ginger griffin, cixous

I found this particular reading to rather interesting. A year ago I took a class on gender and society and after having read this article, I immediately thought of that class. Throughout that term we came to realize that there is not much difference between a man and a woman. This passage also kind of confused me but one quote I did agree with was this, “for a woman speaking-even just opening her mouth-in public is something rash, a transgression.” I see that there is a problem in noticing that by even having a woman speak is transgression because the opposite of that would be that a woman shouldn't speak in public. And therein lies the problem.

Like Spaghetti spoke about in his/her blog, they state that in order for you to be a man, you must not be a woman, and in order for you to be a man you must not enjoy doing what women do. Therefore no man should wear women's clothes, no man (or boy) should play with barbies or with dollhouses. This is the part of the article in which I did not agree with. I do agree with defining something by what it is not, but I think that in certain cases you must make an exception, as with everything in life.

This was a rather hard passage to understand but an interesting one to say the least. Women have come so far from where they were and what they were allowed to do. Women are in a sense "bisexual" because they do play sports that men play and they do work with men and they do almost everything a man does. Again, I know I flip-flopped on this blog, but it was the only way I culd get my point across.