Well, not really pertaining to economics, but just to start things off...
I thought it was interesting the villagers had a coexistence of Christianity with God and Animism with the river spirits and such. The fact the council of old women proclaimed they must drink alcohol to appease to angered spirits amuses me quite a bit too.
With regards to gender, I don't think there's a lot of discrimination or anything. The whole being naked and baring their breasts in public is natural and traditional to them. It seems odd to us because our society and culture makes it a social taboo, but really, there's nothing biologically wrong with it. Most of the girls WANTED to do it, and considering the pampering and special treatment they get, I'm not surprised. Asikiye (sp?) refused to do it because the influence city life had on her. Much like ourselves, she developed a sense that baring your breasts in public is wrong and embarassing. With the fear of sparking a religious debate, think about Adam and Eve. Before gaining the awareness of their nakedness, they were completely fine and unembarassed. Since the villagers did not have the social influence and indoctrination as we have, the ceremony was merely a natural tradition.
In one segment of the film where differing viewpoints of the "Iria" ceremony is discussed by the council of chiefs, one explains that the girls are not forced or coerced to participate in the ceremony; it is a part of their culture. I think that this summarizes how these girls are conflicted between traditional practices and modern beliefs. I'm pleased that the film presented opposing perspectives from the "iriabos" themselves. This provides viewers with a more concrete depiction of the ceremony, rather than if it were described from solely an outsider's point of view. Another important part of the film is that it illustrates how one's identity evolves throughout time. Whether or not this means that individual choice and freedom are more important factors to forming an identity, it is important for these girls to know that they have a choice, and that they do not always have to obey or adhere to certain traditions and societal expectations.
I definitely agree with what Vinh has already posted. I was surprised to see the 'city lady' known as Asikiye to be so against the culture she grew up in.
Another interesting point was that in the village, where food was not as plentiful as in the US, heavier women were thought of as more attractive. Since part of the reason of going though this ceremony was to find a spouse, young women were put in ‘fattening rooms’ in order to gain weight and appeal to the opposite sex. Where as in the US, where food is definitely readily available, women who are trying to find a spouse generally try to loose weight since skinniness is portrayed as more attractive.
Before delving in to any sort of rhetoric discussion, I have to say I am always intrigued by the variety of cultures and customs in our world. It’s important to break away from our isolated western culture and Monday’s Girls, helped us do that.
This film was made the audience walk a fine line of judgment considering the role of women in this village and our western cultural biased. In other words, the question is raised where do we tow the line in allowing different culture to flourish in there uniqueness while still observing equality among gender?
At one point in the film I was taken aback by the presentation of the young women in the village after they had been painted and powdered. From an American perspective a person might be appalled by the objectification of the female body in front of the village. I did not like when one of the young village boys walked up and grazed one of the young woman’s breast. But this ceremony is not intended for Americans it is intended for the people of the village and it is important to consider their perspective.
Every culture has customs that progress young men and women from adolescence to adulthood whether it be prom and high school graduation or painted bodies and fattening rooms. If the people of the village in the film saw a documentary of young high school students dancing at prom and partying afterwards, they might be appalled as well. My point is that perspective is essential when evaluating a culture.
While the documentary explains that the Waikiriki coming of age ceremonies are voluntary and a great honor to the girls involved, the village response to Azikiwe's refusal to take part in the breast exposure implies coercion. When Azikiwe refuses to show her breasts to the community, an emergency council of village elders is called. Eventually, these elders level a fine on Azikiwe's father, offering an economic disincentive to resist tradition. Furthermore, this community reaction creates a clear rift between Azikiwe and her father. Even some of the girls who take part in the ceremony do so under clear pressure from their families. One girl's father gives her "strong beer" to make the public exposure less intimidating. While I understand that a foreigner looking at a ceremony like this from the outside should avoid imposing their own cultural lens, it does seem like there is evidence that there are some who, in the absence of social pressure, would not take part.
So far great discussion! Going forward though I'd like people to be more careful in using the word "natural"... there's nothing "natural" about human behavior, it is all socially constructed.
At the end of the film Azikiwe says, "There are some traditions people should forget." What say you?
My only comment is; if it is something that a person needs to be drunk to do, than he or she probably should not be doing it. Clearly the girl in the movie had enormous pressure on her to do something that she would not have done in other circumstances.
In response to what others have said, although "bearing breasts" was a part of this tradition in becoming a women, we can not make the assumption that they should all feel completely fine and unembarrassed. This act may be considered fine if it was a norm to bear breasts in everyday living conditions, but it is not. This tradition is, in my mind, meant to embarrass them. Think about the look on their faces during the first village ritual. From my opinion, none of them wanted to be there (from facial expressions). I think that through this embarrassment they gain the sense of obedience that they must do what the men say. I doubt that this was a tradition started by the women. I see it starting with the men, meant to create submissiveness. Should the act of becoming a women be a privilege. I think it is a right that all humans are entitled to.
