Women's Rights Are More Than Just a Topic of Debate

            Although it may seem like we have overcome the harsh period of time of policing women’s bodies, in actuality, we have regressed. As early as the 16^th century, women’s bodies have been put on display for all to gawk at. As John Berger described it in his book “Ways of Seeing,” “men act and women appear” (47). As a whole, society has continued to encourage the policing and dictation of how a woman should look, what is appropriate for her to wear, and what rights she is to have. It is not surprising that young girls are getting sent home from school for showing “too much skin,” or are getting harassed on the streets. If we as a society choose to sit idly by while all of this is happening, there is no telling if we will ever combat it.

On magazine covers, commercials, films, and shows we are usually shown a very specific type of woman: “thin, generally tall and long-legged… and young” (Kilbourne, 122). Of course there are exceptions to this ideal portrayal of a woman, but a limited view of women presents the notion that in order to be considered beautiful you need to be thin and flawless- and if you land outside of that ideal you should feel ashamed. As Wykes & Gunter put it, “…it is women’s bodies, rather than any other attributes, which appear to make them worthy of being represented…The female body is a spectacle” (206). Women are seen as sexual beings in the mass media which is not surprising as most of the individuals who are making the decisions in terms of what gets put out to the public are white men. Not only is it devaluing the women that are sexualized, but it is also dehumanizing them for the sake of selling a product.

These Budweiser ads clearly show the dehumanization of women

"Boys will be boys" is not a valid excuse to
shame girls about their clothing choices.

  Young girls are being exposed to certain images in the media, so it’s no surprise to anyone when some of them choose to dress in the same way; crop tops, short shorts, and tight clothes are perfectly fine to wear on the cover of a magazine but not to school. It’s not uncommon for there to be dress code violations in schools, however, a few are just plain unnecessary and highlight our patriarchal and sexist society. There have been multiple stories of girls getting sent home for dressing inappropriately in a learning environment. Bare shoulders, collarbones, and bra straps OH MY! These dress code violations are gender-biased in that it is asserting that what a girl chooses to wear is too distracting for boys in a learning environment. 

  As Berger stated, “every one of her actions-whatever its direct purpose or motivation- is also read as an indication of how she would like to be treated” (47). Berger makes a great point which wholly speaks to street harassment and sexual harassment. We frequently read news articles and hear stories where one of the main topics discussed after a horrific rape incident is what the woman was wearing. In addressing what she wore, they are proclaiming the idea that she was practically asking to get sexually assaulted because she chose to wear a dress with heels. With the recent Presidential election, one thing is for certain; Donald Trump’s suit choices were never spoken about. Hillary Clinton’s pantsuits on the other hand were. Why? Sexism. Trump’s rhetoric in calling Clinton a “nasty woman” clearly exemplifies his sexist tendencies towards woman, which is ironic considering he claims “no one has more respect for women than I do." 

Why are men in politics making
choices that only affect women? (source)

This next idea of women not having agency over their own body really gets me frustrated. Reproductive rights have been explained and ordered by men for as long as we can remember. Roxanne Gay brought up a very relevant point since we have just passed the Presidential and Vice-Presidential debates. “We continue to have national and state debates about abortion, birth control, and reproductive freedom, and men, mostly, are directing that debate,” (267) Gay said. To me, having a man make a decision about women’s bodies and what they can and cannot do, is absurd to me. In a debate, Hillary Clinton said it best, “I don’t think that the U.S government should be stepping in and making those types of decision.”  I wholeheartedly agree with Gay’s argument that “a woman should always have the right to choose what she does with her body” (273); the fact that this is still a debate in 2016 boggles my mind. Pro-choice rallies are perfect evidence in supporting the ideas that Audre Lorde so strongly believed in. She explored that we need to not be afraid of voicing our opinions, “in the transformation of silence into language and action, it is vitally necessary for each one of us to establish or examine her function in that transformation and to recognize her role as vital within that transformation” (43).

Why do U.S government officials get to dictate how
a woman takes care of her own body?

  There is a lot of work that needs to be done if we want to live in a society where women’s bodies are their own and not simply a topic for a debate. With men mostly being the ones leading efforts to restrict women’s agency over their bodies, we need more women in politics to avoid irrational decisions and laws from being put into place. We also need to rethink how we teach sex education in schools. Rather than blaming the victim and expressing that the rape would not have occurred had she worn something more appropriate, we need to be teaching young men not to rape and everything about consent.

Teach not to rape rather than how not to get raped (source)

It all starts with education (source)

Works Cited

Berger, John. "Ways of Seeing"

Gay, Roxanne. "The Alienable Rights of Women"

Kilbourne, Jean. "Beauty and the Beast of Advertising" 

Lorde, Audre. "The Transformation of Silence Into Language and Action"

Wykes, Maggie & Gunter Barrier. "Body Messages and Body Meanings"