When reading about legal cases the law shows me that primarily white woman are at the top of the social hierarchy at the end of the day white woman will always be at a high value than everyone else. In my personal opinion white people in America will always be recognized as humans while minorities continue to be objectified and dehumanized by the law each and everyday. Again white people have time and time again gotten away with transgressions, especially wealthy white people who can buy their way out of the legal system as long as it doesn't hit the public eye.
While I agree with your assertion that white women occupy a relatively high position within the social hierarchy, I believe it is important to clarify that, ultimately, white men hold the highest position in both the social hierarchy and the patriarchy. I fully concur that wealthy white individuals dominate the upper echelons of society. However, I want to emphasize that, even though a wealthy white woman may be considered higher on the social hierarchy than a poor woman of any ethnicity, she remains subordinate to her male counterpart—specifically, the wealthy white man.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
This campaign ad appeals to citizens female and male by imposing Donald Trump as a secondary perpetrator of violence against women using implied imposition. After a long winded negative essay on her experience with early life rape, she states: "Donald Trump did this". While a strictly literal interpretation would associate this with Donald Trump's policy implications, there is an inference that transposes Donald Trump onto the malevolence of the actual perpetrator. This appeals to a political audience which is efficiently captivated by sentiments of blame, especially those affected by similar incidents. In this way it appeals to the public its argument for bodily autonomy by implying that those who stand in the way a woman's "right to choose" are as liable as rapists.
This week we connect the case of Thomas/Thomasine Hall in Colonial Virginia, to the legal history of the double standard in abortion cases, and to the strategy used by an Arawak woman enslaved in Salem, Massachusetts to defend herself against a witchcraft accusation in the Salem trials.
We will use these cases to extend our discussion of bodily autonomy and masculinity and to consider the politics of identity in the history of citizenship.
When reading about legal cases, what does the law tell us about cultural values and social hierarchy?
The law confers preferences to demographics that is at the top of the social hierarchy and what is culturally valued. Often these preferences are conferred in ambiguity or generalization. Particularly unvalued things or people are often isolated through specificity. For example, Thomas/ine was subjugated to multiple inspections of their genitalia in order to fulfill the court order/ law whereas Cisgender people were not. This confers a legal and cultural preference against Thomas/ine and towards Cisgender people. The responsibility for interrogation is also placed in the hands of the societally advantaged; all of Thomas/ines' inspectors were likely white.
Who is recognized as human? Who is objectified and dehumanized by the application of laws?
The people that were recognized as human were cisgender white males. The objectified persons are anyone that presented a challenge to the linear nature of that hierarchy. (Thomhas/ine, Arawak woman)
Who gets away with transgressions? Who is reassured and protected by the legal system?
Those instigating the proceedings are generally the people that get away with the transgressions and are reassured by the legal system which is most often white, cisgender males and females.
Nathaniel, your analysis of the campaign ad's connection between Trump and violence against women is powerful. It links political opposition to women's autonomy to personal trauma, creating an emotional appeal that resonates deeply with those affected by similar experiences.
Regarding the legal history, you effectively highlight how laws favor the dominant social hierarchy, specifically cisgender white males. Cases like Thomas/ine Hall and the Arawak woman illustrate how marginalized individuals were subjected to invasive scrutiny, reinforcing their dehumanization. This dynamic shows how laws protect those in power while punishing those who challenge societal norms, emphasizing the role of legal systems in maintaining existing power structures.
When reading about legal cases the law prioritizes white people over colored. Men are often protected by the legal system, as seen in Taking the Trade, the two men who killed a woman weren’t tried because at this point, she wasn’t seen as a “good” girl. The town tried to shame her because she was demonized for being pregnant out of marriage, but no one asked about who impregnated her. The men in this story were not brought to justice or penalized. Throughout history in many cultures woman are objectified and dehumanized, especially women of color. For example, Tituba was underestimated because she was a woman. Viewed as weak she used this to her advantage and talked her way out of being accused of witchcraft and executed. Tituba was very careful and calculative. When ready I was impressed that not only did, she manage to get out of her predicament, but she convinced the town that the ones responsible for witchcraft were white respected men. Often women were the ones accused of witchcraft, but she turned the tables. Tituba did what few (colored) women in history could and she got people to listen to her. It is sad to think the reason the townspeople were listening was because they were nosey, they wanted to watch her be punished. Unfortunately, they did not care about her well-being, but she overcame her situation and brought down the men who had done her wrong in life. Unlike with Sarah , these men were not protected by the legal system.
I completely agree with your point about how the law prioritizes white people. In my crimes and justice in the media class, my professor taught us about "missing White woman syndrome" in which the media seizes on the disappearance of a White woman over a woman of color. It is truly disappointing that there is a clear hierarchy in the legal system regarding gender and race. I think that in a way, history often used witchcraft as an accuse for the abuse and violence towards women, along with the dehumanization of women of color.
