Events from real life

1.       Since my middle school to high school, my teachers as well as my parents advised me not to go anywhere without their permission, especially at the places where I can face the bad stares of males having bad intentions. The educators had an eye on us for sake of check and balance (because parents asked for it) that their students might not get emotionally involved in someone, as they were of the view that in teenage, sexual desire can be sparked only through a ‘Loving Gaze’ from the opposite gender and finally ended up in losing virginity. In context of my past experience, now, being on a mature person level, I can term those restrictions analogous to “VIRGINITY VOUCHER: DON’T BUY THE LIE, SAVE SEX FOR MARRIAGE” (VALENTI 2009: 31), as my parents as well as sex educators in school, believe on the Religious myth (on which virginity movement based on) that premarital sex is a sin, so they imposed restrictions on me so that I could save my virginity which was thought to be a gift from God for my future husband. While no such restrictions were been imposed on my brother, as being a member of a male-dominated society, they think a man can do anything before marriage and virginity is only for women. Being born in a family of conservative-minded people where no sexual freedom was given to daughters (as families having such mentality are very few in China but still do exist) and always been taught by sex educators who think that the curricula in high schools should be devised from ‘Virginity Movement’ that, “Any sexual activity outside of marriage is likely to make them diseased, poor, depressed and suicidal” (Valenti 2009, 102). So my experience of sex education reflects Valenti’s description about virginity but unlike most of the educators of that time, she is of the view that: “Allowing educators to equate sexuality with shame and disease is not the way to go; we are doing our children a great disservice” (Valenti 2009, 120) gives shut-up call to all narrow-minded people.

2.       Despite of all other racist behaviors women of color are facing in USA, the involuntary sterilization procedures following by Pro-Choice movement has been appeared as one of the strategy to snatch reproductive rights from Black or Puerto Rican women, as critically represented by the Angela Davis views that: “This movement, for example had been known to advocate involuntary sterilization-a racist form of mass birth control” (Davis 1983, 2). Whereas the representatives of Pro-choice movement deny such statements and defends themselves by arguing that “women of color were overburdened by their people’s fight against racism; and/or they had not yet become conscious of the centrality of sexism” (Davis, 1983, 1), while this is just a false description of what it actually is. Here I second Angela Davis point of view that women of color shouldn’t face such discrimination when it’s the matter of contraception or illegal abortions. They should also given the rights to decide the future of their unborn whether it should be given the life after 1^st trimester of pregnancy or it should be terminated or ‘murdered’ by illegal abortion and later on sterilization abuse (taking woman’s fertility away through medical-surgical procedures) to eliminate ‘unfit’ sectors of the population. I can relate this to the statement: “In the context of the whole feminist movement, the race-suicide episode was an additional factor identifying feminism almost exclusively with the aspirations of the more privileged women of the society” (Davis 1983, 5), and I again agree to Angela Davis that, this was all done to introduce race suicide by dominant races. So in this way, Angela Davis description of reproductive rights is different from the pro-choice movement because she believes in anti-racial approach and emphasize that Immigrants and Black women (thought to be inferior) should be given equal reproductive rights as that of whites (thought to be superior).