What even is a nipple?

My partner and I were getting ready for bed one night. As she was getting out of that day's clothes, she pulls up her shirt and starts yelling, "I want my Jerry beads!" We both thought it was hilarious. Between the laughing, I told her that, as a child, I thought it was so cool that womyn would show their breasts on T.V. for some beads. I even wanted to go on the Jerry Springer Show and get myself some beads! And my partner expressed she had the same desire as a child.

And then it hit us--what a horrible thing for a child to want to do when they got older! As the daughter of a single mother who was also a Catholic Mexican immigrant, pulling my shirt up to show the world my "chi chis" was not something I should have wanted to do, especially not for some beads my mom could have gotten at me from the 99 Cent Store. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with pulling up your shirt and showing the world your boobs. It was problematic for a seven-year-old girl to believe that was what she should do for attention.

I can think of so many more ideas I had as a child that involved me trying to be "sexy" so that boys would like me. Some people will point to my mother and say she should have monitored what I watched more closely. As many low-income people of color know, our immigrant parents were preoccupied working and worrying about feeding us and not missing our rent payments.

Additionally, this problem goes beyond monitoring what I watched as a child. Why did I think it was cool to pull up your shirt and show off your boobs? My brain had already been wired to sexually objectify my own body. But how?

I am especially surprised that my partner wanted Jerry beads as a child because, from a very early age, she knew she was masculine-of-center and had identified with her brother's clothes and toys more so than what her mother would buy her.

There are obviously many reasons as to why young girls objectify their bodies (i.e., media, society, cultural norms). Whatever the reasons are, this cultural norm is a lose-lose situation for womyn. Womyn are encouraged to behave like this (Jerry beads, spring break wet T-shirt contests, mud fights), but once they do, they are seen as hoes, easy, whores or immoral. Additionally, although men don't want an "easy" woman, they do want a woman who attracts attention. But how do you attract attention without doing  the things that consider a woman easy?

These questions lead me back to wanting Jerry beads. Although this behavior is encouraged, female nipples generally have to be censored on television and social media, with a few exceptions. This would not be upsetting if male nipples also had to be censored. This has fueled the #FreeTheNipple movement. When looking at photos that have been altered to show male nipples in place of female nipples, we can appreciate how similar male and female nipples are and conclude that body censorship really is about sexually objectifying female bodies.

For instance, take Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" at the 2004 Super Bowl. People were so upset about what happened that Janet Jackson issued a public apology even though it was Justin Timberlake who exposed her breast. The aftermath of the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show brings to light the sexism surrounding body censorship. Not only was Janet Jackson's career affected by this choice, Justin Timberlake's was not affected negatively, and if anything, was affected positively. Since Justin Timberlake did not share the responsibility in 2004, people were upset he was invited to perform for the 2018 Super Bowl halftime show.

At the end of the day, male and female nipples are the same. So what's the problem? The only thing I can think of is that the more censored a womxn is, the sexier society finds her. But, that's society's problem to deal with, not ours.

Unveiling and dismantling the taboos around menstruation through film

On February 24, 2019, Period. End of Sentence, won an Oscar for Best Documentary Short Subject at the 91st Academy Awards. Iranian-American director Rayka Zehtabhi and Oakwood School teacher Melissa Berton, the visionaries behind this documentary, graciously accepted the award and delivered an insightful speech to the audience. Overwhelmed with emotion during the speech, Zehtabhi stated “I’m not crying because I’m on my period or anything. I can’t believe a film about menstruation just won an Oscar!”

Zehtabhi’s surprised reaction to the Oscar recognition her menstruation film received only affirmed the pressing need to foster dialogue and dismantle the deeply rooted stigma associated with menstruation.

Period. End of Sentence embarked on a journey to address this need by showcasing the menstruation-related experiences of women in the rural Kathikhera village of Hapur, located 60 kilometers outside of India’s national capital Delhi.