Hi Brynn I like how you added witchcraft being used as an excuse for the abuse. It seems it would be easy to go “no they are bad and with the devil” instead of accepting someone of a different culture if we are talking about non white women.
In Colonial American History it was clear that men were protected against the legal system more than women ever were. A key example of this is how the doctor, Hallowell, and Amasa got away with essentially murder. Since the men were so liked and trusted by society, the court let Amasa roam freely and Hallowell escaped town to avoid any potential punishments. In the end, the men never experienced an actual punishment for condoning and preforming an abortion on a woman and thus causing her death. I believe if a women committed the same crimes these men did, she definitely would have not been let off so easily. I can predict this outcome just due to the fact women already experienced a harsher punishment to fornication than men ever did during this time. It's hard to know that gender plays such a big role into priority and protection in the legal system.
Even in after dying, Sarah was judged for having intercourse of of marriage and getting pregnant. Where as no one questioned who the man in this situation was. I agree with you, women had greater punishments for having sex than men, woman are often seen as pure but only if they're a virgin. They have to be pure for a husband but men didn't have to and could even have mistresses and affairs long after being wed. The double standards are crazy.
I completely agree all throughout history we have seen men constantly get away with their crimes and even rewarded. Even throughout today's world we see people such as Trump who is a racist, rapist sexist, felon but yet so many people are able to look past that and now he's once again our president. It is truly saddening to see him get away with these acts and get rewarded. When will men get held accountable for their actions?
(I couldn't restack the video, so I will enter my response for that here)
The girl in the video above says, “I felt like I was alone on a planet” (00:00:12) after she was sexually abused by her stepfather at age five. This excerpt reinstates what we talked about in class how the angling and casting of the advertisement depicts the girl by herself. Additionally, I observed that since the girl was doing typical tasks such as the dishes or washing her face, it was made to be relatable. Almost as if it was conveying that she does chores just like any of us, so this could happen to any of us. Although the advertisement hinted that victims often feel alone, simply by speaking your truth, it proves that we are not alone. Patriarchy wants to alienate individuals assigned females at birth to justify stripping them of their reproductive rights. These are the same rights that are needed due to the injustices we face at the hands of men.
I completely agree with what you are stating. The video shows a vulnerable side of herself that normally victims of such things wouldn't typically share. I think the video was to show other victims that they aren't alone in what they went through but also to show the patriarchy of what they can help protect if things were to change.
Hello, I agree with this. This element you're talking about where she's by herself is added to by the way the shots are under exposed. This brings a coldness to the image that assigns her some vulnerability. I noticed as she continues to go about her life normally as you describe (normally because of her claim abortion policies permitted this normalcy), the shots being normally or over exposed. This progression of vulnerability to relative openness is shared by the audience and aims to make the feel more empathetic. I also like the piece you mentioned about speaking truths as a means to gain community. I think this is a powerful commonality that is a continuity among many of the victim written readings we explore.
I would be careful personifying patriarchy, or confusing it in a vicarious manner with men (or specific men). The primary reason is that it is offensive to males like myself. Secondarily, the emotions that come with overly- personifying systemic problems limits the advocate's ability to be objective in reviewing and implementing effective change in a society. e.g. If a feminist blames problem x on the individual actions a, b, and c of specific men (maybe thinking heavily about specific circumstances in her life), then passes legislation that prevents those men from taking those actions, she may find that she was blindsided to systemic contributors g, e, and f to problem x. (systemic contributors could be availability of day after pill, infrastructure that favors certain heights, workplace policies, etc.)
I believe this is something we see in this video. The female has a truth to speak, but it is only considered an enabler for real world change because of specific and intentional political rhetoric that aided in the manufacture of the video. This political rhetoric was done with the intention of advocating for broader change (voting blue). For example, it is no mistake that the female in the video was from Arkansas. This was an attempt to humanize the abortion issue across party lines (Arkansas traditionally votes conservative). Even the most poignant anecdotes must be harnessed by logic and systemic consideration to have efficacy.
Many of the cases we have looked at share similar themes. The people who have been oppressed share some characteristics. Being female, being a POC, being queer, diverting from the norm. Remaining rural is also a threat to Christian and western ways of life. In the case of the Igbo women/ people the reading states that they "chose to remain rural and highly democratic". Their main deity was a woman, a land goddess named Ala. Women in power also diverts from the commonly pushed western norm.
The Igbo women had laws and rules of the land that included, homicide, suicide, kidnapping, birthing twins, stealing, and yam stealing. However being taken from the land and sold as slaves caused many of them to commit suicide despite the spiritual consequences.
