It
was interesting to me to read, in Outsourcing
the Womb, the amount of money that can be earned when someone sells the
rights to their body. The current industries are related to larger issues of
colonialism and women’s control of their own bodies. Along with this discovery,
it made me see the discrepancies within the system that is dubious while
asserting subjectivity to a woman.
Depending on her socioeconomic status and
nationality, a woman in need of money might be paid less because of her
geographical location. Internationally, for example, in Guatemala the text
mentions in Outsourcing the Womb how
little they get paid in comparison to women here in the United States. There is
a similar discrepancy in other countries, like India, as well. In India, the
practice of paying women, and especially women of lower socioeconomic status,
less is a common practice for functions such as holding a fetus. It was also interesting comparing this reading
to the last one, as that reading talked about indigenous women and their lack
of subjectivity of their bodies they were still policed by the movement. The institutions
were not there for them or to support them, but to rather police them and
police their bodies.
The reading suggests that we should
not get caught up with the sense that this is giving freedom to a woman to do
what she wants with her body. It is misleading, because hiring, underpaying,
and making a business of a woman’s body might help that woman in need. However,
it still doesn’t account for the systematic problems and history that goes tied
into being a woman, and even more so a pregnant woman.
Outsourcing the womb, then just
makes all of these inconsistencies of our system that puts women in a double
bind; and this goes for poor women especially, since poorer women are the most
targeted women to serve as surrogates. While connecting this reading to the one
about Indigenous women and their colonization, it was also interesting to see
and the differences and similarities within the article that talked about the
criminalization of mothers, which I wrote about in my last post. These
industries that exist for the demand of surrogacies and women who will do the
labor do not care about the woman involved. The fetus, and the want and need for
fetuses, comes from societal norms. These societal norms further the point of
the lack of subjectivity of the body of a woman.
Connecting the current reading to
the last reading, as I mentioned earlier, is compelling because it is
interesting to see how it interconnects because these indigenous women are
being policed, and the hierarchy between races and socioeconomic status. There
are women who are being sterilized against their will, but there other women
who are being paid to get pregnant, give up their rights, and go through the
labor of growing, and giving birth to a child. Therefore, there are many
problematic issues within the industry of surrogacy, the lack of regulation in
this industry, and this industry does not give power to the woman. There is
market place for the body, but not for the person, or the conditions that they
live under.
In other cases around the world,
such as Kenya, this nation ruled out the idea of adoption just recently in
order to lower the rates of human trafficking. This recent development brings
another facet of this issue into consideration. Moreover, this new development
makes it even harder to deal with these issues because we are not only talking
about subjectivity of a body but the lack of an individual owning one. Furthermore,
this brings the argument that if countries that are targeted as tourism
adoption to follow this same example and how it would affect them: would it
hurt them or benefit them? In the case of some women, without breaking the
glass ceiling of what it means to pay someone in a developing economy to carry
a child a give it up, this industry might not mean a lot because of their existing
structures of privilege. To another person, and the one carrying the child to
term, it would mean a lot. Because they need the money to feed another of their
children, if they do need to feed them, or in some other cases pay off their
students loans.
Furthermore, these industries and
issues are more problematic, aside from the race and socioeconomic status
issues that are clearly represented, as the ideas and legacy of colonialism
that are hidden and still prevalent in today’s world as seen through these
practices. The world has not achieved a post-colonialist society. The world is
still clearly experiencing the legacy of colonialism, and some of us don’t
realize this legacy unless we take courses in college. Organizing to action would be my other point
of grievance, how do we raise these issues to the level of attention they merit
when no one is talking about them? When, not wanting to assume, no one really
goes through this issues post undergraduate school? Tackling these issues as
women is a main concern when there is a male dominated society.
I have learned through my own perseverance
to stand up for myself, but how can I make conversations and make others
understand when they don’t want to listen? That is a problem that I want to
understand. But coming together, and understanding that we should look at the
small successes is a good way to start. Because no matter the issues brought up
at the dinner table we should not be discouraged to let others know of what we
stand up.
That’s
where I leave this blog post, in this note that I care and there others that do
as well. And will keep that with me.
I leave this article to keep the conversation going about adopting, and the alternatives wanna-be- parents can take,
No comments:
Post a Comment