Although the Kathikhera village women knew that sanitary pads existed from watching television and seeing them in local stores, cultural and socioeconomic barriers prevented them from ever purchasing the pads. Instead, for many generations, women of the Kathikhera village utilized any discarded rags, cloths, ashes, leaves, and newspapers they could find to absorb the blood from menstruation. The unhygienic and dangerous nature of these items caused the Kathikhera village women to experience severe health problems.

In addition, the constant presence of men and their prying judgmental gaze resulting from their misinformed notions about menstruation constituting a “disease which mostly affects women” only exacerbated the difficulties these women faced. Specifically, it adversely impacted the ability of Kathikhera village women to periodically change the items used to absorb menstruation blood and ultimately barred most of them from completing their education.

For example, the producers interviewed a young girl who described how menstruating forced her to drop out once she reached middle school. She highlighted the challenges she faced in finding nearby private places to change her clothes and stated that the “looks and comments surrounding men ushered at her made her feel ashamed.” This harsh reality only emphasizes the importance of Berton’s closing remarks in her Oscars acceptance speech, which called for action and declared that, “a period should end a sentence, not a girl’s education.”

The extreme discomfort and painful shame these women endured in dealing with menstruation persisted even throughout other scenes of the film. For example, the film opened with a scene of two pre-teenage girls “melting into giggles of embarrassment from having to discuss their period.” In a subsequent scene, a teacher asked a 15-year-old female student to tell the class about menstruation. The female student “stood up completely petrified, remained in stone cold silence for roughly three minutes, and looked like she was about to faint.” Even older women of Kathikhera village echoed similar sentiments when interviewed about menstruation. Elderly women expressed strong resentment towards having to remain in seclusion when on their period and deemed their period “dirty blood and a mysterious illness.”

After witnessing the plight of the Kathikhera village women, The Pad Project, a non-profit organization started by the producers of this film, collaborated with Action India, a grassroots feminist organization, to raise money and provide the village with a low-cost sanitary pad making machine.

What proves to be most astonishing about this pad making machine is the fact that a man pioneered its invention, despite the prevalence of a radical male dominance culture in India. Arunachalam Muruganantham spent nine years of his life inventing this low-cost sanitary pad making machine based on a desire “to create a good sanitary napkin for his wife” and a shocking realization that “a lack of proper sanitary napkins restricted a woman’s mobility, stifled her confidence, and negatively affected her health.”

Muruganantham played an integral role in the Period. End of Sentence narrative by personally going to the Kathikhera village to install the machine and teach the women how to operate it. Initially, the machine instilled both fear and eagerness in the Kathikhera village women and puzzled the Kathikhera village men who thought it served as a “diaper making machine.”

However, as Poorna Jagannathan, an Indian-American producer involved in the film aptly noted, “a simple product can give birth to a revolution.” Installation of pad generating machines ultimately transformed the Kathikhera village women who experienced “crippling shame at their own menstrual cycles” into empowered women who worked and earned money for the very first time in a thriving microeconomy. Within six months, the Kathikhera village women manufactured, marketed, and sold over 18,000 pads under the brand name “Fly.” The women specifically chose the brand name “Fly” to encourage other women to “rise and soar” above the perils of the patriarchy and break the cultural taboos surrounding menstruation.

In addition, installing the sanitary pad generating machines disrupted the traditional public-private divide in the Kathikhera village by granting its women economic independence and purpose beyond domesticity and marriage. For example, Sneha, one of pivotal sanitary pad makers in the film’s narrative and an aspiring police officer, discussed how she planned to use the money she earned from sanitary pad sales to escape marriage and fund her training for joining the Delhi Police. Beaming with positivity and optimism, Sneha articulated her hope of selling “Fly” sanitary pads nationwide and making it easier for women in rural villages to access sanitary pads.