Tituba acted as a very different role. She was a witness to the supposed witchcraft taking place. She was the "first to suggest men and members and the elite were members of the conspiracy". This differs from what we've seen. The concept of men being in on it was foreign. Women through the years seemed to have faced much harsher punishment compared to men. A double standard!
While I don't think it was your intention, I think something you imply is that those at the perceived "top" of the social hierarchy are able to bend and manipulate what is seen as acceptable, no matter how much it precedes them. For example, the Igbo and many other Indigenous and even African tribal societies had fully fledged governments that were often on par (if not superior) to the governments found in Europe and colonial America. But when the oppressor exerts power in a violent and dehumanizing manner, it barely matters whether or not the Cherokee or the Igbo had sophisticated perceptions of law and order because they are still seen as "savage" for living rurally and off the land rather than participate in mass agriculture.
I like your dissection of gendered power dynamics, specifically the threat that is non-white women being in positions of power to colonial ideals of socially structured hierarchies. Tituba's role in the Salem Witch Trials was one that quite forcefully opposed these established views and for that, was a remarkable historical moment. The opposition of expressed spirituality as in the example of Igbo women is also incredibly significant to the formation and examination of the sexual double standard.
Across all the sources it carried a common theme of oppression aimed toward control of the queer, and colored individuals. Across the sources I looked at almost all the time it was a White male who owned property. This was prevalent in both the Thomas(ine) readings and the Tituba document where the individuals on the courts and leading were land owning white men and many of the accusations being leveled at both being from prominent white females within the community leveraging power from their status due to their husbands and friends to push their accusations. This being seen by the repeated searches of Thomas(ine) Hall, with numerous 4 such searches being carried out. And in regards to Salem Tituba being accused of witchcraft and haunting people with her specter, She used these accusations to redirect attention away from herself by mixing indigenous and European beliefs on the occult to create a large smoke screen that snowballed into what we know today as the Salem Witch Trials.
I like your perspective. I also noticed that the white male superiority was sprinkled throughout the readings. It just solidifies our views of how minorities were and continue to be treated. A saddening aspect that you mentioned was how Tituba's biracial past affected her fate. It is crazy to me that separately, in the minds of the Puritans, people of color are immediately sinful, yet the natural cycle that creates biracial individuals is somehow worse. It really highlights the pure in Puritan, even though the said puritans acted in such a way was impure and without a doubt would bring shame onto them from the false god they worship. I've noticed that religion is a very tricky thing, as it is not tangible so its values can be shady and unmoving in evolving societies, further thinning the line between a religion and a cult. However, in my opinion, any religion that brutalizes those with less footing in the society is definitely a cult.
In regards to this week's readings, the concept of culture, social hierarchy and humanity are all interesting points to review. In the Thomas/Thomasine readings, we became aware of the act of "othering", of pointing out someone's differences in order to push one's self into a position above the person with differences. We can see this within the story of Thomas/Thomasine, and in other examples, such as the U.S. government and their othering of BIPOC people and communities.
This narrative continues both throughout history, and throughout the rest of this week's readings, particularly in reference to the Salem witch trials. The Salem readings tell the story of the young indigenous woman and her narrow escape from the accusations of witchcraft that plagued her. In both stories, there is the concept of othering, although the Salem readings are utilized quite unconventionally. Tituba utilized the concept of "othering" in order to deter attention away from her and spur fear into a witch hunt. This tactic not only reversed (if only momentarily) the Puritan social order, culture, and hierarchy at the time, which I found to be absolutely fascinating.
Traditionally, when reviewing legal cases, we can tell that in America, the law favors white individuals and European/colonialist cultures over all others. There is an intersection of gender within this bias of course, as cis, heterosexual, white men were the most revered within the legal system, and allowed the most leeway within breaking laws/upholding them. Our society is built around culture, which in turn cultivates social norms and expectations. These expectations dictate how we dress, how we present gender, the way we speak, what we are allowed to partake in, etc., and the legal system is designed to uphold these norms.
This is why in the modern day AND previous history, we can see a focus on humanity being identified as the straight, cis, white man that founded Puritan societies so long ago. The duality of whiteness is that it is both a shield and a fragile object. It can protect an individual or a system, but also needs protection from the deviance of the socially labeled "others" (such as BIPOC and Queer/Trans people). Despite this, however, we can see marginalized people pushing back against the system. Thomas/Thomasine's mere existence stood in defiance of a white, binary, social system. Tituba pushed a similar narrative by weaponizing the fear of the devilish "other" against the white townspeople, effectively diverting their attention from her and saving her life.
As much as our social systems and institutions are designed to harm those who dare to be different, there will always be those who choose to forge their own path, rather than be beaten to the ground. I think the history of these people is so vitally important to the way we view ourselves today because it reminds us that resistance is not new. BIPOC and Queer/Trans people have always existed and will continue to. Systems are not designed to be perfect. We are at the point now where as students and historians we must ask ourselves if we would like to change the narrative, or simply close the book.
