first of all, I would like to say that I did not comment about the friendship topic, because I don’t really know what to say about it… I feel like friendship different for everyone, even when cultural realities and norms are imposed, and it is difficult for me to discuss it without giving personal examples…
However, I would now like to address the article that Professor Luciano sent us: “Secret Sex: At What Risk?” In the article the author compares Ewan McGregor’s character in “Deception” and the sexual situation he is in with Spitzer’s sex scandal. However, I don’t think this is a fair comparison. What Spitzer did was illegal (paying for sex), and immoral (adultery); neither of which were McGregor’s character’s crimes. The author doesn’t go into a lot of detail as so how and why McGregor’s life was in danger due to his sexual encounters, but from what I understand, he was suspected of kidnapping or murder, because the women he was sharing a hotel bed with for a short while had disappeared from it.
Still, I don’t see how what happened to the antagonist in “Deception” can be directly attributed to secret sex, or in anyway to the consequences that Spitzer faced due to his illegal behavior… Of course, if cought in the act as Spitzer was, anyone would face dire consequences (perhaps not as dire as losing a job of the governor of New York), but what happened to McGregor’s character would not necessarily happen to anyone else who has “intimacy without intricacy” and, at least the way the author describes it, cannot be attributed specifically to “secret sex.”
Nonetheless, it is understandable that people are attracted to the danger (legal or moral) of this kind of sexual activity, which feeds into sexual fantasies, and usually, any circustances, if hurting others or yourself, make the act not worth the cost.
Myspace, Facebook, Friend Feed; interest in social networks are growing at an alarming rate.An individual can have 400 friends and only have met 200 of those friends face to face. In today’s changing environment I believe the definiton of a friend has also changed because it is now used as a lighter term.Aristotle suggest that friendship has three components; “friends must enjoy each other’s company, they must be useful to one another,and they must share”. He also categorized friendship further into three forms: genuine friendships, one based on mutual usefulness, and pleasure. The emergence of virtual communities allow individuals to link up with “friends” based on all three categories. These social networks allow for people to search for potential friends with parallel interest while allowing searches for old classmates and co-workers. Friendships today can last longer (if it is a solid relation intially) because technology allows friends to stay socially connected through sharing files, photos and conversations online.
Suggested questions:
How would you analyze friendship in terms of our discussion on intimacy in the global era, similar to our assessment of love, marriage, adoption in the global era?
How is friendship defined in our society?
Is the category of friend universal?
Do other cultures define friendship differently? How so?
What is the relationship between friends and family
Are there cultural constraints on who can be friends in our society?
Rule:
Treat the social and cultural (as it pertains to friendship) as an object of study beyond yourself. Analyze a social trend. That is, make a social and cultural analysis, be descriptive and analytical not proscriptive ( we should) or subjective (my experience).
In chapter 6, Constable argues that when a Chinese woman marries an American man, the woman is marrying “up” and the man is marrying “down,” based on contrasting cultural views on education, occupation, social class and financial stability. Agree or disagree??
Is it justified that some men want to marry women from another country (like China or the Philippines) because they can take good care of them and their households and because they are less demanding and more faithful than local women? Likewise, is it justified that foreign women seek American men because they think that American men are their ’shortcut’ to an American passport and it’s easier for them to help their family members come to the United States? Or is it natural to find partners because the men and women, both, are fulfilling their ‘needs?’
Why do American women not seek foreign men for relationships? Do they find the love and commitment they need from men in the United States? If it does happen, then why does the chapter in the book not focus on that?
These are some of the sites that Constable notes in the book, and what I was suggesting to look at in class. This is really selling brides: “with over 70,000 photos to choose from…
http://www.sincere-asian-brides.com/
http://www.chinabride.com/
The thing that struck me most intriguing about this article is the differences between Sweden and the United States in how they relate to children adopted from other countries and/or races. I would have expected that Sweden would be a lot more liberal, open minded, and accepting of international adoption and diversity, while the US would be more conservative. However, the article presents a different reality. While most adoptions in Sweden are international (here is another point, that Swedes tend to discourage mothers from giving their baby up for adoption, even if they feel unable to care for it) Swedish adoptive parents seem to have a difficult time accepting their adoptive children’s differences, interest in their birth country, and desire to contact their birth family.
On the other hand, parents in the United States seem to encourage such contact and research. The examples provided in the article illustrate the American families’ understanding of their Korean child’s need to be in contact with her Korean family. Even the fact that American families adopted these girls at the age of 8 shows that they are willing for them to have more of a memory and connection to their life in their birth country.
Coincidentally, this morning one of the topics discussed on NPR radio station was that of Sweden receiving the most Iraqi refugees, and now sending some of them back, against their will. The broadcast also discussed how Sweden is receiving more and more immigrants (and refugees) from other countries, which is bringing about an unwelcoming response. In connection to Yngvesson’s article, people who look different, from a different race or country, have a difficult time being accepted by the Swedish society, regardless of the nation’s seemingly liberal approach.
On another note, my brother is adopted, and my parents agreed upon adopting him (at the age of 5), that he would have directcontact with his biological mother (these were her terms). This was the first such case in Israel, where the biological parent remained in contact with their child who was adopted by another family. This situation was not easy on my brother or my family, and therefore, on the other hand, I understand the adoptive parents’ hesitations about such contacts.
Next week class discussion is about selling Intimacy. I was reading the article by Susan Frohlick I thought this article is slightly related to this week readings. In Sallie Yea’s article we read about women selling sex to GI for money and security and In Frohlick reading it’s about young men in Caribbean selling sex for money, land, and house or for visa for so they can leave the country. Most women that go to Caribbean to get some pleasure from young man do know that they motives. So my Questions are why don’t we read news or article about male prostitution or life style of those men in Caribbean? Why do these women go to Caribbean countries to get a little pleasure time in exchange for money or even for visa?
Surprised nothing has been mentioned about Gov. Spitzer. Any comments on his nights out with hookers and the prostitution ring he’s got going on?? I’m sure it can be tied into our class somehow….
Here are the questions I discussed in class on Tuesday and what I think would be interesting to farther explore about Yea’s article:
- The author describes the transitions in the women’s roles, from “trafficking entertainers” to “runaway brides” and the stereotypes attached to these roles as causing anxiety. Is it right to say, or to assume, that this anxiety is caused by this ‘identity crisis’ due to these roles, as the author suggests, or is it the acts that the women are forced to perform within these roles that are the source of anxiety?
- Why do the GI men marry the Filipina club workers, when they know of the stigma attached to these marriages, which obviously causes distrust?
- Are the Filipina “trafficked entertainers” really trafficked? Form the paper it seems like they chose this way of life in order to make more money than they did in their home country, and then chose to leave it when they found an American husband. Is this a common plan that these women have? Is the “trafficking” part all their own scam to gain sympathy from the young men?