Moreover, giving these women the opportunity to sell sanitary pads facilitated more candid and open conversations about women’s menstrual needs. It served as a concrete first step in dismantling menstruation taboos by providing a forum where it became socially acceptable to discuss it with their female friends and relatives, people who ultimately became their biggest customers.

However, as Suman, one of the sanitary pad makers in the film, aptly acknowledges that “when there’s patriarchy things take time.” Destroying the stigma around menstruation completely requires examining it through an intersectional perspective that accounts for racial and cultural nuances and inspires men to be proactive like Muruganantham and knowledgeable about menstruation being a “natural phenomena” rather than a “disease.”

Notes on The Bachelor, Part 2: Justice for Tayshia

Congratulations, friends! We've made it through another season where the titular "Bachelor" decided to forgo choosing a woman who loved him or was actually ready for marriage, and instead chose the blonde he thought was hottest, despite the fact that she lacked the aforementioned qualities and maybe just liked being on reality shows. As much fun as that phenomenon is to dissect, this post is dedicated to another one of The Bachelor's many problems: Race.

For those who have not kept up with this riveting season, here is a quick recap of what truly may have been the most dramatic ending ever. As even those who don't watch the show know, Colton jumped a fence in a fit of emotion. We were teased with this fence jump all season, and it became somewhat of a running joke on social media each Monday night as we all anxiously awaited Colton's reasoning. Well, it turns out that his reason was Cassie Randolph. After about 5 other women warned Colton that Cassie might not be "ready for marriage," it turned out that Cassie was in fact, not ready to get engaged at the end of the show. Colton pleaded for her to stay and told her he was going to choose her, she stood her ground, he went back to his hotel to sulk, but soon left and gave Bachelor Nation what it had been waiting for all season.  After calming down, he decided that Cassie was still the one, and he would fight for her. But first, he needed to dump his two remaining ladies - Tayshia and Hannah G. (Cassie eventually acquiesced to Colton's pleas for a second chance, and now they are happily dating, I guess?)

Both Cassie and Hannah G. are very typical of women that make it to the final three on The Bachelor - pretty, blonde, thin, honestly somewhat innocuous. Tayshia, however, is black. Black women, as well as other women of color, do not typically fare well on this series. Sure, most of time, they aren't all eliminated on night one. But Tayshia's place in the final three women is only the second time out of 23 seasons where a black woman has made it that far. Further, no black woman has ever progressed past the final 3. This can likely be attributed to a lack of diversity in the cast generally, as well as the implicit biases of the Bachelor(ette)s themselves. As a woman of color, I like to root for the non-white contestants, even knowing their chances of winning the show are slim, and that is easy to do when given contestants like Tayshia. I didn't expect Tayshia to win, but there are two things about the way her storyline ended that trouble me: 1) the way she felt she needed to handle herself when Colton broke up with her and; 2) that she wasn't chosen to be the next Bachelorette.

Tayshia's trajectory on the show was typical of a frontrunner. She went bungee-jumping on her first date with Colton, and he seemed to genuinely like her and want to spend time with her. Tayshia seemed smart, down to earth, and sincere. She stayed out of drama for most of the season, until she felt she needed to warn Colton about Cassie's intentions. (After that episode, there was some backlash against her, though she was vindicated in the end when Cassie tried to quit the show.)  When confronted by Caelynn, she stayed calm and did not resort to name calling. Caelynn on the other hand felt entitled to swear, and even called Tayshia a "stupid bitch" in an interview with a producer. Tayshia likely felt that she could not do either, lest she embody the problematic reality television trope of the "angry black woman." She kept her cool again when Colton blindsided her with the news he was breaking up with her for Cassie. In fact, at least from what we saw, she seemed to be the one comforting him (at 4:09) - a really annoying phenomenon many straight women have experienced. She kept her composure through her meeting with Colton at the finale as well, and she was lauded in the comments sections of YouTube videos as well as other social media sites as being "classy," "beautiful," and "too good for Colton." Hannah G. was much more confrontational with Colton, choosing to use both the break-up itself and the interview at the finale to ask the questions she needed to gain closure, and was firm about making her disappointment in him known. She too, was showered with praise and similarly told by the internet that she was "too good for Colton." Hannah G. was pretty quiet this season - we didn't get a lot from her substantively, as the edit was focused on her and Colton's physical chemistry. However, in the final two episodes she came out, guns blazing. She didn't have to worry whether she would be branded aggressive, she could talk to Colton as indignantly as she felt the situation warranted. Tayshia didn't have that luxury, which, given the situation, feels unfair to her.