When we are reading about legal cases usually the law only cares about the cultural values of the people at the top of the social hierarchy. The people at the top have the most money and have the most value in cultures because of their riches and resources. The farther down on the scale the less likely society will believe you or stand up for you. For example, the women at the witch trials were at the bottom of the social scale and no one could stand up for them or did that had enough power to stop them. Throughout time who is recognized as human has changed, in the early 17th century only white men and occasionally some white women were recognized as human, but then it changed to white men and white women, then white men and women and black men and then everyone and now it changes every single day with the current political state of our world. But white men are ALWAYS considered human when everyone else has to fight for it. White men get away with transgressions of violent offenses and white-collar crime every day and the legal system is set up so we think most crime is violent but most crime is white-collar crime usually committed by white men. The media and system work together to spread false information and create biases against other groups.
White people are given preference in the judicial system over persons of color, and men are frequently protected, as demonstrated in Taking the Trade. Over time, women of color have been dehumanized and objectified. Men were given more protection than women in colonial America, as seen by the incidents of doctors Hallowell and Amasa, who performed abortions but were trusted and never penalized. Because of the vital role that gender plays in the legal system, it is crucial to avoid personifying patriarchy or conflating it with men.
When reading about abortion in colonial America, the men/men in power seem to get off Scott free. As seen with the case of Sarah Grosvenor, where her lover and doctor convinced her to abort her child, the men in Sarah’s life had power over her decision whether to keep her child or not. Unfortunately, they successfully convinced/coerced her to rid of the child, costing her life. When reading about these legal cases, we often see the white men in power are protected by the law, while women and those of color are often targeted and not protected by the law. As seen in the case of Tituba and other women accused of witchcraft, the social majority targeted the most vulnerable women in society.
We see this gendered power dynamic present still today. The people in power of regulating a woman’s body are largely men.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
The ad’s argument for bodily autonomy is framed around the themes of personal freedom, emotional hardship, and the specific loss of choice that comes with the overturning of Roe v. Wade. It appeals to voters who value individual rights, particularly women’s rights to make decisions about their bodies without government interference.
Whether it’s being forced into rigid gender categories (Hall), being criminalized for seeking reproductive rights (abortion cases), or being accused and punished under a system that strips one of personal agency (Tituba), these stories highlight the ways that legal systems and social norms shape and restrict the autonomy of individuals...often in ways that disproportionately affect women and people of color.
The campaign ad that we watched was very bittersweet, it is beneficial that her story is out there for people to see what Donald Trump's anti abortion beliefs could do to other women, but at the same time I feel like it's so sad that she has to discuss her trauma for people to actually understand what anti-abortion laws really are and how they affect others. I feel like the campaign ad could get viewers to reconsider what Project 2025 is and what the future could ever look like for their loved ones. It definitely highlighted the extreme realities that these laws place on different people's lives.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
My thoughts when first watching the campaign ad were how they used a real persons experience to channel a persuasive tone to the audience. This Ad gave the credibility of a women who has endured the pain of being effected by circumstances that are out of her control. A situations where she was able to recover by being able to have access to an abortion which helped her to be able to move forward despite still being effected by remembering the day. This Ad was powerful in telling us how she lives with the thoughts of this day on a daily basis but then ties in how not being able to have access to an abortion would have trapped her.
Connecting back to the readings of the Thomas/Thomasine cases I could see similar aspects of the standards being presented. It seemed as though in these readings so many were pushing back against Thomas/Thomasine being able to express themselves and were undecided when it came to bodily autonomy. There was a constant battle of being able to base gender of bodily autonomy for Thomas/Thomasine. It is a clear confusion because despite one person deciding one thing in the community another person will argue against created major conflict over something that we still are seeing today. Were living in a reality where peoples gender is ultimaly decided by a group of people who don’t know much about the person to just declare what they think.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
In this campaign she talks about how difficult it was in her situation under the circumstances she was put in by her step father. It advocates for bodily autonomy by showing the different kinds of situations that happen unfortunately on a day to day basis that a good amount of people would never even think of considering. I feel that we need more campaign ads like this to show the groups of people who disagree that this is a very serious thing that many people need to have easy access to.
It made it clear as day that white women are more than often at the top of social rankings. As a Navajo woman, I have known for a while that white women seem to be valued more highly than everyone else. In my opinion, white people in America are always recognized as humans, while minorities continue to be objectified and dehumanized by the law every single day. Again, being native, I have seen how we have lost our land and still aren't seen as equals. White people, especially wealthy ones, have repeatedly gotten away with transgressions. They can buy their way out of the legal system as long as it doesn't hit the public eye.
