07554346

=**Week 2 entry) Women’s Amazing Bodies**= Welcome to my women's health wiki page! I have never posted a wiki or even heard of wikispaces before this unit, so this is all very new to me. Nevertheless, I am hoping to get the hang of wikispaces soon. My first wiki post will be on the lecture presented this week, and the topic of this lecture was women's amazing bodies. One of the very first points highlighted in this lecture was one I found very interesting and was surprised that I didn’t already know about: the difference between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’. I had always thought each of these terms referred to whether someone was a boy or a girl, a man or a woman. As I learnt in the lecture and then further in the tutorial, ‘sex’ refers to male vs. female and the gender one is born and identified with at birth, while ‘gender’ is a social construct rather than a biological construct, is the specific gender an individual identifies themselves with and looks at masculinity vs. femininity. When the female body is mentioned in social media and conversations these days, it seems like all people can seem to think about is whether a woman is thin (or not), whether a woman has adequate sized breasts and if they are “pretty”- whatever that truly means. The more important things like health risks associated with the female body and psychological effects of how one sees themselves seems to be talked about less. //Why is it that everyone is so obsessed with appearances?// This is something I have always been very fascinated by. Even more interesting is that I too seem to care about my appearance. What are people saying about my body? Do I pass the test of being adequate? If there is such a thing as the ‘perfect female body’, how do I match up?

We also learnt more about what it means to be transgender or transsexual. These two terms would often be used interchangeably, but as I learnt this week, the two terms are completely different. As our lecture outlined, “//transgender is an// //umbrella term for persons whose gender identity, gender expression, or behaviour does not conform to that typically associated with the sex to which they were assigned at birth//.” Alternatively, transsexual refers to “//a person who strongly identifies with the opposite gender and who chooses to live as a member of the opposite gender or to become one by surgery//.” Learning about these terms really got me thinking about what it would mean for someone to fall into one of these categories and how differently people identifying as one of these would be treated by society. The final main section of the lecture essentially revolved around what could go wrong in terms of females and their bodies. When hearing about breast cancer, childbirth, prolapse, cervical cancer, fibroids, endometriosis, polycystic ovarian syndrome and ovarian cancer, it is safe to say that I was overcome with a sense of anxiety. Talking about these topics was definitely incentive enough to encourage me to maintain health check-ups. These are the main topics I wanted to talk about this week, but I am sure that as the weeks progress and my confidence in writing wikis grows, I am hoping to lengthen out my wikis and enhance how in depth I go into the topics presented. =**Week 3 entry) Women in Popular Culture, Advertising and the Media**= This week’s lecture revolved around numerous very important and interesting points including the nature of womanhood in advertising, women who have challenged the status quo, women’s sexuality in the media, the image of violence against women, women’s mental health, older women and social inequalities. The topics that really caught my attention were the nature of womanhood in advertising and older women. To be honest, I had never really had a __good__ think about how woman were represented right from the very beginning- in the Bible. As a Christian myself, although Eve led Adam away from God and persuaded him to go against God, I had never thought this would represent her as being ‘evil’. It appears that because of her actions here, an image of //what women are really like// was created. From this, women became untrustworthy. When the middle ages came along, a Witch hunt began and those who were found guilty of witchery were burnt alive. From what we learnt this week, almost 80% of people accused of witchery were women. It was believed that the devil targeted people who were not strong enough to resist him – and of course women were not as strong as men….....please note the sarcasm! Then came the 1950s; the era of the housewives. Men were supposed to be the workers and women were supposed to stay at home, look pretty and look after their man. Cooking, cleaning – the works. Even now women aren’t portrayed as their own person. Women still have titles such as ‘the mothering wife’, ‘the bossy wife’ and ‘the husband-centered wife’. Isn’t it interesting that all of these titles have a negative tilt on them in some way? It has been suggested that women have been portrayed so negatively throughout history not because “//men wanted to subordinate women because they benefit from it”//, rather because “//when various problem arise in society, we look to blame particular groups”//.

