How many
times have you said an object has emotions, when it clearly does not? Have you
ever said that the computer is against you when it does not seem to be working quite
right? It is common place for humans to give inanimate objects emotions, in an
attempt to explain why something is not working out for them. In the medical
world, this habit continues in some contexts, especially when describing a
woman’s body.
In the 1960s
and 1970s, birth control became a booming business in the United States,
carrying on the strong belief of population control, which had been developed
earlier in the century. Along with the rise of the pill as a form of
contraception, the intrauterine device (IUD) became a key contraceptive method
being developed. Ideally, the IUD could be used in the global south because it
required little effort for women there and lasted a long time (Takeshita 2012).
However, as it was being developed, little focus was given to the pain and
other side effects burdening women who used the IUD. The woman was often blamed
for being over-dramatic and emotional about these symptoms by the male
scientists creating the device.
In fact, the
creators even began blaming the women’s reproductive system, an inanimate
object, for any failure in the device. As Chikako Takeshita (2012), author of The Global Biopolitics of the IUD: How
Science Constructs Contraceptive Users and Women’s Bodies, stated,
“Scientists more commonly attributed the expulsion problem as the act of an
‘angry uterus’ that was ‘sending a message’ by contracting itself and expelling
the device” (p. 50). Even advertisements like the one shown in the figure below from Takeshita's book, blamed the uterus. The early conceptions of why IUDs were failing to be
effective for women was largely focused on the biopolitical ideals towards
women. These ideals of women as reproductive beings and their connected
objectification continue to manifest in current culture, causing women to
struggle with creations and attitudes in medicine. To ensure improved health
for women, these views of women must be reshaped to reduce the structural
violence to which they are subject.
Primarily, women
are subject to structural and medical violence because they are most often seen
strictly as reproductive beings. As population control became a serious
concern, eventually turning into the IUD movement, women were something to be managed,
as if they could not control their own fertility and reproduction (Takeshita,
2012, p. 41). This was especially true for women of color and poor
socioeconomic status. Women were seen by the help or harm they could provide to
society through childbirth.
Even today,
throughout the world, the focus on reproduction as the main function of women
continues to thrive. In an article, which can be found here, by Jie Yang (2015)
discusses the prevalence of women being used in Beijing as a way of maintaining
offspring, which is a mark of male success by continuing family lines. In many
cases, if a wife is unable to reproduce, a man goes to a surrogate, in an
informal agreement for the woman to produce a child. Women in poverty are
especially prone to take a path of surrogacy in order to support themselves and
their families (Yang, 2015). However, this is not really a benefit for the
woman. As Yang (2015) reveals, “The unique instances of informal surrogacy
enable dramatic economic and social changes and gendered forms of power that
ultimately reinforce men’s dominance” (p. 91). The occurrence of informal surrogacy
in Beijing reinforces heavily the duty of a woman to be a reproductive being,
forcing them to reproduce and often slander themselves to survive.
In addition
to being viewed primarily as reproductive beings, women are highly objectified
according to their body parts and not their individual personhood. From
colonialization, the body of a woman has been seen as something to explore,
dominate, and to try to understand (Takeshita, 2012, p. 45). The description of
the uterus provided earlier shows the desire of a patriarchal society to dominate
this part of a woman. By ignoring the women with severe side effects, it was revealed
just how small the focus was on the individual.
Ultimately,
the body parts on which the medical and societal world focus are tied to female
reproduction. Specifically, Magdalena Wieczorkowska (2012), discusses the medicalization
and objectification of women’s breasts. The breasts receive heavy focus because
they nourish the baby women are seen as required to produce. Wieczorkowska
(2012) states specifically that, “The body is seen as a reservoir for new life”
(p. 150). Therefore, every piece of the reproductive system must be monitored
and maintained, again, ignoring the woman as a whole individual being. The
article, provided here, further explores the objectification of women,
especially regarding their breasts.
While the
narrow view of a woman as a reproductive being and the resulting parts-based objectification
obviously creates a societal disrespect of women, it also brings great harm to
the woman physically in the medical field. Takeshita (2012), repeatedly notes
that many women were severely injured, sterilized and even killed during the
creation of the IUD. The damage of dominating women is incredibly tangible in
this way. Furthermore, in a simple google search of “women violated during
birth” (Some results are provided below), shows the degrading and painful
methods that medical professionals take in an attempt to have a born
successfully, much to the cost of the mother. Stories of vaginal cutting,
forced caesarian sections, and roughness of doctors permeate the media, as a
result of the lack of concern for the woman herself.
It is true that not all people, not even all
women, would agree with me about how views of women have caused such great
physical, mental, and social disasters. When Yang (2015) writes about informal
surrogacy in China as a way of using women strictly for reproduction, she
expands upon how the physical need for women provides a certain amount of power
to surrogates. She notes the effect that surrogacy has had on the economy and
local moralization. While a positive impact may be made, I do not think the
overall repression of women can be justified by the small powers in gives
women. They are still very much subject to medical and structural violence,
having no choice and no voice as an individual person.
The ideals of
women as reproductive beings and their connected objectification are such a
severe form of repression, that many women are unable to lead healthy,
fulfilling lives according to individual choice. Takeshita (2012) traces the
path of IUD invention throughout a century of time, noting the limited view of
woman capability and responsibility. She notes the pain and death that was and
can still be caused by ignoring the concerns of the individual woman. Wieczorkowska (2012) further expands upon the
study of the reproductive system selectively, defining a woman by her parts.
Yang (2015) explores the social impacts of this treatment of women. If we ever
hope to reduce the sexism and repression of women in society, we must begin
looking beyond them as reproductive beings, a series of parts to ensure life.
We cannot treat women and their bodies like inanimate objects. Identifying
women by their individuality and personhood is the only way to reduce the
physical, emotional, and social harm which they have faced throughout human
history.
References
Takeshita, C. (2012).
The global biopolitics of the IUD: How science constructs contraceptive
users and women's bodies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wieczorkowska, M.
(2012). MEDICALIZATION OF A WOMAN'S BODY - A CASE OF BREASTS. Przeglad
Socjologiczny, 61(4), 143-172. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1374480301?accountid=8268
Yang, J. (2015).
Informal surrogacy in China embodiment and biopower. Body & Society, 21(1),
90-117. doi:10.1177/1357034X14539357
Visual Media:
Cartoon:
http://twinpossible.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/preggo7.png
Figure:
Takeshita, C. (2012).
The global biopolitics of the IUD: How science constructs contraceptive
users and women's bodies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. p 51.
Resources for Violence Against Women During Birth:
http://www.salon.com/2010/09/
No comments:
Post a Comment