When reading about legal cases the law shows me that primarily white woman are at the top of the social hierarchy at the end of the day white woman will always be at a high value than everyone else. In my personal opinion white people in America will always be recognized as humans while minorities continue to be objectified and dehumanized by the law each and everyday. Again white people have time and time again gotten away with transgressions, especially wealthy white people who can buy their way out of the legal system as long as it doesn't hit the public eye.
While I agree with your assertion that white women occupy a relatively high position within the social hierarchy, I believe it is important to clarify that, ultimately, white men hold the highest position in both the social hierarchy and the patriarchy. I fully concur that wealthy white individuals dominate the upper echelons of society. However, I want to emphasize that, even though a wealthy white woman may be considered higher on the social hierarchy than a poor woman of any ethnicity, she remains subordinate to her male counterpart—specifically, the wealthy white man.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
This campaign ad appeals to citizens female and male by imposing Donald Trump as a secondary perpetrator of violence against women using implied imposition. After a long winded negative essay on her experience with early life rape, she states: "Donald Trump did this". While a strictly literal interpretation would associate this with Donald Trump's policy implications, there is an inference that transposes Donald Trump onto the malevolence of the actual perpetrator. This appeals to a political audience which is efficiently captivated by sentiments of blame, especially those affected by similar incidents. In this way it appeals to the public its argument for bodily autonomy by implying that those who stand in the way a woman's "right to choose" are as liable as rapists.
This week we connect the case of Thomas/Thomasine Hall in Colonial Virginia, to the legal history of the double standard in abortion cases, and to the strategy used by an Arawak woman enslaved in Salem, Massachusetts to defend herself against a witchcraft accusation in the Salem trials.
We will use these cases to extend our discussion of bodily autonomy and masculinity and to consider the politics of identity in the history of citizenship.
When reading about legal cases, what does the law tell us about cultural values and social hierarchy?
The law confers preferences to demographics that is at the top of the social hierarchy and what is culturally valued. Often these preferences are conferred in ambiguity or generalization. Particularly unvalued things or people are often isolated through specificity. For example, Thomas/ine was subjugated to multiple inspections of their genitalia in order to fulfill the court order/ law whereas Cisgender people were not. This confers a legal and cultural preference against Thomas/ine and towards Cisgender people. The responsibility for interrogation is also placed in the hands of the societally advantaged; all of Thomas/ines' inspectors were likely white.
Who is recognized as human? Who is objectified and dehumanized by the application of laws?
The people that were recognized as human were cisgender white males. The objectified persons are anyone that presented a challenge to the linear nature of that hierarchy. (Thomhas/ine, Arawak woman)
Who gets away with transgressions? Who is reassured and protected by the legal system?
Those instigating the proceedings are generally the people that get away with the transgressions and are reassured by the legal system which is most often white, cisgender males and females.
Nathaniel, your analysis of the campaign ad's connection between Trump and violence against women is powerful. It links political opposition to women's autonomy to personal trauma, creating an emotional appeal that resonates deeply with those affected by similar experiences.
Regarding the legal history, you effectively highlight how laws favor the dominant social hierarchy, specifically cisgender white males. Cases like Thomas/ine Hall and the Arawak woman illustrate how marginalized individuals were subjected to invasive scrutiny, reinforcing their dehumanization. This dynamic shows how laws protect those in power while punishing those who challenge societal norms, emphasizing the role of legal systems in maintaining existing power structures.
When reading about legal cases the law prioritizes white people over colored. Men are often protected by the legal system, as seen in Taking the Trade, the two men who killed a woman weren’t tried because at this point, she wasn’t seen as a “good” girl. The town tried to shame her because she was demonized for being pregnant out of marriage, but no one asked about who impregnated her. The men in this story were not brought to justice or penalized. Throughout history in many cultures woman are objectified and dehumanized, especially women of color. For example, Tituba was underestimated because she was a woman. Viewed as weak she used this to her advantage and talked her way out of being accused of witchcraft and executed. Tituba was very careful and calculative. When ready I was impressed that not only did, she manage to get out of her predicament, but she convinced the town that the ones responsible for witchcraft were white respected men. Often women were the ones accused of witchcraft, but she turned the tables. Tituba did what few (colored) women in history could and she got people to listen to her. It is sad to think the reason the townspeople were listening was because they were nosey, they wanted to watch her be punished. Unfortunately, they did not care about her well-being, but she overcame her situation and brought down the men who had done her wrong in life. Unlike with Sarah , these men were not protected by the legal system.
I completely agree with your point about how the law prioritizes white people. In my crimes and justice in the media class, my professor taught us about "missing White woman syndrome" in which the media seizes on the disappearance of a White woman over a woman of color. It is truly disappointing that there is a clear hierarchy in the legal system regarding gender and race. I think that in a way, history often used witchcraft as an accuse for the abuse and violence towards women, along with the dehumanization of women of color.
