy watching different shows and movies that appear on platforms such as Netflix, Disney+, Hulu, Prime Video, etc. I am a huge fan of shows such as Stranger Things, The Boys, Arrow, Never Have I Ever, just to name a few. All of these shows were appealing to me whether it was for the plot of the show, the many different twists, or even the action pack thrill. But one show in particular that I can say has had a huge impact on more than just myself is the HBO groundbreaking show Euphoria. Euphoria, created by Sam Levinson, is an astonishing series that delves into the complexities of adolescence through lenses such as gender and sexuality. The show’s vivid portrayal of these themes reflects contemporary societal issues while also using them to highlight the struggles that the characters face because of them. Jules Vaughn, portrayed by transgender actress Hunter Schafer, is a huge representation of all these different themes throughout the HBO series. Jules’ character challenges traditional norms of gender identity while offering a nuanced perspective on sexual fluidity.


Jules Vaughn

Jules embodies a fluid approach to gender, consistently defying many conventional binary definitions and norms. Things such as her fashion choices, behavior, and many different interactions illustrate a personal journey of self-discovery that transcends societal expectations. The series presents her grappling with her own internal conflicts and external pressures, particularly around femininity. 

Through many of Jules’ relationships, especially hers with Rue Bennett portrayed by actress Zendaya, Jules expresses a desire for authentic connection and love, highlighting that emotional intimacy often supersedes rigid gender roles. Her character challenges stereotypes by presenting gender as a spectrum rather than being a fixed identity. This representation is extremely significant, as it showcases a deep understanding of transgender experiences, struggles and desires, all while encouraging viewers to reconsider the limitations many individuals and social groups have imposed on gender norms and roles. 

Rue Bennett 

Euphoria presents a wide range of sexual identities and uses them to highlight the fluidity and complexity of adolescent sexuality. Different characters throughout the series navigate their desires in certain ways that are able to push boundaries and challenge typical societal norms. One of the main characters Jules, in particular a transgender female, embodies the role of a non-binary sexuality, showcasing the challenges and joys of discovering one’s self and identity in a world that typically demands conformity. Characters like Jules presented me with an idea that topics such as sexuality were going to be growing and explored in public media outlets due to the fact that the series refusing to shy away from many of the darker aspects of sexual exploration, such as manipulation and trauma, as it is shown in many different character’s experiences. 



The series used many different relationships that some viewers would describe as disturbing, to highlight the many different sexual structures and the defiance to conform to what was seen as “normal” In the very first episode of the first season, Jules is meeting up with a man on an online dating site with the screen name “dominant daddy”. It turns out the man was Cal Jacobs, a married man with two sons, with one of them being one of Jules’ classmates. This was very disturbing to watch progress throughout the series as it led into a downward spiral for Cal and the relationship between his family. But I do believe this was the first showing of how much fluidity Jules had in her sexual orientation as it was seen later that season in episode 7, she goes into the city to see one of her good friends and ends up sleeping with a woman named Anna. This helps the series compile the portrayal that Jules’ exploration of her sexuality further complicates her character, unveiling a rich tapestry of desire that includes both men and women. Her bisexuality challenges the binary narratives often seen in media, illustrating that equal attraction can be both diverse and multifaceted. 

Jules’ relationship with Rue served as a critical focal point, illustrating the intertwining of love, vulnerability, and emotional dependency. The series captures the highs and the extremely low lows of their bond, emphasizing the impact of personal struggles such as Rue’s addiction problem and many mental health issues. This relationship helps showcase that sexuality can be deeply intertwined with individual experiences and social contexts, highlighting the complex nature of love and attraction.  

Overall, I believe it can be said that Jules’ character in Euphoria well represented a vital examination of gender and sexuality, challenging the many viewers of the series to embrace complexity and things outside of societal norms. Her journey throughout the series not only represents the challenges faced by transgender individuals but also invites a broader conversation about the diverse nature of sexual identity. By pushing the boundaries of traditional representations, Jules becomes a significant figure in contemporary media, showcasing that media companies are recognizing that times are changing every single day and thus must be represented as well. 