As much as the ladies this season spent a lot of time questioning the other girls' motive for coming on the show, every season of this franchise is an audition for the next Bachelor(ette) and Bachelor in Paradise. As long as a contestant is somewhat interesting or memorable (in the broadest possible terms), they will end up on Bachelor in Paradise. That is not a bad thing - from just four seasons, two couples are married with kids, and at least three more are still in committed relationships. As such, BiP actually has a pretty good track record.  Still, if it doesn't seem like a contestant is going to win, you can bet one of their other goals is to be the new Bachelor(ette). The title position is typically chosen from the previous season's final 4 men or women. Thus, this year's pool of eligible women should have been: Caelynn, Tayshia, and Hannah G. Instead, the powers that be chose Hannah B., who finished in 7th place, who while sometimes delightful enough, seemed to struggle at times in front of the camera. Caelynn was implicated in the Cassie "not here for the right reasons" drama, and, as mentioned before, we didn't see enough of Hannah G's personality to imagine her carrying a show. So what about Tayshia? The last time that a black woman, Rachel Lindsay made it this far on the Bachelor, she was chosen as the Bachelorette. I thought it was an enjoyable season - Lindsay is smart, vibrant, and was not afraid to ask the men (a few) difficult questions about race, and they brought in more men of color for the occasion. The franchise appears to like Lindsay, but given another opportunity to produce another season with a black woman in the lead role, they balked and chose a woman who finished in 7th place. ABC seems to have felt they have done enough with respect to diversity and race when it cast Lindsay in the role, but it appears to be hesitant to cast a another person of color.

In conclusion, ABC missed an opportunity to cast another black woman as the Bachelorette, despite how carefully she policed herself on the show. At least we'll be seeing her again in Paradise!

"Dear Mr. Foland": Addressing male domination of the legal profession

Dear Mr. Foland,
We are in receipt of your application materials ... Thank you for your interest in our office.

The above is an excerpt from an email I received the other day after sending in my application materials for a fall externship. It represents the typical response I get from potential employers; it is polite, informative, and most importantly, the respondent presumes that I am a man.

When I apply for jobs, a majority of the responses I get address a Mr. Taylor Foland. As someone with a gender neutral name, I obviously understand why this happens. Taylors come in all shapes, sizes, and genders, and my application materials do not include any gender indicators such as Mr., Ms., or preferred pronouns. But, before I came to law school, this didn't happen at all...not even once. And, it happens often. About 70-80% of the responses I get address Mr. Foland. So, what is it about the legal profession that makes my resume read male?

First of all, let's talk about my resume. I've spent a lot of time crafting my resume over the years, but for the majority of law school my resume has included one or more of the following positions: museum educator at two different history museums, law clerk at the Children's Law Centre, and Law Clerk at the Sacramento City Attorney's Office. In addition to my professional obligations I also list: President of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, Co-Chair of the Women's Law Association, and Member of Law Review. And for a fun little twist to the resume, I've also included a "Personal Interests" section which includes (beware: it's a little cringe): bread and pastry baking (hit me up if you want some baked goods!), aerial dance (a PC way to say pole dancing...it's great exercise for the body and mind!), clothing design (a nod to the sewing machine I break out every now and again), and soccer.

