this is ladies night: no cell phones would have ruined me

11.18.2008

no cell phones would have ruined me

This weekend I drove to visit some friends of mine at Villanova, by way of Baltimore to pick up a friend at Loyola. Along the drive I got lost (of course) and when I called a friend to get directions (she was at her computer) and we had been over them and I couldnt figure out what road was which (no signs, obviously) she suggested I pull over at a gas station to figure it out. Not going to lie, I took one look at the places I was passing and decided to put gas prices out of my mind and just to figure it out on my own. Why would I do that? because the thought of getting out of the car and having to walk past all these men (at some places I could see men just sitting on the curb or walking in large groups) to go ask for directions, which clearly meant I didn't belong there was just too much for me to handle. Instead I spent 30 min on the phone with a friend until she figured out what to do and I got onto the road and on my way. This of course is all in areas that I was unfamiliar with. I hate that it was the fact that I couldnt even get directions without knowing I was going to be "attacked" (definately verbally, but I was in a bad part of Balitomore, I wasnt about to chance it physically) - what did we do in the age of no cell phones?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...: seriously!! cell phones have totally changed everything. how many of us have made pretend to be talking on the phone as we walk past a group of hollering men just to have something to occupy us and remove us, at least mentally, from the situation?

how many times have we had a friend call us to get us out of a situation we feel too uncomfortable to just remove ourselves from ("you know, I gotta go, I gotta take this call")?

how many times has calling a cab or a friend to pick us up or find us or help us saved our lifes? or at least our sense of safety?

I wasn't old enough to have been out and about before the cellular age. For those of you who came of age in the beeper days, or pre-beeper days, what do you think?; November 24, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Post a Comment

You CAN handle the truth:

"Violence is but one means by which men as a class enforce conformity of women as a class. Moreover, it is not necessary for all men to engage in violence against women, since the very threat of violent censure is constantly with women. Violence against women, then, is indeed a "classic" form of hate crime, since it too terrorizes the collective by victimizing the individual. In so doing, hate crime against women reaffirms the priviledge and superiority of the male perpetrator with respect to the female victim" (Perry "In the Name of Hate," 2001:83).

"Harassment becomes a frequent response to women's invasion of male bastions. It is a means to simultaneously create a particular masculinity and enforce a particular exclusive femininity...Men often perceived sexual harassment of women as a well-deserved response to their economic and professional advances. Their encroachment into male realms interferes with, indeed calls into question, men's ability to prove themselves to be men" (Perry "In the Name of Hate," 2001:91).

"Sexual Harassment allows for the reassertion of masculinity and femininity, and especially the 'natural' differences between the two...it reassures men that they are at once heterosexual and empowered, and [reminds] the women that they are sexual objects." Many women do not report harassment and simply stay away from the harasser/place of harassment instead of seeking out justice (Perry "In the Name of Hate," 2001:91).

"'Prejudice' is a hostile attitude directed specifically toward the members of an outgroup" (Jack Levin, "The Violence of Hate," Page 1)

"Gender-motivated violence is a mechanism that perpetuates the marginalization of women, gay men and lesbians. Moreover, gender motivated hate crime also provides a very useful resource for doing gender, especially for accomplishing hegemonic masculinity." (Barbara Perry, "In the Name of Hate," Page 5)

A bit radical but still resonates truth: "From prehistoric times to the present...rape has played a critical function. It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear." (Brownmiller 1975:14-15 in McPhail, B. (2002) in Perry, "Hate and Bias Crime: A Reader," Page 267)

"Although not all women are raped, most women fear rape. (Gordon & Riger, 1989). Women alter their daily lives in numerous ways to avoid the violent behavior of men. Choundas (1995) noted, 'While potential victims of racial, ethnic, or religious violence might attempt to avoid certain neighborhoods in which prejudice might run particularly rampant, women remain safe from street harassment and violent assault only by straying out of those areas known as public' (pp1090-1091). And yet, even in "private," women are not safe from the hands of intimate partners. Again, this intimate relationship often cloaks the reality of the violence" (McPhail, B. (2002) in Perry, "Hate and Bias Crime: A Reader," p271).