The other topic I wanted to discuss revolved around older women. What fascinates and distresses me about the elderly in the media is that they do not have a voice. Older people are seen as grumpy, short tempered nobodies and apparently it is okay for the public to view them this way. They are essentially invisible, or at least that’s how they seem to feel. From what we learnt in class this week, negative qualities of older women included being slow, feeble, cranky and repetitive. Another astonishing fact presented was that older women were less successful than older men. Not only are older women represented more negatively than older men, it seems that it is socially acceptable for an older man to date a much younger woman, but when the roles are reversed and it is an older women dating a much younger man, apparently it is unacceptable and ‘disturbing’. Why is that? Why are men allowed to date younger women, while it is only acceptable for a women to date a man of the same age or older? As women seem to be excluded from society as they age, they suffer from loneliness, isolation, depression, cognitive impairment, cardiovascular disease and obesity. If excluding women are causing these issues to increase or worsen, why not try to treat older women normally and include them in everyday life? Wouldn’t this improve their quality of life and potentially even lengthen their lives? Maybe one day everyone will be treated equally… key word: maybe. =**Week 4 entry) The 'Right' Time to Have a Child**= As soon as this week's lecture commenced, I knew it was going to be a very interesting one. It revolved around medical abortion, contraceptive measures and when it is truly the //right// time to have a baby. Just from looking at the title of this lecture it was clear it was going to be a debatable couple of hours. There are a few things I want to talk about this week, some of which extremely relate to the content presented, and some of which is a little off topic but was mentioned in the lecture and really caught my attention. One of the very first things that came up in the lecture revolved around the upcoming election. There was a little bit of talk about who votes for the policies that best fits themselves, who swings from party to party depending on what best suits them at the time, and also about who is very unsure of where they sit in the voting spectrum. For myself personally, if I'm being honest, I don't know a very large amount about politics or the policies that each party are bringing to the table. I only really get insight into the world of politics when I'm watching the news, or when a politician makes the front page of the paper. This is why I found a suggestion made from a student in the lecture to have a look online on the ABC site fantastic. As I learnt a few days ago, there is a resource on the ABC website called 'Vote Compass' that is essentially a survey revolved around The Labor Party, The Liberal Party and The Greens that assesses where you might best fit in terms of the voting spectrum. For someone like myself who isn't overly knowledgeable about each party's policies, I found this resource extremely useful. It asks a range of questions about whether or not you agree, disagree, have a neutral standpoint or simply don't know about a range of different topics (topics relating to current and future policies), asks some questions about the current parties and then shows you where your opinions are similar or different to each of the parties view points. I found this tool extremely useful in trying to determine where my opinions sit and who I might be best to vote for this election. This tool was definitely an eye opener for me. Another interesting topic that was discussed in fairly great detail revolved around contraceptive measures and essentially avoiding pregnancy. The pill and the morning after pill were two of the factors discussed when fertility control and avoiding pregnancy were talked about. I learnt that as the pill was introduced, women could finally control pregnancy and essentially had the power to do what they wanted with their sexual lives. It became evident that when the pill was introduced, divorce rates actually increased as women were able to have sex with people other than their husbands with a reduced risk of falling pregnant if they wished too. The concept of sexual activity being so separated from reproduction (more so than ever) came about, and the issue of sexually transmitted infections increasing was discussed. This topic really got me thinking about why women may have started sleeping with men other than their husbands. Had they been so restricted prior to the pill that they were simply trying out new things? Was this new sense of power so great that they had to take the pill for a test drive? The morning after pill was also discussed. There was a time when women had to go to their GP and the doctor would decide if a woman was to get the morning after pill or not. Since then, now all women need to do is go to the chemist and request it over the counter. It is interesting how protocols have changed. Now the biggest debate revolves around how old a female should be before being allowed access to the pill. Should it be as soon as the female hits puberty? Should it be 16? Should it be as soon as a woman becomes sexually active? Is there a specific time it becomes //acceptable// for a woman to be sexually active? So many questions and so many different opinions. Throughout the duration of this lecture, I found myself wondering and wondering, when could be the best time for a woman to have a child? After the completion of a university degree? Once she has been working for 5 years? 10 years? Is there a //'perfect'// time to have a child? For me personally, I don't think there is a //'perfect'// time, because everyone is different aren't they? You hear of women that want to be engaged by 21, married by 23 and have a child by 25. These women seem to know exactly what they want, where they want it and who they want it with. But not everyone can be so figured out and determined to start a family by such a young age. Maybe if everyone knew what they wanted by such a young age the world would be a simpler place. But alas, that is not the case. It was interesting hearing all about the different trends in birth rates over the years. Fascinatingly, gen X decided to have their children at later ages, while gen Y decided to have their babies at earlier ages. Now we see this big overlap and large numbers of children being produced. But before these large numbers were born, why were the birth numbers at such a low level? Something I found very interesting that was presented in the lecture revolved around Peter McDonald's take on why women were having fewer children. We were told about the key theories McDonald thought to relate to why women were not having as many children: rational choice theory, risk aversion theory, post-materialist values theory and gender equity theory. Rational choice theory seemed to have a focus on weighing up the economic and psychological benefits of having a child. Will the benefits of having a child outweigh the costs? Does a woman need to be financially secure to have a child? How do you know when you are truly financially ready for a child? Next, risk aversion theory related to worrying about the factors revolving around having a child. Will the child ruin the marriage? What if we get divorced? How will I cope being a single parent? As we see more and more in society these days, many marriages end in divorce. I can see why people worry that bringing a child into the world could impact on their relationships. Post-materialist values theory focused on the fact that people generally want to do things, have adventures, have fun experiences and spend money on great things rather than spending all of their money on children. In examining this theory, I believe this wouldn't apply to a wide range of women - the women that have been thinking about having kids for a long time and had decided from a very young age that they //needed// kids in their lives. Finally, gender equity theory explored how generally speaking, women are doing really well in school, getting great jobs and succeeding in life, until they have a child and need to take time off work to care for their new baby. How is it fair that a woman is not entitled to a promotion because they are pregnant or need maternity leave? Does this concept stop a lot of women from having children until they are older? Does it stop them from having kids at all? I found all of these theories very interesting to learn and think about. This weeks content was probably the content I have found most interesting so far, and I really enjoyed gaining more insight into some of the topics discussed.

