I’m really excited for my final seminar paper! In class, we hit on a few key ideas that I wanted to take on in my paper. We discussed the impact that mothers have had on their daughter’s sexual development. Generations of women have looked to their mothers as role models for normative gender and sexual roles. They behave as their mothers behave. The repetition of performative acts is what defines normative sexual behavior in our society.
How do we break away from normative sexual roles? We break away from this Oedipal logic. We break away from our mothers.
As we discussed in class, monogamy is a socially constructed example of normative sexual behavior. As a society, we take for granted that monogamy is the final goal of all sexual relationships. But is monogamy for everyone? Like most socially constructed roles for normative behavior, it’s not. And when a person is forced to conform to these roles, happiness is never the end result.
A few brave women chase after sexual satisfaction and happiness. They rebel against normative gender roles, like monogamy, and explore sexual behaviors that are outside of the “norm”. As a result of this behavior, these women have the opportunity to create and define their own femininity on their own terms, separate from the expectations of society and most importantly their mothers. That’s because the creation and discovery of one’s self is not complete without a complete and total separation from one’s mother.
I completely agree with your opinion on how mothers can impact their daughter's beliefs concerning sexual behavior. I also think that, to perhaps a lesser extent, this occurs between fathers and sons. It isn't necessarily just the female side of the equation that creates the "norm" - both sexes contribute! :) It definitely sounds like an interesting seminar paper, and I'm curious to see if daughters truly can ever separate from their mothers.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Adam in that it applies to fathers and sons well. You can also maybe delve into cultural aspects because in Western culture individuality is emphasized so it makes sense that women like to rebel against normativity. However, in collectivist cultures such as those in East Asia, daughters are less likely to deviate from their mothers. In fact, in East Asian culture, daughters are more likely to follow the same fate as their mothers and become loyal, obedient housewives.
ReplyDeleteI like how you have acknowledged the influence of a mother on a daughter's sexuality. However, I was wondering what your opinion on was on daughters who have lost their mothers/ do not have a mother figure present? Do you think that they find another person to fill the mother role? Or do they just deal without one? Also, you comment on how a few brave women "have the opportunity to create and define their own femininity on their own terms, separate from the expectations of society and most importantly their mothers". Do you believe that a woman can truly separate herself from society's standards? Can they ever be free?
ReplyDeleteIt's pretty clear that everyone agrees on the social construction of monogamy and the influence mother's have. What strikes me is the incest scene in the Piano Teacher. You say that self-discovery is independent of mothers, but that one instance may provide a unique insight into your paper. Additionally, I think there is an interesting paradox that you pose. A "mother" seems to discover her identify by having children, does this mean the mother gains identity at the loss of the daughter? Moreover, isn't "daughter" an identity in relation to a mother?
ReplyDeleteI want to make a few points. First, I don't think Shannon is referring to literal mothers. Instead, breaking away from "mother" is a symbolic gesture, one that we can achieve even if we don't have a literal mother. I also *don't* think we can just apply the same logic to fathers and sons. I think we should talk about why in class tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteI really like what you have to say about daughters inheriting normative sexual practices from their mothers...but I would like to pose a question through the lens of Hobi Bhabha's theory: If mimicry is almost the same, but not quite, then what is the difference between mothers' and daughters' sexual practices? In Bhabah's article, we postulated that when one society attempts to inherit parts of the invading superior country that maintains power over them, the indigenous people almost mimic them perfectly. Since their mimicry is not perfect, however, the invading peoples maintain power. So what does that mean for daughters who try to mimic their superior mothers? I would say that daughters probably mimic their mothers almost the same, but not quite. Perhaps this explains the changes in sexual behavior that we have seen throughout time. I think we could all agree that people are more sexually liberated nowadays, and maybe this has to do with the fact that daughters are mimicking their mothers almost the same, but being more sexually liberated as the result of being unable to perfectly mimic their mothers.
ReplyDeleteI like how Megan is bringing Bhabha into the discussion here, and I agree that we see mimicking with a difference. But I don't necessarily agree that "people are more sexually liberated nowadays." In fact, the logical fallacy here is that time leads to "progress," when in fact it could be the other way around (i.e., time leads to decay). Benjamin would certainly argue that we need to look to the past for liberation.
ReplyDelete