That is, more or less, the sum total of my resume. Again, there are no obvious gender markers such as name prefixes or preferred pronouns. My name "Taylor Foland" is on the top of the page in larger text than anything else. That's about it. So, what is it about that information that leads employers to address me as Mr. Foland?

What strikes me as odd right off the bat is that a lot of the things on my resume indicate a female identity per societal standards and norms. For example, education is a field typically occupied by women and family law is largely comprised of female attorneys. If that wasn't enough, surely most people would think that leadership roles in a reproductive justice society and a women's law club screams, "female!", or that clothing design and dance are extracurriculars associated more often with women. Are the people reading my resume just progressive? Are the people reading my resume even reading it at all??

My experiences as "Mr. Foland" have lead me to consider the ways in which the entire legal system is dominated by men. Male-domination occurs at almost every stage in the process to becoming a lawyer: getting to law school, law school itself, and the legal profession. In such an environment, it is no surprise that an applicant with a gender-neutral name, regardless of the content of their resume, will be presumed male. I will focus on the final stage of domination: the legal profession.

To quickly comment on the first two, barriers often discourage women from applying to law school, and/or lead to "poorer" performances by women in law school, among other things. Some of those barriers include the lack of female law school professors and mentors, emotional labour responsibilities that women often take on in addition to their academic, financial, and personal responsibilities, and systemic sexism that expects certain behaviours of women (agreeable, smiling, pleasant) and pushes women into certain professions (aka "pink-collared jobs" such as nursing, waitressing, and teaching).

But, relevant to Mr. Foland are the barriers in the professional realm of the law, where "his" resume gets read and analyzed. Because although women enrollees have surpassed men enrollees in American law schools for the past three years, female representation in leadership positions (partners and equity partners) and retention rates of female employees demonstrate persisting inequalities.

Why do these inequalities exist? Interpretations of a 2018 Law Society survey suggest some reasons:

In an international survey of over 7,500 women lawyers conducted by the Law Society, the top three barriers to women’s career progression were reported to be unconscious bias on the part of senior colleagues (52% of respondents), an unacceptable work/life balance (48%), and a belief that the traditional networks and routes to promotion in law are male orientated (46%).

Another key factor that others writing on the topic have suggested is the "focus on presenteeism" in the legal profession, or the requirement that lawyers be present in the workplace at all times to conduct their work. This approach disproportionately turns women away from the legal profession after a while, because women often rely on flexible work schedules once starting a family (Note: there is a discussion to be had here about why women have to become more flexible, while their male partners - in heterosexual relationships - often do not).

All of these factors contribute to the male domination of the legal profession. Not only is the build up to becoming a lawyer inaccessible to women, but the profession itself is not conducive to female involvement. When it is men who typically succeed in a profession, it is not surprising that an applicant with a name sometimes given to men is presumed to be one.

Having identified that male-domination exists in the legal field, which is probably not a surprising realization, the question remains: what do we do about it? And, what do I do about my alter-ego, Mr. Foland?

In my opinion, flexibility in all workplaces for both men and women alleviates gender-based pressure to be present/perform at work in ways that go against other commitments. Next, the legal profession must ensure that there are women in senior positions, both at law schools and law firms. Up and coming female lawyers also need greater access to mentoring and sponsorship from those already in the field (e.g. breaking down gender-barriers with respect to networking events). Finally, men need to engage more directly with the equality debate in all aspects of life. 

As to what I, Mr./Ms. Foland should do, I admit that it is something I still grapple with. On the one hand, misgendering has provided me a unique advantage in interviews. Surprising (or correcting in an email) an interviewer with my true gender identity often puts me in a better position in an interview. In a weird way, I have a slight upper hand because they made a mistake.

On the other hand, I recognize the problems associated with this method, which I have followed up until this point. First, misgendering is a real problem for trans and nonbinary individuals. As a cis-female, is my capitalization of misgendering disrespectful and trivializing of trans/nonbinary issues? I think it probably is. Secondly, by failing to put gender markers on my resume, am I taking advantage of male domination by knowing I may pass as male and thus get a (potential) leg up in the application process? To what extent does feeding into the current state perpetuate it? These are all questions I have that I have not figured out the answer to. But, they are questions I will keep asking myself as I edit and submit my resume in the future.