Hi Brynn I like how you added witchcraft being used as an excuse for the abuse. It seems it would be easy to go “no they are bad and with the devil” instead of accepting someone of a different culture if we are talking about non white women.
In Colonial American History it was clear that men were protected against the legal system more than women ever were. A key example of this is how the doctor, Hallowell, and Amasa got away with essentially murder. Since the men were so liked and trusted by society, the court let Amasa roam freely and Hallowell escaped town to avoid any potential punishments. In the end, the men never experienced an actual punishment for condoning and preforming an abortion on a woman and thus causing her death. I believe if a women committed the same crimes these men did, she definitely would have not been let off so easily. I can predict this outcome just due to the fact women already experienced a harsher punishment to fornication than men ever did during this time. It's hard to know that gender plays such a big role into priority and protection in the legal system.
Even in after dying, Sarah was judged for having intercourse of of marriage and getting pregnant. Where as no one questioned who the man in this situation was. I agree with you, women had greater punishments for having sex than men, woman are often seen as pure but only if they're a virgin. They have to be pure for a husband but men didn't have to and could even have mistresses and affairs long after being wed. The double standards are crazy.
I completely agree all throughout history we have seen men constantly get away with their crimes and even rewarded. Even throughout today's world we see people such as Trump who is a racist, rapist sexist, felon but yet so many people are able to look past that and now he's once again our president. It is truly saddening to see him get away with these acts and get rewarded. When will men get held accountable for their actions?
(I couldn't restack the video, so I will enter my response for that here)
The girl in the video above says, “I felt like I was alone on a planet” (00:00:12) after she was sexually abused by her stepfather at age five. This excerpt reinstates what we talked about in class how the angling and casting of the advertisement depicts the girl by herself. Additionally, I observed that since the girl was doing typical tasks such as the dishes or washing her face, it was made to be relatable. Almost as if it was conveying that she does chores just like any of us, so this could happen to any of us. Although the advertisement hinted that victims often feel alone, simply by speaking your truth, it proves that we are not alone. Patriarchy wants to alienate individuals assigned females at birth to justify stripping them of their reproductive rights. These are the same rights that are needed due to the injustices we face at the hands of men.
I completely agree with what you are stating. The video shows a vulnerable side of herself that normally victims of such things wouldn't typically share. I think the video was to show other victims that they aren't alone in what they went through but also to show the patriarchy of what they can help protect if things were to change.
Hello, I agree with this. This element you're talking about where she's by herself is added to by the way the shots are under exposed. This brings a coldness to the image that assigns her some vulnerability. I noticed as she continues to go about her life normally as you describe (normally because of her claim abortion policies permitted this normalcy), the shots being normally or over exposed. This progression of vulnerability to relative openness is shared by the audience and aims to make the feel more empathetic. I also like the piece you mentioned about speaking truths as a means to gain community. I think this is a powerful commonality that is a continuity among many of the victim written readings we explore.
I would be careful personifying patriarchy, or confusing it in a vicarious manner with men (or specific men). The primary reason is that it is offensive to males like myself. Secondarily, the emotions that come with overly- personifying systemic problems limits the advocate's ability to be objective in reviewing and implementing effective change in a society. e.g. If a feminist blames problem x on the individual actions a, b, and c of specific men (maybe thinking heavily about specific circumstances in her life), then passes legislation that prevents those men from taking those actions, she may find that she was blindsided to systemic contributors g, e, and f to problem x. (systemic contributors could be availability of day after pill, infrastructure that favors certain heights, workplace policies, etc.)
I believe this is something we see in this video. The female has a truth to speak, but it is only considered an enabler for real world change because of specific and intentional political rhetoric that aided in the manufacture of the video. This political rhetoric was done with the intention of advocating for broader change (voting blue). For example, it is no mistake that the female in the video was from Arkansas. This was an attempt to humanize the abortion issue across party lines (Arkansas traditionally votes conservative). Even the most poignant anecdotes must be harnessed by logic and systemic consideration to have efficacy.
Cheers and thank you for your post Grace!
Many of the cases we have looked at share similar themes. The people who have been oppressed share some characteristics. Being female, being a POC, being queer, diverting from the norm. Remaining rural is also a threat to Christian and western ways of life. In the case of the Igbo women/ people the reading states that they "chose to remain rural and highly democratic". Their main deity was a woman, a land goddess named Ala. Women in power also diverts from the commonly pushed western norm.
The Igbo women had laws and rules of the land that included, homicide, suicide, kidnapping, birthing twins, stealing, and yam stealing. However being taken from the land and sold as slaves caused many of them to commit suicide despite the spiritual consequences.
