Think of being unable to contact your loved ones, seeing them face to face, or even leaving your cell for an indefinite period of time. That is the situation that befell thousands of California prison inmates in June 2025, when the state introduced sweeping restrictions in as many as 24 prisons. As described by CalMatters, almost 34,000 inmates were restricted in terms of their activity and movement, due to security concerns regarding violence, overdoses, and contraband. All phone calls, visits, communications via tablets, as well as rehabilitation programs were suspended. Although it might have been claimed that these restrictions were justified for the sake of security, I believe that it brings up a bigger question of when protection becomes punishment of all involved parties, regardless of whether they deserve it or not. The thing that made me realize the gravity of the situation the most is the fact that there had not been any announcement about the end date of these restrictions.

What makes this case even more disappointing is the fact that prisons are already facilities that limit the freedom of those who are confined there, which makes one wonder how limiting most forms of contact with the outside world may affect an already challenging experience. As it is reported in the article, family members were concerned about their relatives’ well-being and did not know if they were safe. Personally, I cannot comprehend what kind of stress it must be to have my relative in prison and not be able to reach out to him or her. Sometimes, a simple call may do wonders for the well-being of a person, and depriving people of such opportunity can certainly harm their psychological state. The measures were introduced to address the issue of potential violence that exists in prisons, and all staff members should feel safe in the workplace; however, it is still hard to see the difference between tackling certain issues and introducing limitations to thousands of people without setting any date.

Here, too, the hunger strike becomes relevant to our discussion. Less than a day after the restrictions came into effect, the inmates of Salinas Valley State Prison started a hunger strike in response to what they perceived as unjust restrictions, collective punishment, and violation of their rights. According to an advocate, there were around 500 participants. As for me, the fact that the people chose this type of action to make their voices heard demonstrates the desperation they felt. Moreover, the chosen action relates to another reading on this week’s agenda: in the article “Still Burning: Self-Immolation as Photographic Protest”, Michelle Murray Yang talks about the use of extremely violent protests by the individuals to bring attention to the injustice done to them. In particular, Yang refers to the famous picture of the Buddhist monk Thich Quang Duc, who staged his self-immolation in 1963 as a protest against religious persecution in South Vietnam. Despite the fact that this type of protest action differs greatly from a hunger strike in a prison, both cases are similar in terms of people’s willingness to engage in such an extreme type of protest when other means are no longer effective.

Another interesting aspect of Yang’s article is the fact that strong visual images and stories may challenge what is going on rather than accept it as it is. For example, the photograph of Quang Duc’s protest attracted the attention of the whole world and was later used by those who opposed the war to persuade people to speak out. This is an example of the power of media to spread the word about someone’s experience. In my opinion, the same concept should be applied to the incarceration stories. When hearing the word “prisoner,” people tend to stop thinking about a real person whose emotions, family, and needs are important. Incarcerated people are not animals that have no right to voice their experiences. I thought about the same thing when reading about the new California restrictions because it became clear to me how much the way of thinking depends on one’s side of the story. For example, hearing the explanation of the government, one may consider the lockdown measures to be just necessary steps for the sake of security. That does not mean every protester’s claim should automatically be accepted as fact, but it does mean their concerns should not be dismissed without being examined.

Overall, both articles brought to my mind the importance of having a chance to protest when one believes that something goes wrong. The act of protest may come in many different forms, but the truth is that it might uncover the issues that might remain unnoticed at first glance. In my opinion, maintaining safety within prison institutions and treating inmates like real human beings should not be two contradictory concepts. On the contrary, the way that, in my opinion, should be adopted involves dealing with particular security issues and letting people access their families, get proper treatment, and have an opportunity for rehabilitation as much as possible. The main question that comes to my mind in this case is: what if people start feeling like there is no one who listens to them? In this sense, Yang’s article indicates that there are some acts of protest that might force the public to ask: “What now?” I think that this question is quite appropriate in our case as well. Once we understand the issue and the people who have to face it, we will have to think about the future actions to be undertaken. At the end of the day, being willing to listen is a small step, but it can be the beginning of real change.

When I first read Susan Stryker’s “My Words to Victor Frankenstein,” I honestly wasn’t really sure what to expect. I thought it was going to be mostly about Frankenstein and being seen as a “monster,” but it ended up being more about how people are treated when they don’t fit into what society sees as normal. I thought it was interesting how Stryker took the idea of being a monster and basically made it into something empowering instead of something negative. That part actually made me think about my own experiences with learning. I have had to find different ways to learn and get things done because of my learning disabilities, and technology has helped me a lot with that. Sometimes I used to feel like needing a different way of doing something meant I wasn’t as capable as other people, but I’ve realized that everyone just learns and does things differently.