=**Week 5 entry)** **The Fashion Industry** **and Body Image: Impact on Women’s Health**= In this week’s lecture, we had our first guest speaker. Although I missed the lecture itself due to sickness, it was great to have the option to listen to the lecture online. I found the lecture very interesting, relevant and beneficial to my women’s health learning experience. Additionally, I found many of the concepts discussed to be very informative. The lecture was on how the fashion industry and body image impact on women’s health. The lecture included some relevant definitions, issues revolving around these topics, how the issues are important to women’s health, outcomes for women’s health and what we can do about these outcomes. Interestingly enough, women are often expected to know a lot about fashion and the fashion industry, but this is not always the case. If I am being honest, I’m not exactly ‘trendy’ myself, and am not overly knowledgeable about the fashion industry. In society’s eyes, does this make me less of a woman? To some, I would not be surprised if this was the case at all. Is it really fair to see someone as not being very feminine if they aren’t extremely into fashion or if they don’t go shopping every week to buy new clothes? Something to ponder…

So what is the fashion industry? Is it all about designers, clothing, fashion shows, clothing manufacturers, celebrities, clothes marketing and fashion magazines? Or is it something more? According to our guest lecturer, the fashion industry revolves around images, predominantly of women. It is becoming clearer that the picture of what a woman should look like is becoming more and more detrimental to the health of women in our society today. Women see advertisements starring beautiful celebrities, TV shows and movies with extremely attractive actresses and even news readers looking flawless on the evening news. Women viewing all of these programs and advertisements can then look on and feel a sense of inadequacy about them. Why is everybody obsessed with this image of eternal beauty?

Along with these beautiful women often come beautiful bodies. Opinions of what the ‘perfect’ body is vary, but generally speaking, there seems to be an infatuation with being very petite and thin in today’s society. Why is this? I find it fascinating how at different times in history, different body shapes have been idealized. There has been a lot of diversity in body shapes over time, but why has that diversity diminished of late? Are we turning into a one-size-is-best society? The final topic I want to talk about revolves around how fashionable bodies influence women’s health. This relates back to women seeing beautiful faces and bodies all over the TV and subsequently comparing themselves with these women. In the words of Dr. Angela Dwyer, //“literature suggests social comparison to ideal, typically unachievable images leads to a few different outcomes like disorderly bodies and distorted identities”.// Things such as unrealistic clothing sizes, cosmetic surgery and eating disorders fall under the category of disorderly bodies while self-esteem issues, body image dissatisfaction and dysphoria fall under the category of distorted identities. If these issues are arising because people so wish to be like their celebrity idols, why do people continue? Are appearances so truly important that individual health comes second? These were some of the questions I found myself to be considering when listening to this lecture. All in all, I found this particular topic to be very interesting and gained insight into the area quite a lot whilst listening to the content. =**Week 6 entry) Birth Politics - from Normality to Pathology**= In today’s lecture, we had another guest speaker – and boy was it great. There was a lot of information to absorb, but the way the content was presented was fantastic. Dr. Yvette Miller talked to us about birth politics and shared some of her very extensive knowledge on pregnancy, labour, birth and related topics. Many topics were discussed, some of the bigger ones being the two philosophies of birth, birth in Australia, the impact of pathologising birth, factors in pathologising birth and where women stand in the birthing spectrum. The very first thing that was explained and emphasized was the meaning of pathologising. I had no idea what this meant before commencing today’s lecture, so I was quite pleased when Yvette went into detail to explain the concept. Essentially, pathologising is “//the act of turning a normal human condition into an illness requiring medical intervention//”. Before hearing all of what Yvette had to say, I wasn’t quite sure how this was going to relate to child birth. I think the main reason behind this was the fact that the word illness was in this definition. I had never thought of pregnancy as an illness, or even as a ‘medical problem’. As the lecture progressed, pregnancy was referred to as a 'medical problem' numerous times. This was one of the main concepts of the lecture that I did not agree with. I found myself wondering that if pregnancy was a 'medical condition', why do so many people want to go through the experience to create a child? If pregnancy is so risky, why do the majority of women experience it at least once throughout their lives? Although the information presented was very well researched and presented well, the main issue I had with the lecture revolved around this 'medical problem' title and the way it was being used.