Tituba acted as a very different role. She was a witness to the supposed witchcraft taking place. She was the "first to suggest men and members and the elite were members of the conspiracy". This differs from what we've seen. The concept of men being in on it was foreign. Women through the years seemed to have faced much harsher punishment compared to men. A double standard!
While I don't think it was your intention, I think something you imply is that those at the perceived "top" of the social hierarchy are able to bend and manipulate what is seen as acceptable, no matter how much it precedes them. For example, the Igbo and many other Indigenous and even African tribal societies had fully fledged governments that were often on par (if not superior) to the governments found in Europe and colonial America. But when the oppressor exerts power in a violent and dehumanizing manner, it barely matters whether or not the Cherokee or the Igbo had sophisticated perceptions of law and order because they are still seen as "savage" for living rurally and off the land rather than participate in mass agriculture.
I like your dissection of gendered power dynamics, specifically the threat that is non-white women being in positions of power to colonial ideals of socially structured hierarchies. Tituba's role in the Salem Witch Trials was one that quite forcefully opposed these established views and for that, was a remarkable historical moment. The opposition of expressed spirituality as in the example of Igbo women is also incredibly significant to the formation and examination of the sexual double standard.
Across all the sources it carried a common theme of oppression aimed toward control of the queer, and colored individuals. Across the sources I looked at almost all the time it was a White male who owned property. This was prevalent in both the Thomas(ine) readings and the Tituba document where the individuals on the courts and leading were land owning white men and many of the accusations being leveled at both being from prominent white females within the community leveraging power from their status due to their husbands and friends to push their accusations. This being seen by the repeated searches of Thomas(ine) Hall, with numerous 4 such searches being carried out. And in regards to Salem Tituba being accused of witchcraft and haunting people with her specter, She used these accusations to redirect attention away from herself by mixing indigenous and European beliefs on the occult to create a large smoke screen that snowballed into what we know today as the Salem Witch Trials.
I like your perspective. I also noticed that the white male superiority was sprinkled throughout the readings. It just solidifies our views of how minorities were and continue to be treated. A saddening aspect that you mentioned was how Tituba's biracial past affected her fate. It is crazy to me that separately, in the minds of the Puritans, people of color are immediately sinful, yet the natural cycle that creates biracial individuals is somehow worse. It really highlights the pure in Puritan, even though the said puritans acted in such a way was impure and without a doubt would bring shame onto them from the false god they worship. I've noticed that religion is a very tricky thing, as it is not tangible so its values can be shady and unmoving in evolving societies, further thinning the line between a religion and a cult. However, in my opinion, any religion that brutalizes those with less footing in the society is definitely a cult.
In regards to this week's readings, the concept of culture, social hierarchy and humanity are all interesting points to review. In the Thomas/Thomasine readings, we became aware of the act of "othering", of pointing out someone's differences in order to push one's self into a position above the person with differences. We can see this within the story of Thomas/Thomasine, and in other examples, such as the U.S. government and their othering of BIPOC people and communities.
This narrative continues both throughout history, and throughout the rest of this week's readings, particularly in reference to the Salem witch trials. The Salem readings tell the story of the young indigenous woman and her narrow escape from the accusations of witchcraft that plagued her. In both stories, there is the concept of othering, although the Salem readings are utilized quite unconventionally. Tituba utilized the concept of "othering" in order to deter attention away from her and spur fear into a witch hunt. This tactic not only reversed (if only momentarily) the Puritan social order, culture, and hierarchy at the time, which I found to be absolutely fascinating.
Traditionally, when reviewing legal cases, we can tell that in America, the law favors white individuals and European/colonialist cultures over all others. There is an intersection of gender within this bias of course, as cis, heterosexual, white men were the most revered within the legal system, and allowed the most leeway within breaking laws/upholding them. Our society is built around culture, which in turn cultivates social norms and expectations. These expectations dictate how we dress, how we present gender, the way we speak, what we are allowed to partake in, etc., and the legal system is designed to uphold these norms.
This is why in the modern day AND previous history, we can see a focus on humanity being identified as the straight, cis, white man that founded Puritan societies so long ago. The duality of whiteness is that it is both a shield and a fragile object. It can protect an individual or a system, but also needs protection from the deviance of the socially labeled "others" (such as BIPOC and Queer/Trans people). Despite this, however, we can see marginalized people pushing back against the system. Thomas/Thomasine's mere existence stood in defiance of a white, binary, social system. Tituba pushed a similar narrative by weaponizing the fear of the devilish "other" against the white townspeople, effectively diverting their attention from her and saving her life.
As much as our social systems and institutions are designed to harm those who dare to be different, there will always be those who choose to forge their own path, rather than be beaten to the ground. I think the history of these people is so vitally important to the way we view ourselves today because it reminds us that resistance is not new. BIPOC and Queer/Trans people have always existed and will continue to. Systems are not designed to be perfect. We are at the point now where as students and historians we must ask ourselves if we would like to change the narrative, or simply close the book.
