Filtering by
- Creators: Arizona Board of Regents
- Creators: Economics Program in CLAS
![135548-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2021-05/135548-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=9XMs80V9dV7IiYpFUpGgOPyVRubnnAqA&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240614/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240614T124206Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=d4537aee1928c9f3494e3090d983d3e40a72ff4391e6598eaec17dbc5cc2abf0&itok=1UVXBbmI)
Hiking and Hegemony: Destabilizing the nature/culture and gender binaries through outdoor recreation
Our second framework, titled The Pleasurable Potential of Outdoor Recreation, cites second-wave feminism as a catalyst for women’s participation in wilderness exploration and outdoor recreation. The work of radical feminists and the women’s liberation movement in 1960s and 1970s empowered women at home, in the workplace, and eventually, in the outdoors; women reclaimed their wilderness, yet they continued to employ Framework One’s feminization of nature. Ecofeminsim brought together nature and women, seeking to bring justice to two groups wronged by the same entity: masculinity. In this context, outdoor recreation is empowering for women.
Despite the potential of Framework Two to reinscribe and better the experiences of women in outdoor recreation, we argue that both Frameworks One and Two perpetuate the gender binary and the nature/culture binary, because they are based upon the notion that women are in fact fundamentally different and separate from men, the notion that nature is an entity separate from culture, or human society, as well as the notion that nature is in fact a feminine entity.
Our third framework, Deer Pay No Mind to Your Genitals, engages poststructuralism, asserting that outdoor recreation and activities that occur in nature can serve to destabilize and deconstruct notions of the gender binary. However, we argue that care must be exercised during this process as not to perpetuate the problematic nature/culture binary, a phenomenon that is unproductive in terms of both sustainability and gender liberation. Outdoor recreation has been used by many as a tool to deconstruct numerous societal constraints, including the gender binary; this, however, continues to attribute escapist and isolationist qualities toward nature, and therefore perpetuating the nature/culture divide. Ultimately, we argue outdoor recreation can and should be used as a tool deconstruct the gender binary, however needs to account for the fact that if nature is helping to construct elements of culture, then the two cannot be separate.
![148344-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2021-07/148344-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=mMfcuj55Keft9PUXp4cBtsFQLMd_kNl1&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240614/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240614T165324Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=d1de5f3acca84204ebeb1a6491df15d99f59d41acf9e42c01bbfee42f660addf&itok=S73pAD_-)
Theoretically, negative shareholders' equity ("deficit") indicates that a business is insolvent. Yet many large, profitable businesses report deficits today. My research focused on the fast-food industry, namely McDonald's, Starbucks, Yum! Brands, and Papa John's, to uncover how these deficits came about and what they mean for investors.
![133721-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2021-05/133721-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=lIEXID5d0wtfQUwIeUvyv2g5uoA_pJ54&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240614/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240614T154810Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=1b2728df54bd8edd861d27be92a7bd2df326aeec134ac43e7e710151cd783965&itok=2OYdHAfi)
![133894-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2021-05/133894-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=Uq3Qtbv5csU2wYvrel33NsqilLStkPaV&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240614/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240614T195152Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=964ba989b733baef823ff4c4d8ede649857a5db0b22d169ac070deef7ecd17d5&itok=Tf3pYjxl)
![134466-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2021-08/134466-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=Zvgxx3YdqAlvBC56uLCgsdryz5H2EE8V&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240614/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240614T171102Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=8a7b5747ab34025e685ddb32a0dfe079c3cc7abae3ce1b35717f7a7c7044e375&itok=QQ6dHtQ0)
![173103-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2023-02/173103-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=UULQGZCDEOfIQNzXWv3O4p5flr5bU.8I&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240614/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240614T161719Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=626c3049487c67e91adda2162e20b36ddb761126fbd217bcacb050184b9409d2&itok=ciktsNig)
In the United States, most people are assigned both a biological sex and gender at birth based on their chromosomes and reproductive organs. However, there is an important distinction between biological sex and gender. Biological sex, such as male, female, or intersex, commonly refers to physical characteristics. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, and actions people take on, usually in relation to expectations of masculinity or femininity. As of 2022, there is disagreement over the relation between sex and gender. People’s biological sex and gender greatly influence the way they understand themselves, as well as how others treat them and how they interact with society. Moreover, some people’s gender differs from what they were assigned at birth, and they face discrimination, harassment, and violence. Evolving understandings of gender and sex in the US have created more ways for people to live and express their gender identities.