The first main topic discussed revolved around the two philosophies of birth. Although I knew that different people had different perceptions and opinions of pregnancy and birth, I didn't quite know the extent of it and that there were actually philosophies that could explain these differences in opinions. The philosophies can be broken down into a non-medical and medical model, and these models are fairly contrasting. The non-medical model revolves around an organic approach to pregnancy at birth, has emphasis on birth being a normal process rather than a disease, has a goal of having more than a live mother and child after birth, revolves around the actual experience and process of having a baby and considers pregnancy and birth as a normal human process which in some cases becomes a process requiring medical intervention. Alternatively, the medical model is a mechanical approach, has a pathological emphasis on the process of pregnancy, labour and birth, has an overall goal of having a live mother and baby after birth, considers that creating what the mother might see as a positive experience to be a threat, revolves around risk management and risk reduction, involves technical intervention such a screening and assumes that technology is required in most births. To assess where we stood in an individual sense on the non-medical to medical spectrum, we each completed a small questionnaire to answer questions on the topic. After completing the questions, we looked at each of our answers that each corresponded with a number to give us a final score. I scored a total of 81 points out of about 130 I think it was, which means I lean slightly more towards the medical birth philosophy. I thought this tool was great in terms of giving me a slight understanding of my summarized views, and it would be interested to see if I scored the same again if I took the test in 10 years time. Another topic discussed revolved around women's choices. I found this topic quite interesting as it made me critically think about the choices women do have to make when pregnant and how they can be seen if they make the so called 'wrong' choice. For example, if a woman chooses to have a home birth, more often than not people tend to judge this decision because birth is generally considered 'medical'. Interestingly enough, we learnt that the government provides funding to women who give birth in hospitals, however do not provide funding to women who decide they want to give birth at home. Why is this? Is it fair that some women and families get funding and others don't? What if a woman has always dreamt of having a home birth but simply cannot afford it with the costs of home births ever rising? Another interesting point highlighted was that women that give birth in private hospitals tend to be healthier than women birthing in public hospitals. Could this be because people are paying more for private hospitals so health levels are being maintained to a greater extent? Does this mean the duty of care is superior in private hospitals? And this brings me back to a matter of fairness and equity. Shouldn't all women have the same access to care when it comes to them and their child's health?

The final topic I wanted to discuss revolves around media representation of home-birth deaths. As we were taught, the media reports that home births are more risky and likely to result in death even though evidence gathered suggests otherwise and disproves that. How can the media convey this message if it is simply false? Some of the facts revolving around this media representation was discussed, and it was actually quite interesting to hear about. Home births are less risky in terms of having medical procedures, surgery and related complications are more likely to occur in hospital and women are no more likely to have complications such a hemorrhage at home compared to the hospital. In essence, the media wants to convey a simple message that is not controversial, people are more likely to support hospital births and the idea of a home birth being more risky fits in with people's general ideologies. Additionally, hospitals gain if people give birth there whereas mothers lose the choice of where to have their kids (relating back to stigmatization) and hospital staff gain money while mid-wives lose money. Although I myself was very surprised to hear that home births are in actual fact less risky than hospital births, the concept of evidence portraying this fact while the media portrays the opposite message baffled me. Surely this cannot be legal? Fascinating... =**Week 7 entry) Changing Gender Roles in Families: Paid Work, House work and Child-Raising**= This week's lecture on changing gender roles in families was a very interesting and informative one. Not only did we learn about the differences in pay rates for both men and women, but we also learnt about the stereotypes surrounding house work delegations and gender roles when it comes to raising a child. Some of the points I found most interesting revolved around contemporary western families, how work is divided along gender lines within a house hold, what the word 'work' really means, gender related stereotypes, pay differences by gender in Australia, 21st century families and what is meant by the term 'affirmative action'. One of the very first points covered was that in a general sense, men are the 'bread winners' and women look after the kids. Although this is the common perception, what a sexist perception it is. Who is to say that women can't earn the majority of a family's income while men look after the kids? Why is it socially acceptable to view families this way? How do women that earn more than their husbands feel to be included in this stereotype even though it might not apply to them? Contemporary western families were also discussed. Throughout this portion of the lecture we covered many points such as: men generally earn more money than women, men occupy more powerful positions in the work place than women and men get more superannuation than women. Additionally, we learnt that women staying at home for long periods of time to look after their children can cause isolation, boredom, loneliness, depression and anxiety. Furthermore, it was presented that male work positions account for and add to addiction to risky behaviours/harmful substances due to the stress involved in these job roles. Something I found fascinating was that women generally live so long because they aren't exposed to quite as stressful jobs as men. Some very interesting points raised... is this really the society we live in? Even in 2013, is