normality of man and female....

I also liked this week’s readings, thank you Cathy! I read the introduction and two papers so far, one more to go.
So far I found Carrie Crenshaws’ paper the most interesting. While reading the paper especially the first pages, I was surprised to see there was a legal case against a law totally for the benefit of the women. I put a lot of question marks around the lines and asked a few times “what is wrong with this idea”? I was especially shocked when I read the part about seeing pregnant women the same as men. Women are similar to men, pregnant women are similar to non-pregnant women. So pregnant women are similar to man. (This should be written by someone who never got pregnant, seriously). I still do not agree with this section! but especially the conclusion part of the paper made it clear that this law especially paralyzed the hiring chances of females, did not really helped them as stated and there are some other ways to solve the problem.
One other focus of Crenshaw was the objectivity of news. I believe her point is very correct that news try to be objective by listening to all parties in the discussion but they listen only the leading figures. Isn’t it interesting that none of the sources cited mentions the ideas of the blue-color female workers but the ideas of feminist rhetoricians and law enforcers.