Cancel Culture Knows No Nuances

Posted on by momckenna

Figure 1. The Wilds Show Cover

The Wilds, an Amazon Prime, 2 season show, created by Sarah Streicher in 2020 follows a group of teens stranded on an island, all of whom have crossed paths in one way or another­ before the stranding–two brothers, two best friends, and 2 sets of students who went to school together. To those who have watched The Wilds, we all know season 2 did not live up to the hype of season 1. However, I think there are still meaningful stories told and dynamics to analyze in the second season. I am choosing to focus on the argument between two main characters, Ivan and Kirin, during their character-focused episode. While the two went to high school together, they ran in entirely different social circles. Kirin was the stereotypical popular, egotistical jock, and Ivan was a proud, witty, gay teen. I believe the selected scene, and their dynamic as a whole, is a commentary on the totality of “cancel culture”, and its modern-day lack of situational consideration. I cannot begin to imagine the struggles and intersectionality of living life as a young, gay, black man, but I will be discussing my understanding of the message as portrayed.

Figure 2. The Wilds Season 2, screenshots from episode 6.
Kirin pictured left; Ivan pictured right.

The conflict begins with Ivan scrolling through the Instagram of Kirin’s lacrosse coach. While deep diving, he uncovers an old photo of the coach doing blackface for a Halloween costume. Ivan exposes this image and gets the coach fired. Ivan is riding the high of being deemed a “hero” and is clearly enjoying the attention he is receiving from exposing the coach. A brief interruption to this buzz, was catching Kirin hugging his coach goodbye and crying, causing Ivan to call him a “sympathizer”.

We don’t know the full story behind Kirin’s relationship with his coach until Ivan and his love interest, Luc, stumble on Kirin sitting alone in the locker room, drinking heavily. Ivan smiles down on him, and begins asking what’s going on, to which Kirin angrily responds that Ivan acts like a know-it-all, who doesn’t know anything about real life. He divulges into how the coach was a father to him, a good man with a wife and kids, someone who took him in when he needed family. Ivan pushes that he protected himself and the school from a bigot. He slowly gets closer to Kirin, with no intentions of defusing the situation but rather aggravating it.

At no point does Kirin actually try to justify the coach’s racist actions, something I think slipped by Ivan, because to him it was an ‘all or nothing’ situation. As Kirin gets increasingly angry, Ivan excitedly pulls out his phone, stating he’s “been waiting for this. The white rage boiling point”. Kirin punches a locker, denying the “white rage” claim. Ivan continually taunts, “you wish that locker had been my face, don’t you?”, with a gleeful expression. The progression of the dialogue in the scene is upsetting and contains the use of a homophobic slur, so to those looking to watch, take this as a trigger warning. Ivan does not stop provoking Kirin and is uncomfortably exhilarated by his increasing anger. I think the following images speak for themselves, as Kirin is in a drunken, emotionally unstable state, Ivan appears gleeful, and Luc looks disturbed by Ivan’s comments.

Figure 3. The Wilds Season 2, screenshots from episode 6. From left to right; Kirin, Ivan, Luc.

Kirin screams at Ivan to shut up and get out, refusing to say the things Ivan is probing him to. The scene comes to a climax after Ivan does not cease tormenting Kirin. He insists on calling him homophobic slurs, to which Kirin finally does. Ivan has all of this on video, which gets Kirin expelled.

This is a heavy scene, leaving all 3 characters hurt and disturbed by what took place. In my analysis, I am in no way trying to justify any acts of racism or homophobia portrayed in this episode. Kirin is not in the right; being drunk, hurt, or having any other extenuating circumstance does not warrant bigotry.

However, I do not believe viewers were supposed to interpret Ivan as being in the right either. The look in Ivan’s eyes as he taunts Kirin is hungry and uncomfortable, he wasn’t an underdog hero who prevented further harm but rather incited it. Kirin and his coach deserved consequences, and they received such, but it is revealed to the viewers that Ivan did too. Luc, so upset by the situation, breaks it off with him. He leaves Ivan with the message “Be tender” on a dollar bill he owed him.

Figure 4. The Wilds Season 2, screenshot from episode 6. “Be tender”.