this still the case? How is it fair for men to earn more money than women for doing the exact same job? How is it fair for many women not to have the opportunity to do a certain job because of their gender? When will these views change? In my opinion, the day can't come soon enough... In terms of home living, the class had a discussion revolving around who does the house work, cleaning, cooking, washing and technical jobs around the house. Very surprisingly, a lot of students explained how their father's actually did a lot of the jobs that would usually be seen as 'woman jobs'. I myself fit into this category. My father has always been the chef of the house, he does the majority of the house cleaning and he does most of the garden based maintenance. It was interesting to hear about other students that have grown up in house holds where their parents did not fit the usual stereotypes. Could it be that there are more families out there than people believe that don't fit the traditional house hold work gender stereotypes? Another topic discussed was the true meaning of the word 'work'. Generally, this term is used to describe //stuff// you get paid to do and acts as a transaction with the economy. Interestingly enough, even though many women spend long hours at home caring for their children post-birth, this is not considered to be a job. Is this because women aren't being paid to do it? Some might argue that just because women aren't being paid to do this, it should still be considered as a job. It includes long hours and hard work, so why shouldn't it be called a job? One of the key facts in the lecture that really jumped out at me was the fact that men earn 17% more than women and that this adds up to being a loss of more than $1 million over a lifetime. Unbelievable! This seems so truly unfair and is still occurring into today's society. The final point I wanted to talk about was the term called 'affirmative action'. I did not know the meaning of this term before this lecture and was very interested to find out about it. Affirmative action is the act of purposefully hiring women over men or indigenous people over non-indigenous people in order to create reverse discrimination. Although I support this idea and think it would definitely add to equity in the work place, there is also potential for it to cause drama if for example a male believes he did not get a job simply because of 'affirmative action'. If this is the case, will women ever truly be treated as equals? =**Week 8 entry) 'Walking into Doors': Domestic Violence and Violence Against Women**= This weeks lecture was another very interesting one. The topic revolved around violence against women and explored domestic violence and the impact it has on women, families and society. When the term 'domestic violence' is said, a man hitting a woman automatically comes to mind. Why would men do this? What is the reasoning behind doing such a horrible thing? Most of the time, women tend to be physically weaker then men, so do men hit women to emhpasise that they are the **ruler** of the house? In society, we all know how unacceptable and severely frowned upon it is for a man to hit a woman, not matter what the reason. Yet this still seems to happen behind closed doors. I have always found it interesting that when a woman hits a man society assumes she had good reason to and that she was probably defending herself. Is this always the case though? Why is it seen as okay for a woman to do this to a man? Why can't we all just discuss our problems and work through them using our words rather then hearing of stories where physical violence is involved? As we learned in this week's lecture, of recent times, domestic violence has become a public health problem. From this specific health perspective, domestic violence is known as //"a chronic syndrome characterised not only by episodes of physical violence, but also by the emotional and psychological abuse that perpetrators use to maintain control over their partners"//. It is interesting that whenever domestic violence is talked about, the physical aspect is the major factor that pops to mind. People tend to forget about the emotional and psychological aspect of it. If domestic violence was only physical, wouldn't all women simply leave and never return to their abusive partner? Because emotional and psychological factors are involved as well, this tends to be why we see women stay and live in fear with their abusive partners. How is it that a man can gain such emotional control over a woman, so much so that she is willing to put herself through physical violence rather than leave? __Fear.__ The fear of leaving is so strong, so terrifying, that even staying seems like the best option. Did you know that most women who experience this type of violence actually report that the physical component of it all is the least damaging aspect of it? It is reported that //"it is the relentless psychological abuse that cripples and isolates the woman"//. A factor I found quite chilling is that under Australian law, domestic violence //"refers exclusively to violence committed by a heterosexual partner and includes physical injury, intimidation or serious harassment, wilful damage to property, indecent behaviour without consent, or a threat to commit any of these acts".// This whole definition sounds about right to me, besides one key factor: __violence committed by a__ __heterosexual__ __partner__. Why does the word heterosexual need to be in this definition? Why can't the definition simply state "violence committed by a partner"? Violent situations can occur in same sex relationships too, so why does Australian law single out heterosexuals here? It isn't right at all... As we learned throughout the lecture, The Australian Public Health Associaiton includes physical, verbal, economic and social abuse in its definition of domestic violence. Even some seemingly passive statements can actually be forms of domestic violence. Some examples include: "//if you didn't make me so angry, I wouldn't get so violent//" (making the woman feel responsible), "//you can't wear that to work, go and get changed//", "//let me see that text you just sent//", and "//you don't need a job, you already have a job looking after me and the baby//". Not only are these terms controlling, but they take away a woman's sense of independence. If a woman cannot wear what she wants, text who she wants and say what she wants to others, what is she allowed to do? It is sickening to hear about the large number of women who go through this suffering throughout the world... A very interesting (and upsetting) part of the lecture revolved around the statistics behind domestic violence and assult. We found out that men are most likely to be assulted by a complete stranger, less likely to be assulted by a non-family member and even less likely to be assulted by a family member. Alternatively, women are much more likely to be assulted by a family member: someone they are supposed to be able to trust and be loved by. It was very clear that most domestic violence is most likely to occur at home. We think of home as being somewhere we can go to relax, rest and be with family and loved ones, however this is where most women fall victim to this horrible violence. Interestingly enough, most domestic violence occurs on the weekend. This is when both the man and woman of the relationship are at home together. Violence rates are highest on a Sunday, perhaps because the 'man of the house' is most stressed on this day because he has to return to work the next day. In terms of times this violence occurs, it was interesting to find out that 6-9pm is the time in which it occurs most. Could this be because the male has just come home from work and taken out his fury of the day on his partner? Could alcohol be a contributing factor? As Grech and Burgess (2011) explains, "alcohol remains an associated factor in many of these incidents". Another major part of the lecture revolved around indicators of domestic violence in women presenting at medical clinics. Psychological symptoms included insomnia, depression, suicidal ideation, anxiety, somatoform disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, eating disorders and substance abuse. On the other hand, physical symptoms included lethargy, numbness and tingling caused by injuries, chronic back pain, chronic headaches, chronic abdominal and pelvic pain, STDs, signs of sexual assult, brusies in various stages of healing and obvious injuries to the body. We also learned about the high rates of miscarriages in women who are victims of sexual assult. How is it that men are willing to hurt their partner at all, especially while they are carrying his child? How do men keep getting away with this? Domestic violence will never make sense to me, and I can only hope that more women are able to speak up, be heard and receive help. As a society, we need to come together and figure out just how these victims can be helped. What can we do to stop domestic violence from occuring? Surely there is something we can do... more than what is being done right now... I found this topic so interesting that I am actually considering writing about it in the final piece of assessment for this unit. In my opinion, women currently don't have enough support to withdraw themselves from domestic violence relationships, so I am thinking that this will be a key focus of my essay. =**Week 9 entry) Week off**= We have been told that we are allowed to take a week or two off here and there from writing our wikis, so I have decided to take a break this week. =**Week 10 entry) Healthy Ageing of Women**= Unfortunately, this week I was sick so could not attend the lecture. Luckily, the notes are available online so I could keep up to date with the content and gain some insight into the lecture presented. Professor Debra Anderson presented this weeks lecture. I wasn't too happy that I had to miss it because we had been told her lectures are always very interesting and well presented. Topics discussed revolved around issues for women during menopause, the impact that breast cancer, osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease (CVD) have on women from midlife and beyond, and the national and international agendas on women and ageing. To start the lecture off, some reasonably general knowledge points were discussed. Things such as the fact that diseases of old age actually begin earlier in life (so start affecting people from younger ages), patterns of disease between men and women are actually quite variable and different, and that women generally have a higher life expectancy than men were discussed. Something in this weeks notes that I found quite alarming was that apparently, nearly half of the female population of Australia are actually overweight or obese. HALF! That is an alarmingly high rate. It was presented that this is because younger women now a days are gaining weight at a much higher rate, and subsequently being overweight or obese in their later years. Another distressing fact presented was that approximately one third of women do not exercise. For me, this is extremely alarming because I come from an exercise science background so physical activity is something I have learnt a lot about. Because physical activity is so important to me, it distresses me more that a large portion of women do not partake in physical activity in comparison to alarming statistics revolving around diet for example. The top 5 leading causes of death for women in Australia are: heart disease, stroke, dementia and Alzheimer's disease, trachea and lung cancer and breast cancer. Interestingly, quite a few of these diseases are diseases that occur more and more when people age, and seeing as women in actual fact seem to live longer than men, this is why these are the top causes of death for Australian women. Worryingly, women are not actually aware that diseases of the heart are the leading cause of death for them, so something really needs to be done to inform women of the danger of this disease and campaigns need to be developed to try and start fighting heart diseases. Breast cancer is a big killer of women, so I have decided to place focus on this disease in my reflection this week. In the lecture, the main risk factors for breast cancer were outlined as being a woman, age, previous history and family history. It was explained that as a woman ages, her risk of developing breast cancer increases. Professor Anderson explained that under the age of 30, a woman has a 1 in 2,296 risk of developing this disease. Next, between 30-39 years of age, a woman's risk increases to 1 in 244. Finally, above 75 years of age, alarmingly a woman has a 1 in 11 chance of developing breast cancer. Considering there are so many women in the world, having a 1 in 11 chance of developing breast cancer results in a very very very large number of women throughout the world that develop this illness. As common sense might explain to some, if a woman has had breast cancer at some point in her life and overcome it, she is more likely than someone who has never had the disease to develop it again later in life. The likelihood is so much higher that