That's all that Ms. Foland has to say about the matter for now. 

Law and sexual repression in China

Li Yinhe, the famous sociologist, sexologist, and activist for LGBT rights in the People's Republic of China claimed in an interview with Phoenix Net Culture (IFENG. COM) on December 24, 2014, that Chinese sexual repression is the highest in the world and only North Korea’s sexual repression is higher than China. It is worth mentioning that on December 12, 2014, cankaoxiaoxi.com published an article: the Chinese are the most sexually “repressed”? The article indicated that people in China watch pornography as the highest in the world and have surpassed the United States in pornography usage.

For thousands of year, Chinese culture promoted the belief that sex before marriage is unacceptable. Women should abide by “the women's morality” and maintain their loyalty to their husbands before marriage. The purpose of sex is not enjoyment, but to produce offspring and to let the husband release his sexual desires. Fortunately, with the advent of family planning policies in the 20th century, the purpose of sexual behavior has changed. The family can only have one child. So sexual behavior between a husband and wife is no longer just for childbirth but to enjoy sexual pleasure. However, in an interview, Li Yinhe, I mentioned at the first paragraph, said, “There was a national sex survey in 2004; twenty-eight percent of Chinese women between 60 and 64 years old had never experienced sexual pleasure in their lives.” she also stated that “ There are also surveys about other countries’ people. Sometimes women can’t enjoy sexual pleasure because of physical limitations or personal dislikes, but that does not exceed more than 10% of the female population.”

The key reason for feeling no pleasure from sex is probably due to long-term sexual repression based on cultural norms. Women are shamed and prevented from expressing their sexual desires. However, the law also plays an important role in shaping a woman’s perspective and behavior. The law relating to sex absorbs plenty of traditional moral theory. The law in any country reflects the cultural values of that country; the law can also shape the values of individuals within the country.

There are two typical laws in China that exemplify this. According to Article 301 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, group licentiousness is a crime based on the view that assembling a crowd to engage in sexual promiscuity reflects public contempt for state law and social morality. Specifically, it refers to a gathering of three or more people (men and/or women) engaging in sexual activity and other promiscuous activities. The activity of the participants must be voluntary. The state views such behavior as violating the public order. Those who gather for promiscuous activities shall experience criminal detention or public surveillance or imprisonment for not more than fives years.

There has been much talk of the law being repealed. Legal experts argue that there are no victims from voluntary group sex which generally takes place in private and hidden places and does not endanger public order. Why, then, should the law punish such harmless acts? There are opposing voices say that these group sex acts can’t match the traditional Chinese morality. In my opinion, law is the lowest standard of morality. We can require the public to respect the law and use the standard of law. But we can not ask the public to act following all the traditional morality whatever it is correct or decadent. Because it is difficult to distinguish whether the standard of traditional morality is appropriate in this new era. If we use morality as the bottom line of law, then morality will kidnap all the people to comply with the strictest “law” which may cause the mess. Also, freedom will become nonsense.

The goal in punishing group licentiousness is to curb sexual openness and freedom. The present Chinese law doesn’t accept sexual openness in its citizens and uses stringent criminal laws to imprison people for what the state considers immoral and unlawful behavior. Criminal laws serve to warn people that sex can only take place between two people, a husband and wife, in private. Sex intercourse should occur in a “proper way”. Citizens can't follow their own inclinations. Sex is a private act, but the law wants to control this kind of behavior in a way that completely violates the individual's privacy and sexual freedom. It is unreasonable to treat sexual acts in private as sins when they are done freely and do not harm others.