I believe this goodbye sentiment supports the message that Ivan was overtly cruel, likely out of fear. As a young, gay, black man, much of the world is out to get him. His fear is understandable, trying to protect himself offensively, rather than leave himself vulnerable to attack. His fear and defensiveness causes him to not just encounter enemies but to make them out of strangers. Kirin had no right to say slurs, but he truly did not seem to do it out of a real hatred for gay or black people–it was borderline coercion. In reality, Kirin was hurting and Ivan was too. To Kirin, Ivan was an unsympathetic attention seeker, and to Ivan, Kirin was a sympathizer and bigot. I believe neither of them was correct, but this episode showed the two imperfect characters at incredibly low moments in their lives.

This is where I believe the show can be extended to a larger metaphor about the world. “Cancel culture”, while at times truly does give harmful people the consequences they deserve, has also become bloodthirsty. There is no black and white in the way society “cancels” people nowadays. Someone is good, until they inevitably mess up, and then they are irredeemably bad. The general media shows no mercy, nor the ability to portray someone as simply human, i.e., flawed.

Ivan felt that he was protecting his community by canceling the enemy he saw in Kirin. What he didn’t see was the nuances of the situation. Kirin didn’t say his coach shouldn’t be punished for blackface, and was, not so eloquently, expressing the massive grief he felt at losing another father figure. It is possible for his coach to have been a loving person to Kirin, while also being incredibly ignorant and insensitive to the impact of his actions. It is important to understand that situations are not so cut and dry. Someone could get canceled over a viral video that makes them out to be a horrible person, when in reality, we caught a glimpse into one of the worst days of someone’s life. I believe most of us could only hope to be shown grace, were we to mess up during one of our lowest moments.

Through this character pairing of Ivan and Kirin, The Wilds, portrays how quickly fear can devolve into violence. Kirin could not understand the root of Ivan’s defensive demeanor– someone who will be faced with hate and prejudice his whole life. Similarly, Ivan could not see where Kirin was coming from due to his preconceived notions about him. While this depiction was a hard watch, and deeply sad from multiple angles, the creators very masterfully challenged our usual assumptions about a protagonist and antagonist. You’d think with a white, straight jock versus a black, queer character, it’s not difficult to assume who is the hero and who is the villain of the scene. However, the show writers didn’t allow for such an easy interpretation. It is an uncomfortable position for a viewer to not know who is right or wrong.

Nowadays, there is a level of overcompensation when trying to be politically correct, in order to avoid the mob mentality of “cancel culture”. That’s not to say society didn’t need to advance its sensitivity and empathy towards others, but one must think critically and look for a larger picture before pointing a finger and slapping a label on someone. Humans will make mistakes, especially young ones, and deeming them an abhorrent person dismisses a chance to better themselves and learn. Ivan and Kirin eventually make amends, and show how capable of growth and compassion they are. Rather than crucify all who make mistakes, people should be allowed an opportunity to become a more understanding, educated, and loving person. 

Book Review – Medical Bondage: Race, Gender, and the Origins of American GynecologyBook Review: Medical Bondage

Posted on by Former Student

The origins of American gynecology reflect back to the racism that has been seen within medicine for quite some time. Black women were seen as these “superbodies” that were capable of withstanding all levels of pain. As a result of this belief, black women were abused in different ways and used for experimental and teaching purposes within the gynecology field. Author Deirdre Cooper Owens focused on the history of American gynecology and the racist origins behind the field. Dr. Cooper Owens reflects on the stories of black women who were at times left to die and then used as study subjects by the same doctors who were meant to cure them. At the same time, Dr. Cooper Owens reflects on the connection that slavery and medicine have and emphasizes the idea that black women in many ways can be seen as the founders of gynecology. 