it is said they have a 3 to 4 fold increased risk of breast cancer developing in their other breast. These rates are horrendously high... Age is such an issue when it comes to breast cancer development that it has actually been proven that 70% of ALL breast cancers occur in women who are over the age of 50 years old... something really needs to be done to try and decrease these numbers or better yet, a cure //needs// to be found. As currently there is no definite cure for breast cancer, 'a lifestyle approach' is being promoted to try and at least decrease risk factors/the likelihood of so many women developing this disease. In this approach, the key factors of focus are health education, alcohol and drug use, smoking, nutrition and physical activity. Through examining these factors, implementing healthy behaviours into our lives and attempting to age in a healthier way, it is hoped that this will aid in cancer prevention/reduction in rates later in life. At this point, the only thing we can really do is attempt to be as healthy as possible and hope that one day, a cure for this horrible illness is found. =**Week 11 entry) Women's Health in Same-Sex Relationships**= Unfortunately this week we didn't have a face-to-face lecture as Julie-Anne's daughter was sick and the lecture was cancelled. Luckily though, the slides were provided so we could take a look at the content that was going to be presented and learn about the topic. This week's topic was women's health in same-sex relationships. This topic could potentially be seen as controversial by some, as some people still get uncomfortable talking about same-sex relationships and don't believe in them. I have never had a problem with same-sex relationships. I've always had the view point that if two people make each other happy, they should be together. Who cares what gender they are? Man and woman, man and man, woman and woman - it's no one's businesses but those involved in the relationship. Whilst growing up, it's been interesting to see the world evolve in terms of views on same-sex relationships. When I was younger, the topic seemed quite unspoken of / although same-sex relationships were around, people tended to keep them on the down low and not discuss them very much. As I've aged, I've seen more and more people open up about being in a same-sex relationship and seen the stigma related to these sorts of relationships decrease. All I can say is thank god for that. It is no one's business but the people involved in a relationship to impact on who they want to date, so I've always thought everyone should just butt out and keep their opinions to themselves. There were many topic components discussed throughout this lecture. __History__ (ancient civilization, renaissance, middle ages, Victorian times, 19th century, 20th century), __legislation__ (human rights, striving for social equality, policing and queers) and __health__ (physical health, mental health, social functioning, lesbians and motherhood, the children of lesbians) were all discussed. A couple of things I wanted to write about are what it means to be a lesbian, legislation and health. I'm sure many people haven't really thought about what it really means for someone to be a lesbian. I mean straight women never have to openly come out and say "I'm straight", so why do lesbians need to essentially announce to everyone in their lives that they are a lesbian? That doesn't seem fair... To me, this just seems like pressure being put on someone to express their sexuality potentially making them feel uncomfortable around their loved ones. Have you ever noticed that for girls who openly claim they are lesbians people often question them regarding if this is just a little phase they are going through? "Oh, are you sure you're a lesbian? Or is this just something you're trying? Maybe you're bi? Are you just doing it for attention?" These are all questions I've heard people asking their friends about during my school years. Interestingly, you don't ever hear people asking men if it's just a phase they are going through when they come out as being gay. Why is this question only aimed at women? Are men not capable to 'just go through a phase' like this, or are there more assumptions and false beliefs behind lesbianism...? Briefly, I wanted to talk a little bit about legislation revolving around same sex relationships. Presently, we are in the year 2013... people like to think racism, sexism and discrimination regarding same sex relationships are a thing of the past, but are they really? As much as people would like to say these are things of the past, I'm not convinced they are at all. If same sex couples aren't allowed to get married in a wide variety of places across the world, how can we say that we as a society don't discriminate? In Queensland alone, gay surrogacy is not permitted and civil unions no longer exist because supposedly they are too similar to marriage ceremonies. Apparently now, it is enough for same sex couples to be in a 'registered relationship'... how fulfilling that must feel, to know if you want to live in Queensland, you cannot even partake in a civil union....... I am very excited for the day that same sex marriage is legalized all across the world, and I hope that day comes sooner rather than later. Finally, I wanted to discuss health regarding women in same sex relationships. Before looking through this lecture, I really didn't even consider that some of the points highlighted existed. I guess I thought that in the health care system, everyone has the same rights and felt just as comfortable as the next person regarding doctor visits. As I have learnt, a lot of women in same sex relationships actually fear telling their doctor of their sexual orientation because they worry this could interfere with the standard of health care they receive. I find this unbelievable! Doctors are supposed to be there for everyone, so it deeply saddens me that some people don't even feel comfortable visiting their local GP. Building on this point, some women even delay or avoid some medical appointments all together because of previous negative experiences they have encountered. For obvious reasons, cancelling appointments is very problematic for a woman's health. What if because a woman is scared to go to the doctors for an appointment she avoids it completely and subsequently develops something that could have been prevented all together? It distresses me that people feel this way regarding their health care professionals. As a society, we really need to remove the stigma relating to same sex relationships and start treating