Then people began to accept that sex was not completely free. Once again the ancient tradition came to mind that sex was not something to be played with, but rather a tool for procreation within rules and regulations. Even if you want to enjoy it, be careful and sneaky.

Another law that promotes the sexual repression of citizens is the People's Republic of China criminal law, Article 363 (amended in 2015)：

Whoever for the purpose of making profits, produces, duplicates, publishes, sells or disseminates pornographic articles for profit shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of no more than three years, criminal detention or public surveillance and shall also be fined. If the circumstances are serious, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of no less than three years but no more than 10 years and shall also be fined; If the circumstances are especially serious, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 years or fixed-term imprisonment, and shall also be fined or have his property confiscated.

Criminal law, Article 364, claims that whoever disseminates pornographic books, periodicals, films, audio-visual materials, pictures or other pornographic materials, if the circumstances are serious, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than two years, criminal detention or public surveillance.

Whether making a profit or not, it is a crime to disseminate obscene material. According to the law, the spread of obscene materials in the society will harm the physical and mental health of the Chinese people, especially teenagers, and also easily induce illegal and criminal activities. From the criminal law perspective, cracking down on the spread of obscene articles in society according to law is critical to maintaining public security, protecting people's physical and mental health and promoting spiritual civilization.

When I asked my close male friends, all of them have seen pornographic movies. When I asked my female friends, almost half of them have seen pornographic movies. Since the law wants to combat the spread of obscene materials, why does the law can tolerate everyone watching porn at home? There is an old saying in China that sex and food are life. In other words, the two most important things in life are eating and having sex. The demand for porn is a normal human physiological desire. It is oppressive and against human nature to prohibit people from satisfying their sexual and physical needs.

If the law wants to prohibit the impact of such films on minors, it can learn from the United States to create a film classification system and child protection mode for television. Blindly banning the spread and production of pornographic films will only result in the boom of the pornographic materials market. In the present Chinese system, protecting teenagers from porn can’t be achieved. Worse yet, people can make more money from the dissemination of pornography because it is illegal.

The booming porn market in China is inseparable from sexual repression. Chinese students do not receive sex education as children and teenagers. Teachers keep silent on the topic of sexual behavior and sexual health. Normal minors are full of curiosity and desire as their bodies develop and change. So boys and many girls under the age of 18 have been exposed to porn and they acquire their sexual knowledge and sexual behavior from pornography. Porn is the sex education for Chinese boys. However, girls are more confused about sex because they have no resource to understand sex and sexual behavior. Teachers do not carry out positive sex education in school and parents are too shy to speak to their children about sexual knowledge. Pornography has become the key way for minors to acquire sexual knowledge before they experience sex.

However, pornographic materials are prohibited by law. Minors and adults must close the curtains and watch pornography secretly and quietly. As a result, the public believes that pornography is bad and harmful. More importantly, people are influenced by the anti-pornography laws. Since pornography isn’t supposed to be seen and masturbation is regarded as depraved thing, sexual behavior seems even more shameful. People suppress their desires because the law tells us that it is against the law to spread pornography to help people enjoy sex. Sex, then, should not be treated as a natural pleasure to be enjoyed.

Chinese minors and adults, generation after generation, grow up in this sexually confused and repressive environment. When they first come into contact with sexual behavior, they will doubt themselves: should I feel happy? Should I be ashamed? Morality and law tell me that I should not enjoy sex. Sexual repression is sprouting and developing in China.

The extraordinary influence of laws on the public is so great that legislators should be extremely careful to find ways to deal with the problem since the current laws force people to accept conflicted and negative values towards sex. Laws are meant to protect people's relative freedom, not to limit their innate needs.
x

The fight for LGBT-inclusive K-8 curriculum in Elk Grove Unified School District

I am the Vice President of a the local LGBTQ Democratic club called the Stonewall Democrats of Greater Sacramento. Several months ago in December 2018 I got an email suggesting that Stonewall get involved in a local school board matter. 