Throughout the book Medical Bondage, Dr. Cooper Owens makes a connection between the racist doctrines within American gynecology and the abuse that black women faced as experimental subjects. For many black women, stepping into a gynecologist’s office was a sentence for death. More specifically, “Slavery and the rise of American gynecology were the vessels that poured both life and death into the black women’s lives” (Cooper Owens, 44). Many of these women were forced to go to these doctors for their own health concerns and yet they would end up being abused and used and as was often seen killed as a result of this abuse. Dr. Cooper Owens also reflects on the difference in treatment between white and black women. The experiments that black women were forced to undergo would eventually be used to treat white women. Although the procedures were the same, white women did not receive the same abusive treatment that black women did. From these various arguments, Dr. Cooper Owens emphasizes on the idea that black women are the real founders of American gynecology. Black women not only contributed through forced participation, but many black women were also nurses and midwives. The trauma that these white doctors inflicted upon black women led to many black women continuing as midwives and nurses as a way to avoid any further abuse from occurring. As I read Medical Bondage, it was clear that gynecology as a field was not founded by white men but rather by the black women who underwent abuse and various experimental procedures. 

Dr. Cooper Owens is an award-winning historian, a popular speaker, and a professor. Dr. Cooper Owens attended two historically black colleges and universities, Bennett College and Clark Atlanta University. After completing her education in these two institutions, Dr. Cooper Ownes went on to earn her Ph.D in history at the University of California Los Angeles. Dr. Cooper Owens has also taken part in various fellowships throughout the United States. Using her own personal experiences  has led to her realizing that stories are what draw in the attention of the readers. Having the historical background that she does, Dr. Cooper Owens is working to make history accessible to all people as well as inspiring to all. 

In order to create this monograph, Dr. Cooper Owens uses a variety of sources to discuss the role that black women had throughout the history of American gynecology. One source that Dr. Cooper Owens focuses on the stories of the black women who were forced to take part in these experimental procedures. One case that Dr. Cooper Brown’s discussed, the Julia Brown’s case,  reflects on the shift in value that the lives of black women had to the white doctors. Dr. Cooper Owens states that this case “…illuminates how southern white men developed and deployed medical and pharmaceutical methods that revealed how the value of black people’s lives shifted back and forth like measurements on a sliding scale” (Cooper Owens, 42). This specific example allows readers to understand how the value of black women depended on how valuable their bodies were for the purpose of advancing American gynecological practices. Dr. Cooper Owens also used different records and documents that reflect on this idea that enslaved people, and in particular, enslaved women were seen as nothing but experimental subjects and sources of income. The use of these various sources allow readers to visualize the abuse and disrespect that black women faced in order to have gynecology where it is today. 

The organization of the book made it easy to read along and this would have to be one of the strengths of the book. The actual book is divided into five chapters, with each chapter focusing on a different aspect of American gynecology. The first chapter focuses on the birth of American gynecology and on the father of gynecology, James Marion Sims. Dr. Cooper Owens uses this section to expand upon the procedures that were conducted by these white doctors at the time. It is during this chapter that Dr. Cooper Owens begins to expand on how doctors “… used stark medical terminology that reduced black women’s reproductive organs and bodies to mere “physical specimen” ” (Cooper Owens, 21). Chapter two focuses on these procedures but shifts the focus away from the doctors and the history of American gynecology overall and emphasizes on the experiences of black women during this time. In this chapter, the stories of various black women were told and the abuse and neglect that they received both from their owners and from their doctors. With the example of the State of Missouri v. Celia, Dr. Cooper Owens discusses how Celia, although she was raped by her owner, she was still sentenced to death for defending herself and killing her abuser. Celia was pregnant at the time and although her life was not spared, the life of the baby was (Cooper Owens, 43). This specific chapter highlights the importance that was placed on the unborn child, and the lack of care that was given to enslaved women during this time. Chapter three focuses on the connections between sex, slavery, and  medicine. Many of these black women were abused whether it was by their owners or their doctors. This same abuse is what led to many of these women ending up pregnant or developing certain health concerns that required them to be taken to a doctor. Chapter four expands on this topic of abuse and discusses the experiences of Irish women immigrants and the similarities with those of black women. The example of Mary Donovan reflects the commonalities between the experiences of Irish women and black women in relation to how they were treated by doctors. Donovan was described as “violent, dumb, and defective, but her body provided a pathway for doctors to learn more…” (Cooper Owens, 104). Similar to the experiences of black women, Irish women were also abused by white doctors and these white doctors also exposed the private medical matters of these women to public medical journals. Chapter five summarizes the main points made in the previous chapters as well as discusses the idea of a medical “superbody.” Although this topic was mentioned in previous chapters, Dr. Cooper Owens goes into detail on this topic as well as on the medical gaze and how these topics both added to the trauma that black women in particular endured during the beginning stages of American gynecology. 