I also thought the fattening stage was very interesting in contrast to America. As our society looks at obesity as being against the social popular opinion, Monday's Girls introduces overweight women as being attractive and popular among the community.
Finally, I found it interesting that the person held responsible for Azikiwe's disobedience was not Azikiwe, but rather her father. I guess it makes sense from some of our other readings. It seemed as if Monday and the community was not mad at Azikiwe, but were saddened for her that her father did not lead her down the right path. ...
Brian, Nice comments. Indeed the father was held responsible for the "failure" of the child. Another dimension to the story is that very often traditions are upheld regardless of the specific circumstances of the tradition, but rather because of the the "othering" that happens w.r.t a larger community. So it sets this ethnic community apart, and enhances solidarity within the community (shared rituals often have that effect, no?). So one can then enter a debate at a different level: if this is the only shared ritual your community has, and your community is locked in struggle with other communities so that ritually-enhanced solidarity is important, then maybe you go with the tradition, even though everyone might prefer a different, less gendered, tradition. MK
In response to Grant's mention of the young boy jumping up and grabbing the breast of one of the young women:
I watched that part a couple of times, as I noticed something rather telling about how the boy was reprimanded for his action. In our culture, at least for the most part, if a young boy did an action like that in front of his parents and family, he would probably be pretty severely reprimanded. It just isn't acceptable, nor respectful, for young boys to grab the breasts of women, or so goes our norm.
Yet, in the video, the boy is hardly reprimanded at all in the brief segment. A woman standing nearby, whom I presume is the child's mother or grandmother, just shakes her head somewhat jokingly, as if to say "boys will be boys." I imagine, however, that if the roles were reversed, and young boys were forced to walk around naked, a young girl who ran out and grabbed the penis of a young man would most likely reap a harsh punishment.
The woman's lax response to the young boy clearly highlighted to me the gender disparities in the ceremony. These disparities cause me to be cautious about saying that the rituals are OK because they are "natural." I would even hesitate to claim that the rituals are benign if the young women themselves profess desire to partake; their desires have been so profoundly shaped by asymmetric gender-based conditioning.
If, as I suspect, the elderly woman felt uncomfortable reprimanding the child because of gender-based power differences, I imagine that any preferences formulated in the willing young women's minds must also be quite bounded by such inherent power asymmetries.
Anyway, just some thoughts... I'd be interested to see if anyone else noticed the woman's response to the child and how they interpret it's import...
11 comments:
Well, not really pertaining to economics, but just to start things off...
I thought it was interesting the villagers had a coexistence of Christianity with God and Animism with the river spirits and such. The fact the council of old women proclaimed they must drink alcohol to appease to angered spirits amuses me quite a bit too.
With regards to gender, I don't think there's a lot of discrimination or anything. The whole being naked and baring their breasts in public is natural and traditional to them. It seems odd to us because our society and culture makes it a social taboo, but really, there's nothing biologically wrong with it. Most of the girls WANTED to do it, and considering the pampering and special treatment they get, I'm not surprised. Asikiye (sp?) refused to do it because the influence city life had on her. Much like ourselves, she developed a sense that baring your breasts in public is wrong and embarassing. With the fear of sparking a religious debate, think about Adam and Eve. Before gaining the awareness of their nakedness, they were completely fine and unembarassed. Since the villagers did not have the social influence and indoctrination as we have, the ceremony was merely a natural tradition.
In one segment of the film where differing viewpoints of the "Iria" ceremony is discussed by the council of chiefs, one explains that the girls are not forced or coerced to participate in the ceremony; it is a part of their culture. I think that this summarizes how these girls are conflicted between traditional practices and modern beliefs. I'm pleased that the film presented opposing perspectives from the "iriabos" themselves. This provides viewers with a more concrete depiction of the ceremony, rather than if it were described from solely an outsider's point of view. Another important part of the film is that it illustrates how one's identity evolves throughout time. Whether or not this means that individual choice and freedom are more important factors to forming an identity, it is important for these girls to know that they have a choice, and that they do not always have to obey or adhere to certain traditions and societal expectations.
I definitely agree with what Vinh has already posted. I was surprised to see the 'city lady' known as Asikiye to be so against the culture she grew up in.
Another interesting point was that in the village, where food was not as plentiful as in the US, heavier women were thought of as more attractive. Since part of the reason of going though this ceremony was to find a spouse, young women were put in ‘fattening rooms’ in order to gain weight and appeal to the opposite sex. Where as in the US, where food is definitely readily available, women who are trying to find a spouse generally try to loose weight since skinniness is portrayed as more attractive.
Before delving in to any sort of rhetoric discussion, I have to say I am always intrigued by the variety of cultures and customs in our world. It’s important to break away from our isolated western culture and Monday’s Girls, helped us do that.
This film was made the audience walk a fine line of judgment considering the role of women in this village and our western cultural biased. In other words, the question is raised where do we tow the line in allowing different culture to flourish in there uniqueness while still observing equality among gender?