people as a whole as we wish to be treated. Everyone deserves to be treated as equals, I just wish this thought could be put into practice effectively. = = =**Week 12 entry) Mental Health and Substance Abuse in Women Across the Ages**= During this week's lecture, we learnt all about mental health and substance abuse in women across the ages. The topics of mental health and substance abuse were grouped because as we learnt, it's quite hard to talk about one topic without the other. This lecture was very interesting to me, especially because I have always been interested in mental health and its causes. I'm not positive what exactly bought on my strong interest in mental health, but I would say it has something to do with the fact that numerous people in my life have had issues with mental health. I find it interesting that across the world, men and women develop very different types of mental illnesses. As we learnt, suicide rates, psychosis and substance abuse rates are a lot higher in men, in comparison to rates of anxiety and depression being a lot higher in women. Throughout my studies this semester, the concept of why suicide rates are higher in men compared to women has been discussed quite a lot. In a very general sense, different subjects across my semester have explained that often, men are able to "complete the job" through the use of very dangerous and effective means of committing suicide. In comparison to this, it appears that women choose less abrupt forms of attempts and as a result, are often saved in the process. In a general sense, it appears that mental illness and substance abuse amongst women are not handled very well by society. The social position of women seems to have an association with mental illness and substance abuse, as does what sorts of behavior are expected of women and the issue of inequality. Can you believe that in this day and age, women are still not treated as equals? I still can't believe there was ever a time that women were not allowed to vote... I'll try not to go too much off topic though... In the lecture, we participated in a reflecting activity and then discussed as a big group. First, we had a think about what sorts of things made us feel down on a day to day basis. Then, we considered what sorts of things made us feel better. Next, we examined the sorts of techniques we employ to make ourselves feel better and be able to cope with bad news. In general, the class seemed to have relatively similar answers for these questions. When exploring what made us feel down on a day to day basis, stress and feeling like there was too much to do in too little time seemed to be mentioned by quite a few of us. Could this have anything to do with the fact that we are all university students in the process of trying to complete our busiest time of the semester? I'd say so... When we talked about the sorts of things that made us feel better, getting on top of our university work and spending time with our loved ones were quite popular answers. Then we had a class discussion about the techniques employed to make ourselves feel better and cope with bad news. There were quite a few ideas surrounding these topics: playing favourite music, going to the gym, going outdoors and walking around, baking, shopping, sleeping, calling loved ones and spending time with friends. It was interesting to hear people's reasoning behind their techniques of choice. For me personally, spending time with family and friends is definitely high up on my list, alongside sleeping. Another topic discussed was women and hysterical histories. I mainly wanted to talk a little bit about this topic because while we were having class discussions, the movie "Hysteria" came up and we watched the trailer. Since this lecture was presented, I have actually viewed this movie for myself and I found it fabulous! It was so interesting to hear about the concepts involved in this movie to treat 'hysterical women' back in the day - and I couldn't believe that society believed so many women to be 'hysterical'. A topic presented in the lecture I actually found quite distressing revolved around olden day cures for mental illness, and this is the last topic I want to write about for this wiki entry. As we learnt, these so called 'cures' consisted of suffocating women while they were having hysterical fits, hitting them with wet towels and humiliating them in front of people... I find this appalling... disgusting behavior. Another so called 'cure' for 'mad women' introduced by Freud in the 1950s was the distribution of valium over the counter to women. Supposedly, this method of 'treatment' was given to any woman who was seen to be mad - and obviously, a lot of them wouldn't have actually been mad at all. This made me wonder if there were negative side effects for women who weren't 'mad' at all... It's amazing how times have changed, and although mental illness is still very widespread throughout the world, I am very pleased with the change in direction that treatment methods have gone.



=**Week 13 entry) Week off**= As we are allowed a couple of weeks off and I am so busy with assessment at the moment, I decided to take my second week off from wiki's in the final week of semester. Although I won't be writing a wiki entry about the topics covered in the lecture this week, I did want to quickly write about how much I have enjoyed women's health as a subject this semester. I originally decided to choose women's health as my public health elective because I had heard wonderful things about the topics/content involved and the teaching staff of the unit. I am so pleased that I did choose this topic, because I have really enjoyed learning more about women's health and trying to critically think about the topics presented. Although my reflection skills are probably not the best, I have enjoyed writing these wiki entries to express what I have learnt and my thoughts on the information presented. My favourite piece of assessment by far was the creation of an online resource. This was the first time I had ever attempted to create a website, and I chose to make my website for Older Australian Women. I had a great time making this site, had fun trying to make it look nice, learnt a lot throughout the research process and was very **very** happy with my result. Overall, that was a great piece of assessment and something I really enjoyed creating. I have learnt a lot about women's health this semester, enjoyed being part of this unit and can definitely say that I will be leaving this unit with a greater range of knowledge and a definite sense of satisfaction.