Dr. Cooper Owens reflects on the experiences of Irish women, but this is a topic that is not as focused on throughout the monograph. The main focus of this book is on the experiences of black women as experimental subjects for white doctors, but it would be valuable to learn more on the experiences of Irish women. Seeing that this monograph does focus primarily on black women, adding the relationship between American gynecology and Irish women would take away from the main argument being made. Regardless of this, it is important to know the stories of these women as well. Rather than including a chapter towards the end on Irish women, it would be helpful to instead have the stories of Irish women in connection to American gynecology discussed throughout the book similar to the structure used to give the stories of black women. 

Medical Bondage is a book that I would say all people should read. It emphasizes the stories of black women and their role in the history of American gynecology. Dr. Cooper Owens also gives a voice to these black women by sharing their stories. During the time in which these events were occuring, these black women were not given a platform or rights to defend themselves. As a result of this, people are unaware of the actual history of American gynecology and the racist ideologies that make up the field. This monograph exposes the racism of gynecology while providing a voice for the Irish and black women who were silenced and used for experimental purposes. Ultimately, Dr. Cooper Owens’ writing reminds society of the vital role that Irish and black women played in making American gynecology what it is known to be today. 

Works Cited:

Owens, Deirdre Cooper. Medical Bondage: Race, Gender, and the Origins of American Gynecology. University of Georgia Press, 2017. 

“Bio.” Dr. Deirdre Cooper Owens. Accessed December 16, 2022. https://www.deirdrecooperowens.com/bio. 

JUDY HEUMANN LECTURE

Posted on by Former Student

This lecture was a conversation about Judy’s life with a current Davidson student Sarah Todd Hammer. She is an international disabilities rights activist and was a special advisor for Obama and Clinton. She talked about how disables people had less laws that protected them before than now and how she helped improve laws for disabled people. She talked about how her parents had to learn how to navigate the system and that it took a while and that school wasn’t accessible for her. So, this made her have to speak up at a young age for herself and advocate for herself. She even forced herself on a bus she was waiting for a long time because there was no accessible feature. She talked about small changes that Davidson could have to make it more accessible such as the bathroom door being too heavy and maybe some doors just taking them off completely. She also thinks that disabled students need to be a part of more universities and that it should be a bigger part of DEI. This made me think about how DEI is so focused on race and gender and everything else that is a part is left out with one being disabilities. I do work in DEI for some areas on campus and will have to do that in my job teaching next year that it helped open my eyes for more things to focus on and simple fixes that could happen. She talked a lot about how the laws are discriminatory and ways to advocate for oneself or others. I think it’s horrible that people don’t respect the laws that is there to protect disabled people and how it’s overlooked and unlawful, but it’s so common for people to do. These aren’t things I normally think about. One thing I think about is how I normally would think people who double park to be rude, but a friend of mine is disabled and did this because someone was sitting in their car in the handicap parking stall and there was no other place, so they had to double park for that reason. Accommodations help all and are there for a good reason.

No Product Day Challenge

Posted on by Former Student

When deciding to consciously take part in the no product day challenge, I thought it would be easier than it seemed to be. There are days that I forget to put on deodorant or perfume, so it wouldn’t be that bad I thought, but people’s comments surprised me that day. I told my partner that I was doing this challenge, explaining about what we learned in class at the time with the history of deodorant and how I didn’t really need it. Immediately he said that no wonder people in GSS stink. I never expected that comment and didn’t think my friends who are taking GSS classes stink at all. I think it was a joke, but it still struck me as surprising that he said that. Then, I met up with a friend who I told that I was doing this challenge, he was like you’re gross! This also confused me. There are times I haven’t used deodorant before because I forgot, but how is not using it for one day gross? It was surprising to me how ingrained it was in people’s mind that no deodorant = stink and gross. If I didn’t tell my friends and partner that I was doing this challenge, I believe no one would’ve made these comment. But why is it that the thought of it grosses people out?