The Elk Grove Unified School District (EGUSD), the fifth largest school district in California, was in the process of adopting new K-8 Social Science and History textbooks. The proposed textbooks would comply with CA state law called the FAIR Act which requires K-8 History and Social Science to be LGBTQ-inclusive. The School Board had only received public comments opposed to the adoption of the textbooks because of its LGBT-inclusiveness. 

I worked with a former board member to draft an email to EGUSD Board Members to show the club's support for the proposed curriculum and the importance of seeing members of the LGBT community reflected in textbooks.

The day after I send the emails, Board Member Nancy Chaires Espinoza responded thanking Stonewall for our advocacy and indicating that the comments she had heard thus far at largely been in opposition to the proposed curriculum.

In January 2019 following a Stonewall Board meeting discussion of the issue, I emailed Nancy to ask if she was available to talk with our members about the issues EGUSD is facing. Nancy was unavailable but suggested we invite Board Member Bobbie Singh-Allen, an ally of the LGBTQ community to come talk.

On January 14, 2019 EGUSD Bobbie spoke at the January Stonewall meeting. She said that our advocacy was needed, asked members to send letters and to attend EGUSD board meetings to speak during the public comment period in support of the proposed curriculum. At the time of the January meeting it was unclear when the board would be voting on whether or not to adopt the curriculum because agendas are posted just 72 hours in advance.

Later that night I took the tips and information shared by Bobbie and created resources such as template emails to board members, email addresses for board members, and information about the issue.

Stonewall members responded by sending emails expressing their support to EGUSD board members. The Sacramento Area Rainbow Families and other LGBT groups shared the resources provided by Stonewall.

On Tuesday February 5th the Stonewall board got notice that EGUSD would be voting that night. We sent out emails and spread the work on social media about the upcoming vote and encouraged as many people as possible to show up in person.

The EGUSD board meeting began at 6:00pm in a large room with a dais on one side of the room and lines of tables filing the room. Many people were standing around the edges of the room because there weren’t enough seats for everyone. Stonewall members and other LGBTQ community members that I recognized where there. There were several news cameras and reporters.

Over the course of the regular board meeting, people spoke on the proposed curriculum change during the general public comment period near the beginning of the meeting as well as during the comment period when the curriculum agenda item was called. When it came up on the agenda after what already seemed like a long meeting, EGUSD staff did a presentation about proposed curriculum and recommended adoption.

Public comment on the textbooks took hours. Each speaker had 2 minutes to talk, but many went over the time limit. It was an incredibly emotional and tense environment. There were likely approximately 100 people there to talk, and at least half of the people spoke in opposition. The people speaking in opposition talked about how they didn’t want their kids learning about gay sex and advocated for an opt-out option like with sex education. The amount of hostility and misinformation was staggering. Whenever a speaker would say something in opposition the crowd would erupt in applause and cheering.

When it was my turn to speak I was admittedly nervous. I had not expected the room to be filled with such hostility and hatred masked by people saying “I’m not homophobic but…” I read my notes, shared my personal story of struggling with my sexuality at 13 years old, and tried not to cry so much that I couldn’t get the words out.

When I had finished speaking I stepped out of the room to get a break from the hostility. Friends and strangers came up to me to support me and make sure that I was ok. Two strangers talked with me and hugged me.

Once all of the public comments were heard Board Members spoke, and each gave statements about their decision and the issues. Both Nancy and Bobbie were ardently in support of the proposed curriculum. When the final vote was called at around 9:50pm, the EGUSD Board voted unanimously to adopt the proposed curriculum which is LGBT-inclusive.

With the number of students and young people openly claiming LGBTQ and non-binary identities, I had hoped that parents and community members would be more understanding of the need to talk about role models and historical figures in the LGBTQ community. It was distressing to see how wrong I was, and how little has changed since I was in school. 

This experience showed me how very important having LGBTQ people and allies in public office is, and how important it is to make sure your voice is heard.