Double-Entry Blog #10

Whitney's Double-Entry Research Log Entry for Marked Men, Unmarked Women
Source #1

June 20

Tannen, Deborah. Marked Women, Unmarked Men."
New York Times Magazine 20 June. 1993.
http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/tannend/nyt062093.htm

New York Times article

At the beginning they were talking about how they were in a conference and not focusing on the discussion but focusing on what each other were wearing. "One woman had dark brown hair in a classic style, a cross between Cleopatra and Plain Jane. The severity of her straight hair was softened by wavy bangs and ends that turned under. Because she was beautiful, the effect was more Cleopatra than plain" (Tannen, Deborah 1).-----Good quote, which will be used in my essay.

As she goes on she continues to talk about marked is a staple of linguistic theory. Which refers to the way a word goes and the meaning. It hooks to people because it kind of means that there are all marked women they are basically always judged no matter what. --Good fact

Goes onto ask what us women could adopt to be "unmarked" the answer was none. There is NO unmarked women. A women can't just roll out of bed and go to class they have to worry about their hair, as for men they can just go to class. But in the same since if a man wore makeup they would be called "gay" or "queer" because that is an expectation for men. They are feminine if they don't act "cool" to the other guys. --Great fact that I can use.

Summary:
This was a great article gives me a lot of argument towards why there is no unmarked women and lets me better understand this topic. I like Tannen's points about how women have expectations to please not only men but the other women judging her as well. It was amazing to see that what us women do is so normal. Just like looking at each and every girl in the conference room from their shoes to their hair. She is saying if you're a women it's pretty much impossible to be marked, which isn't really fair at all. But that is her arguments and farther in my research I will find contrast to this article as well.

Source #2
February 17

Graziana, William. "Social Influence, Sex Differences, and Judgements of Beauty"
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1993, Vol. No. 3.
http://journals.ohiolink.edu/ejc/pdf.cgi/Graziano_William_G.pdf?issn=00223514&issue=v65i0003&article=522_sisdajob

They did studies on both men and women to see which were harder on themselves and what the expectations were. Studies showed that men are more leanient on what they look like but they expect more from women. "The women is what makes us men look good" (Eagly 3). This goes to show men lean directly on the women. Which is what tannen's argument was and of what studies show she is correct. --Good fact

As studies go on it just gets worse for us women. The study showed that men look at women are just judged sternly on looks. Shows that every 45/56 guy judges a women from first look. This is why us women have to look good all the time because there is no time we are not being judged. --Great fact, I will use.

Some of the questions they bring up is do your standards go down the less "cool" you act? The answer is yes. If you are always studying getting good grades not focusing on school you are less attractive according to the studies. This shouldn't be the case but it is.

Summary:
Basically all of us women have to be looking good 95% of the time, especially when we go out. Basically the sluttier the better, from the recent studies. There are a lot of great numbers I can use to argue with there being no unmarked women. I have lots of information already adn facts I will use toward my arguments. I love when they did a survey on what guys look at on women because it is so true and shows that us women have to look good at all times if we want to impress and get the "good" word in.