Now, I don’t use deodorant or perfume unless I’m going to an event. I think of products I used to buy that now I don’t such as shaving cream. My family used to constantly tell me that not shaving as a girl is gross which took a long time to get over, but now when people tell me that, it only stings a little bit. So I actually enjoy not using makeup, shaving products, perfume, deodorant, etc because it saves me time and money as well as doesn’t take up too much space and my space is less cluttered.

Diet Culture Token

Posted on by Former Student

December 5th, 2022

Diet Culture Bomb: On TikTok when a video comes up of a girl discussing how dieting changed her life and that she wants to become an inspiration to other cultures to demonstrate the resolve and importance of dieting and losing weight.

How it landed: I was a little shocked. I had seen this person on social media before and they always gave off the impression that they were confident with their body weight and enjoy eating and the various pleasures associated with it. It seemed like since I had last seen them 

How I recovered: I went to sleep. 

December 6th, 2022

Diet Culture Bomb: I’m studying with in the library with a friend and she discusses the specific calorie content of her coffee drink she got from the vending machine.

How it landed: I had have similar experiences with this friend in the past, so I was able to remind myself that everyone has there own person journey and relationship with food.

How I recovered: reminded myself that calories are perceived in society is often incorrect and having a balanced diet that I ensure is more important than counting specific calories 

December 7th, 2022: 

Diet Culture Bomb: I saw a TikTok of a very slim girl with the caption “the two main things that helped me get in shape”, this was followed by the girl saying 1. Being more active every day and 2. Eating healthier and more protein. The video had multiple videos of the girl showing off her slim figure. The girl made it seem like having a slim figure and “being healthy” was a simple matter and choice that could be accomplished by just eating more vegetables.

How it landed: I was shocked. I thought that social media had a least for the most part moved past this unproductive type of instruction. 

How I recovered: I looked at the comment sections and found that everyone was also as baffled as I was which made me realize the vast majority of people did not support this behavior.

Token: Judy Heumann Lecture

Posted on by Former Student

by Lucy Mason

On September 7th, I attended Judy Heumann’s lecture on her work advocating for disability rights. As a person with ADHD, I was already familiar with the concept of learning disabilities, but I knew very little about the laws and statistics surrounding access for physically disabled people. I appreciated how knowledgeable and open Ms. Heumann was, and how she shared her story with us to illustrate where some of the major issues with access to education and transportation for disabled people lie. 

This talk made me reconsider my thoughts on Davidson’s disability access. From seeing all the ramps, buttons, parking spaces, and more around campus, I had thought that Davidson was doing well with providing access. However as I sat in the talk, I remembered seeing Sarah Todd Hammer’s Instagram reel about having difficulty opening the door to the library basement. I then realized that her reel might have influenced the removal of the door. Listening to this talk made me confront my own assumptions and consider what Davidson is already doing to support disabled students and what it could work on providing. 

A number of things in this talk reminded me of our readings in class. I noticed that in both disability and reproductive activism, groups begin advocating for themselves because no one else will, or no one else will create an inclusive agenda. Ms. Heumann and her parents’ early advocacy parallels the quest of the women of color from our Jael Silliman reading. I also thought of questions about human rights. For example, how should the government adapt education to fit all disabled needs? Also, what is the difference between taking care of people who cannot support themselves and allowing those who can to advocate and speak up? Similarly, must we group all women who get abortions together, aruging that they do not know what they are doing, or can we allow them to make their own choices? In addition, I believe in the right to bodily autonomy regardless of whether that body or mind is disabled or not, so the state helping people maintain that bodily autonomy, whether through access or reproductive rights, is imperative. Overall, this talk expanded my awareness of disability on campus and inspired me to make more connections with these discussions and our class material.