At one point in the film I was taken aback by the presentation of the young women in the village after they had been painted and powdered. From an American perspective a person might be appalled by the objectification of the female body in front of the village. I did not like when one of the young village boys walked up and grazed one of the young woman’s breast. But this ceremony is not intended for Americans it is intended for the people of the village and it is important to consider their perspective.
Every culture has customs that progress young men and women from adolescence to adulthood whether it be prom and high school graduation or painted bodies and fattening rooms. If the people of the village in the film saw a documentary of young high school students dancing at prom and partying afterwards, they might be appalled as well. My point is that perspective is essential when evaluating a culture.
While the documentary explains that the Waikiriki coming of age ceremonies are voluntary and a great honor to the girls involved, the village response to Azikiwe's refusal to take part in the breast exposure implies coercion. When Azikiwe refuses to show her breasts to the community, an emergency council of village elders is called. Eventually, these elders level a fine on Azikiwe's father, offering an economic disincentive to resist tradition. Furthermore, this community reaction creates a clear rift between Azikiwe and her father.
Even some of the girls who take part in the ceremony do so under clear pressure from their families. One girl's father gives her "strong beer" to make the public exposure less intimidating. While I understand that a foreigner looking at a ceremony like this from the outside should avoid imposing their own cultural lens, it does seem like there is evidence that there are some who, in the absence of social pressure, would not take part.
So far great discussion! Going forward though I'd like people to be more careful in using the word "natural"... there's nothing "natural" about human behavior, it is all socially constructed.
At the end of the film Azikiwe says, "There are some traditions people should forget." What say you?
My only comment is; if it is something that a person needs to be drunk to do, than he or she probably should not be doing it. Clearly the girl in the movie had enormous pressure on her to do something that she would not have done in other circumstances.
In response to what others have said, although "bearing breasts" was a part of this tradition in becoming a women, we can not make the assumption that they should all feel completely fine and unembarrassed. This act may be considered fine if it was a norm to bear breasts in everyday living conditions, but it is not. This tradition is, in my mind, meant to embarrass them. Think about the look on their faces during the first village ritual. From my opinion, none of them wanted to be there (from facial expressions). I think that through this embarrassment they gain the sense of obedience that they must do what the men say. I doubt that this was a tradition started by the women. I see it starting with the men, meant to create submissiveness. Should the act of becoming a women be a privilege. I think it is a right that all humans are entitled to.
I also thought the fattening stage was very interesting in contrast to America. As our society looks at obesity as being against the social popular opinion, Monday's Girls introduces overweight women as being attractive and popular among the community.
Finally, I found it interesting that the person held responsible for Azikiwe's disobedience was not Azikiwe, but rather her father. I guess it makes sense from some of our other readings. It seemed as if Monday and the community was not mad at Azikiwe, but were saddened for her that her father did not lead her down the right path. ...
Brian,
Nice comments. Indeed the father was held responsible for the "failure" of the child. Another dimension to the story is that very often traditions are upheld regardless of the specific circumstances of the tradition, but rather because of the the "othering" that happens w.r.t a larger community. So it sets this ethnic community apart, and enhances solidarity within the community (shared rituals often have that effect, no?). So one can then enter a debate at a different level: if this is the only shared ritual your community has, and your community is locked in struggle with other communities so that ritually-enhanced solidarity is important, then maybe you go with the tradition, even though everyone might prefer a different, less gendered, tradition.
MK
In response to Grant's mention of the young boy jumping up and grabbing the breast of one of the young women:
I watched that part a couple of times, as I noticed something rather telling about how the boy was reprimanded for his action. In our culture, at least for the most part, if a young boy did an action like that in front of his parents and family, he would probably be pretty severely reprimanded. It just isn't acceptable, nor respectful, for young boys to grab the breasts of women, or so goes our norm.
Yet, in the video, the boy is hardly reprimanded at all in the brief segment. A woman standing nearby, whom I presume is the child's mother or grandmother, just shakes her head somewhat jokingly, as if to say "boys will be boys." I imagine, however, that if the roles were reversed, and young boys were forced to walk around naked, a young girl who ran out and grabbed the penis of a young man would most likely reap a harsh punishment.
The woman's lax response to the young boy clearly highlighted to me the gender disparities in the ceremony. These disparities cause me to be cautious about saying that the rituals are OK because they are "natural." I would even hesitate to claim that the rituals are benign if the young women themselves profess desire to partake; their desires have been so profoundly shaped by asymmetric gender-based conditioning.
If, as I suspect, the elderly woman felt uncomfortable reprimanding the child because of gender-based power differences, I imagine that any preferences formulated in the willing young women's minds must also be quite bounded by such inherent power asymmetries.
Anyway, just some thoughts... I'd be interested to see if anyone else noticed the woman's response to the child and how they interpret it's import...
Post a Comment