The threat spiral

In class on Monday (9/26) it was shown how our analysis of American culture thus far has resembled a spiral. Starting out as a broad view of American freedoms and ideals, and curving inward to a specific point, or “dense fact”, in this case being Anne Hutchinson. Hutchinson’s story emphasizes many of the freedom’s we take for granted today: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to a fair trial.  Hutchinson’s case was also an issue of sexual equality. This is shown quite thoroughly in the article “Out of her place: Anne Hutchinson and the Dislocation of Power in New World Politics” by Cheryl C. Smith. The article argues that Hutchinson’s story emphasizes the “Puritan intolerance of women; (and) it exposes the central role of gender in both determining and threatening social status that continues to resonate in political matters today.”

The article shows that the threat Hutchison posed to puritan society can be likened to a spiral, as it focuses over time to a select group of individuals (just like our class). A spiral that begins broadly as a threat to the male dominance of puritan culture, then narrows to threaten the establishment and authority of puritan society and eventually focuses to threaten John Winthrop—the individual that symbolizes the limitations of Puritan society that Hutchinson fought against.

John Winthrop and others who were threatened by Anne’s message may have been a strong digging force in the burial of Hutchinson, but her downfall was not due only to her dissent. Puritan society (as a protestant religion) was founded on the rejection hierarchy and establishment in religion. If presented in another light, like say from a masculine voice, Hutchinson’s message would have been more widely supported. “A woman is permitted to chat or babble, but speaking in public authority is still the greatest transgression. . . A woman’s artistic output makes her monstrous to men if she does not know how to make herself small at the same time.” Sarah Palin is one such woman who has been able to (for better of worse) been able to maintain her political power while playing off the simple hockey mom image. Her overwhelming folksiness makes her appealing. Similarly, Hutchinson’s wisdom and position of trust in the community made her appealing to housewives and eventually male members of the community. However when she takes a step toward mysticism and claims a direct line to god she loses her image of being a simple member of the community. Winthrop is then able to seize this moment of public doubt in Hutchinson’s audience to ignore her argument, and simply attack the legitimacy of her sexuality. He is able to cast her “as being a woman not fit for society.” It doesn’t matter if Winthrop really was suppressing the colonists’ access to god. Bold and outspoken women “ lose their sexual appeal and, consequently a large degree of their social status” when they gain public acclaim.

 Perhaps if she had had a team of political annalists behind her she wouldn’t have been such a bold woman. Perhaps then history would celebrate the quiet and dignified defiance of Anne Hutchinson—that gosh darn midwife who changed America.

Object Paragraph, its a little sloppy

As American’s we pride ourselves as having inherent liberty; then use this self-declared right to freedom as an excuse for irresponsible behavior. We often fail to acknowledge the rest of the worlds—or our own nation’s—natural right to liberty. Then justify our subversive behavior with a phrase like “whatever, it’s a free country.” Such a phrase would fit Eric Cartman (from South Park), but it wouldn’t be in the spirit of FDR. Whose Four Freedom’s speech had the message to preserve democracy world wide, in order to preserve democracy at home. The present attitude however reflects something closer to Rockefeller’s interpretation of FDR’s four freedoms speech. We are now focused on issues of our own personal liberty; which has developed into a disregard of how our actions affect the lives and liberty of others. An object in American culture that embodies this disregard is the “made in china” label.  The made in china label is a symbol of American’s consumerism; it is a label of convenience over contribution. The demand for cheaper products and cheap labor has led to harsh and impoverished working conditions overseas and has drained our own work force. To meet the rising needs of the American consumer the earth’s natural resources have also been exploited. The living conditions of workers overseas have degraded because of the pollution from unsafe mining and manufacturing. No America wants to strip another human of their right to “freedom from want” or “freedom from fear.” Yet we do this everyday by consuming products made with that little made in china label. American’s have mistaken their freedom to consume to come with freedom from responsibility.