Token: Feminist Mixtape

Posted on by Former Student

The 2010 song “Better Than Revenge” by Taylor Swift tells the story of a narrator who is very angry at another woman for “stealing” her man. The song expresses her anger towards and her disdain for the other woman by criticizing her. 

My first problem with this song is that it pits women against each other and blames the other women for the narrator’s relationship issues. At the end of the day, the narrator’s boyfriend chose to be with someone else, and the narrator should be blaming him, not the other women. Blaming the other woman instead of the narrator’s boyfriend comes across as very patriarchal and outdated. 

However, my main problem with this song is the lyric “she’s better known for the things she does on the mattress.” This lyric is slut-shaming and misogynistic. It suggests that the other woman is somehow a bad person or not “moral” because she has had sex with multiple people. This is incredibly misogynistic; no one should be shamed for the consensual sex that they have, and they certainly should not be considered morally corrupt or not a good person because they have had sex before. 

While “Better Than Revenge” is an expression of the anger that the narrator feels when someone she likes ends up with another girl, it comes across as slut-shaming and blaming other women for problems that are not their own. Even though the song was written 12 years ago, it is not an excuse for the outdated messages surrounding women, sexuality, and purity. Overall, while it is catchy, it is not a very supportive or feminist song. In fact, it is a song that contains harmful messages for young people (Taylor Swift’s main audience) to hear. In the years after she released this song, I think that Taylor Swift has made more music that is supportive of other women, which I appreciate.

Token: Diet Culture Diary

Posted on by Former Student

Friday, December 8th, Davidson, noon

Diet Culture bomb: I was scrolling through Tiktok causally, and a video of an old man showed up on my for you page. He said that we should cut out sugar from our diets for a month, and we would see all sorts of “benefits” such as a thinner face and a “better” body. People in the comments stated that if you cut out sugar for long enough, you won’t even crave it anymore!

How it landed: The Tiktok startled me. I’m not used to seeing diet culture videos on my for you page, but this time, it was loud and clear (apparently the algorithm hasn’t fully figured me out yet). I quickly scrolled past. 

How I recovered: I stopped for a minute and thought about the video I had just watched. Do I really want to cut sugar out of my life? I LOVE sugar. Why would I want to cut it out of my life? Frankly, that sounds miserable. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with my body. So I’ll eat as much sugar as I please, thank you very much. 

Saturday, December 9th, Indiana, 10 pm

Diet culture bomb: I arrived home from my long drive back from college with a large bag of snacks that my eating house gives us for free every finals season (thank you Turner House!!). I was very excited to have good snacks to munch on while I completed finals at home. However, when I walked in the door, my mom immediately expressed her disdain. She said, “we don’t keep junk food in this house. We try to eat healthy around here”.

How it landed: This was hard to hear, especially as someone who has struggled with an eating disorder in the past. I love eating all types of food, from fruits and vegetables to candy and chips. I think that all food is good food. So it was hard to hear my mom refer to a wonderful bag of food as “bad”. 

How I recovered: I thought about the comments that my mom made and talked to her about them. I think that we can keep all types of food in our house, and I don’t think that food should be assigned the terms “good” or “bad”. And just because my mom only wants to eat “healthy” foods, doesn’t mean that I can’t enjoy some good snacks! I make my own food choices!

Tuesday, December 13, Indiana, 2 pm

Diet culture bomb: I show up at my local Starbucks to get some work done. I promptly order a drink, but as soon as I look at the menu, I remember something. Starbucks has calories on their menu. As someone who used to have an eating disorder and be obsessed with calories, that is not really something that I want to see or be reminded of. 

How it landed: I was disappointed. I absolutely hate when restaurants have calories on their menus. It makes it more difficult for people who are recovering from eating disorders and the impacts of diet culture. 

How I recovered: I was disappointed, but I tried to completely ignore the calories and just order whatever I wanted to drink, regardless of the calories or how “healthy” it was. It was a reminder that calories are not at all important in my life, and I can enjoy whatever foods or drinks I want.

Token: No Product Day Challenge Reflection

Posted on by rubleifuss

On September 27th, I participated in the no product day challenge. At first I was hesitant. However, after putting more thought into it, I decided to do it. Going into the challenge, I did not think it would be that hard for me. I hardly ever wear make up, sometimes forget to put on deodorant, and if I’m running late in the morning I don’t do my skincare routine. 