When we are reading about legal cases usually the law only cares about the cultural values of the people at the top of the social hierarchy. The people at the top have the most money and have the most value in cultures because of their riches and resources. The farther down on the scale the less likely society will believe you or stand up for you. For example, the women at the witch trials were at the bottom of the social scale and no one could stand up for them or did that had enough power to stop them. Throughout time who is recognized as human has changed, in the early 17th century only white men and occasionally some white women were recognized as human, but then it changed to white men and white women, then white men and women and black men and then everyone and now it changes every single day with the current political state of our world. But white men are ALWAYS considered human when everyone else has to fight for it. White men get away with transgressions of violent offenses and white-collar crime every day and the legal system is set up so we think most crime is violent but most crime is white-collar crime usually committed by white men. The media and system work together to spread false information and create biases against other groups.
White people are given preference in the judicial system over persons of color, and men are frequently protected, as demonstrated in Taking the Trade. Over time, women of color have been dehumanized and objectified. Men were given more protection than women in colonial America, as seen by the incidents of doctors Hallowell and Amasa, who performed abortions but were trusted and never penalized. Because of the vital role that gender plays in the legal system, it is crucial to avoid personifying patriarchy or conflating it with men.
When reading about abortion in colonial America, the men/men in power seem to get off Scott free. As seen with the case of Sarah Grosvenor, where her lover and doctor convinced her to abort her child, the men in Sarah’s life had power over her decision whether to keep her child or not. Unfortunately, they successfully convinced/coerced her to rid of the child, costing her life. When reading about these legal cases, we often see the white men in power are protected by the law, while women and those of color are often targeted and not protected by the law. As seen in the case of Tituba and other women accused of witchcraft, the social majority targeted the most vulnerable women in society.
We see this gendered power dynamic present still today. The people in power of regulating a woman’s body are largely men.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
The ad’s argument for bodily autonomy is framed around the themes of personal freedom, emotional hardship, and the specific loss of choice that comes with the overturning of Roe v. Wade. It appeals to voters who value individual rights, particularly women’s rights to make decisions about their bodies without government interference.
Whether it’s being forced into rigid gender categories (Hall), being criminalized for seeking reproductive rights (abortion cases), or being accused and punished under a system that strips one of personal agency (Tituba), these stories highlight the ways that legal systems and social norms shape and restrict the autonomy of individuals...often in ways that disproportionately affect women and people of color.
The campaign ad that we watched was very bittersweet, it is beneficial that her story is out there for people to see what Donald Trump's anti abortion beliefs could do to other women, but at the same time I feel like it's so sad that she has to discuss her trauma for people to actually understand what anti-abortion laws really are and how they affect others. I feel like the campaign ad could get viewers to reconsider what Project 2025 is and what the future could ever look like for their loved ones. It definitely highlighted the extreme realities that these laws place on different people's lives.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
My thoughts when first watching the campaign ad were how they used a real persons experience to channel a persuasive tone to the audience. This Ad gave the credibility of a women who has endured the pain of being effected by circumstances that are out of her control. A situations where she was able to recover by being able to have access to an abortion which helped her to be able to move forward despite still being effected by remembering the day. This Ad was powerful in telling us how she lives with the thoughts of this day on a daily basis but then ties in how not being able to have access to an abortion would have trapped her.
Connecting back to the readings of the Thomas/Thomasine cases I could see similar aspects of the standards being presented. It seemed as though in these readings so many were pushing back against Thomas/Thomasine being able to express themselves and were undecided when it came to bodily autonomy. There was a constant battle of being able to base gender of bodily autonomy for Thomas/Thomasine. It is a clear confusion because despite one person deciding one thing in the community another person will argue against created major conflict over something that we still are seeing today. Were living in a reality where peoples gender is ultimaly decided by a group of people who don’t know much about the person to just declare what they think.
How does this campaign ad appeal to certain citizens and make an argument for bodily autonomy?
In this campaign she talks about how difficult it was in her situation under the circumstances she was put in by her step father. It advocates for bodily autonomy by showing the different kinds of situations that happen unfortunately on a day to day basis that a good amount of people would never even think of considering. I feel that we need more campaign ads like this to show the groups of people who disagree that this is a very serious thing that many people need to have easy access to.
It made it clear as day that white women are more than often at the top of social rankings. As a Navajo woman, I have known for a while that white women seem to be valued more highly than everyone else. In my opinion, white people in America are always recognized as humans, while minorities continue to be objectified and dehumanized by the law every single day. Again, being native, I have seen how we have lost our land and still aren't seen as equals. White people, especially wealthy ones, have repeatedly gotten away with transgressions. They can buy their way out of the legal system as long as it doesn't hit the public eye.