![173425-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2023-02/173425-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=_C.5qs6ip9wv5v3dube3cmZWyFNC1Js0&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240614/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240614T175810Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=099bd0ccafeffc22babdcfdad807b6899893aa76c66f4803b2584c9b5265af35&itok=wU8VK4Au)
In the mid-1960s, psychologist John Money encouraged the gender reassignment of David Reimer, who was born a biological male but suffered irreparable damage to his penis as an infant. Born in 1965 as Bruce Reimer, his penis was irreparably damaged during infancy due to a failed circumcision. After encouragement from Money, Reimer’s parents decided to raise Reimer as a girl. Reimer underwent surgery as an infant to construct rudimentary female genitals, and was given female hormones during puberty. During childhood, Reimer was never told he was biologically male and regularly visited Money, who tracked the progress of his gender reassignment. Reimer unknowingly acted as an experimental subject in Money’s controversial investigation, which he called the John/Joan case. The case provided results that were used to justify thousands of sex reassignment surgeries for cases of children with reproductive abnormalities. Despite his upbringing, Reimer rejected the female identity as a young teenager and began living as a male. He suffered severe depression throughout his life, which culminated in his suicide at thirty-eight years old. Reimer, and his public statements about the trauma of his transition, brought attention to gender identity and called into question the sex reassignment of infants and children.
In the book Your Baby’s Sex: Now You Can Choose, David Michael Rorvik and Landrum Brewer Shettles describe methods that couples can use prior to and during conception that will increase the chances of producing a child of their desired sex. Rorvik, a science writer, and Shettles, an obstetrics and gynecology researcher and physician, co-wrote the book. Shettles developed the methods detailed in the book during the 1960s. Although the authors claim a high success rate, some researchers have contested the validity of the methods proposed in Your Baby’s Sex: Now You Can Choose. Despite contradicting evidence for the effectiveness of the methods, the book itself has remained popular throughout its forty consecutive years in print. Since its original publication, Your Baby’s Sex: Now You Can Choose has reached a large audience, with over 1.5 million copies of the book sold worldwide, while adding to the controversy about the ethics of sex selection research.
![172675-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2023-02/172675-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=H97h0CSb9rBP6VzLDXQKPh1shizXyKZd&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240614/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240614T195711Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=e0407084c1a0c5e66ad2ed9ec3b9199a76f7ab3cc4741304bd6b89bf33639bb7&itok=EKsttgmE)
The US Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, published the “Guideline for the Study and Evaluation of Gender Differences in the Clinical Evaluation of Drugs,” henceforth “Study of Gender Differences,” in July 1993. The document defined acceptable practices for investigators studying new drugs. Prior to 1993, investigators excluded most women from clinical trials because in 1977, the FDA recommended that anyone who could possibly become pregnant be excluded from early phase drug research to minimize risk to a potential fetus. In 1997, the FDA reversed that guidance, advising investigators to include women in early phase drug research, a decision that reflected changing views about a woman’s ability to decide whether to participate in drug trials and furthering research on the effects of drugs on women.
![172774-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2023-02/172774-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=y_ZYwefnpd7cDM3BE.NoHL68rohfR3hj&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240614/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240614T195711Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=3835b1aabb751aa3393cd27ec01b230c79a1c4127709cfd83bd55ba62ce2f3e6&itok=VxuwuZHD)
Hermaphrodites and the Medical Invention of Sex, by historian of science Alice Domurat Dreger, was published in 1998 by Harvard University Press. In the book, Dreger describes how many doctors and scientists treated human hermaphrodites from the late nineteenth century to the early twentieth century. She states that during this time period, many physicians and scientists struggled to determine the nature sex, and to support a classification of sex as male or female, many physicians and scientists resorted to viewing a person's gonads for identification of his or her sex. At the time that this book was published, Dreger was a faculty associate at the Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences at the College of Medicine, University of Michigan, Michigan.