As the day started, it took me much less time to get ready than it normally does. I was really surprised to find how much time I spent putting on products that were not entirely necessary. I started to think maybe my five step skincare routine was a little excessive and I could cut some of it. As the day progressed, I felt slightly self conscious about not cleansing my face or not putting on deodorant. I was worried people were going to think I was lazy or dirty. That bothered me because why should not putting certain products on be thought of as a negative thing and be equated with being lazy or dirty. Luckily that day I did not have much to do, so I could relax or just hangout with friends. However, I found it really hard to get myself to do the little work I did have to do. In the moment I was confused on why I was so unmotivated. Usually I procrastinate, but I eventually get my work done. This was different. It felt like something was missing. 

Reflecting on the day I realized I use these products as an act of self care. The act of putting them on helps me get ready for the day. This made me wonder if there are ways to help me feel more put together and more “ready for the day” besides applying certain products. I am so glad I participated in this challenge, as it taught me more about myself and made start thinking about different acts of self care. 

Token: Judy Heumann’s Reynolds Lecture Reflection

Posted on by rubleifuss

​Judy Heumann is an internationally known disability activist. As someone with a physical disability I have looked up to Judy for much of my life. Due to her dedication to equality and disability justice, I have many of my basic human rights, so getting the opportunity to listen and learn from her was such an honor.

 For much of the lecture, Judy spoke on her experiences dealing with ableism in education and her work within the U.S. government. I could relate greatly to her experiences growing up with a disability and going through the public education system with one. I knew the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was signed into place 30 years prior. However, hearing Judy’s experiences really put it in perspective. For instance, Judy talked about how she was not allowed to attend her local elementary school because she was considered a “hazard.” Now due to her activism the ADA is in place and prevents discrimination.

I do question Judy’s commitment to the ADA. Throughout her lecture she would reference and quote the ADA. I am so grateful for the rights it has granted me. However, I do believe the ADA is the bare minimum and there is so much that can be done. In my opinion the ADA reinforces the medical model of disability, which is the idea that the disability is the problem and needs to be fixed. Whereas, remodeling it would help promote the social model of disability, which is the belief that society is the issue – not the disability.

After listening to the lecture, I am still questioning the United States’ lack of implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Judy helped fight for its implementation back in 2009, but it did not get enough support. I am wondering how Judy would advise us to continue to push for the ratification. Especially with Judy’s past experience, I wonder what she thought worked well and what didn’t, and we as the new generation can further her work.

TOKEN – No-Product Day

Posted on by Former Student

I was nervous when I first heard about this challenge since enhancement products are part of my daily routine.  I usually wear light makeup (concealer, mascara, and chapstick), deodorant, and use anti-frizz products if it is a humid day.  I use these products to feel more confident in my own skin.  I typically break out from stress, and it is something I feel quite self-conscious about (especially since it is not something that I can control).  Being able to cover up a blemish allows me to not worry as much about my appearance.  The other products I use are either for convenience (not having to style frizzy hair), general hygiene reasons (not wanting to smell), or just because I like them.

I decided to completely forgo all of my products other than my skincare products.  I was certainly not looking forward to the experience.  The hardest product to go without was the concealer since I did not feel comfortable without it.  The easiest product to go without was the anti-frizz product since I was lucky and the humidity was low.

As I got ready to leave in the morning I was very nervous about what others would think of me, however, nobody mentioned anything the whole day.  This isn’t exactly surprising because I usually do not comment or care about other people’s acne.  This experience reinforced the idea that our biggest critic is ourselves, and most people, frankly, do not notice small things about us (like if we’re wearing mascara).

The no-products day was at the start of the semester, and I have an update.  Since then, my skin has cleared up a bit.  It is by no means perfect (in fact, there are still marks), but I am much more comfortable with not wearing makeup.  I still don’t believe that there is anything wrong with using enhancement products.  Regardless of whether or not they are capitalistic ploys, if a product allows you to feel more confident, then, by all means, use it!