Another thing I liked about the reading was how Stryker didn’t seem interested in changing herself just to make other people more comfortable. She took the things that made her different and made them part of who she was. I think that is something a lot of people can relate to, even if their experiences are completely different. In college, I’ve definitely realized that there isn’t really one “right” way to learn, think, or be successful. Everyone has their own stuff going on that you might not see just by looking at them. I didn’t understand every part of the reading right away, but I liked that it made me think about how quickly people judge things they don’t understand. It also made me think that being different doesn’t automatically mean something is wrong with you. Sometimes it just means you have to find your own way of doing things.

I found “Throwing Like a Girl” by Iris Marion Young to be the reading I related to the most so far. Young talks about how society can shape the way we see what our bodies can do and how boys and girls can learn to use their bodies differently. One of her examples is throwing a ball. She explains that boys are usually encouraged to use their arms, legs, and the space around them, while girls might be more likely to hold back and not use their whole body. This made me think about how different my childhood was. My dad raised me doing what people would probably call “man things.” We went hunting and fishing, worked on cars, welded, and worked on farms together. He basically raised me like I was his prettiest son. Honestly, I was completely fine with it because I loved doing all those things. Even my brother wasn’t as interested in doing them as I was.

When I think about it now, my dad never really taught me that there were things I couldn’t do just because I was a girl. If something needed to be fixed, built, lifted, or figured out, I was usually right there wanting to help. He taught me to be comfortable using my body and not just assume something was “for boys.” That is one of the reasons Young’s example about throwing stood out to me. My experience was almost the opposite of what she describes. My dad taught me to throw with confidence and actually use my whole body. He even raised me to know how to throw every ball as well as, if not better than, a man. Looking back, I think that had a bigger impact on me than I realized when I was younger.

I also see this same idea with the phrase “running like a girl,” which I see all over TikTok. A lot of the videos and jokes around it make “running like a girl” seem like this very girly, unathletic, almost pretty-looking way of running. It is usually portrayed as someone not really using their whole body or looking very serious about being athletic. That reminds me a lot of Young’s point about throwing like a girl. In both examples, there is this idea that there is a certain way girls are expected to move. My experience was pretty different from that because I grew up playing sports and was used to keeping up with the men around me. I never really thought about changing the way I ran or threw because I was a girl. To me, I was just trying to play the sport and do what I needed to do. I think both throwing and running show how much using your body confidently can become something you learn from the people around you.

This connects to phenomenology because it is basically about people’s lived experiences and how we experience the world through our bodies. Growing up, my body wasn’t just something physical. It was something I used to do the things I enjoyed with my dad. I learned how to weld, work on cars, fish, hunt, and work on a farm, and all of those experiences became a part of who I was. Someone else could have grown up with completely different expectations about what they were supposed to do with their body. That’s what I find interesting about the idea of lived experience. We all have bodies, but we don’t all experience them in the same way.

I also started thinking about this idea differently after reading Linda Alcoff’s “Towards a Phenomenology of Racial Embodiment.” Alcoff talks about how race can affect the way someone experiences their body and how other people see them. Even though she is talking about race and Young is talking about gender, I noticed a similar idea in both readings. The way we are seen and treated by other people can affect our experiences. In my case, being a girl who was interested in activities that were usually seen as “men’s activities” affected how I interacted with people. When I was younger, though, I didn’t really think I was different. I was just doing things I liked doing.

Claudia Rankine’s Citizen also connects to this idea because she shows how everyday experiences can shape how someone sees themselves. Rankine focuses on experiences with race and how something that seems small to one person can mean a lot more to the person going through it. I saw a connection to Young because throwing a ball seems like such a small and normal thing too. There isn’t anything complicated about throwing a ball, but Young uses it to show how gender expectations can affect something as basic as the way someone moves. Both readings made me think about how everyday things can shape how we see ourselves without us even realizing it.

The readings from Tom Shakespeare and Mike Oliver about the social model of disability made me think about what our bodies are actually capable of compared to what society expects from us. They explain that disability isn’t only about a person’s impairment, but also about the barriers that society creates. I can connect this to Young because she also talks about how social expectations can affect what people feel comfortable doing with their bodies. In both situations, there can be a difference between what someone is actually capable of and the limitations that other people or society put on them. It made me think about how often we assume what someone can or can’t do based on their body.

My childhood also had an effect on how I connected with other people. Since I spent so much time doing things that were usually considered “man things,” I sometimes had a harder time connecting with other girls. I didn’t always have the same interests as them, and sometimes I felt like I had more in common with boys because of the things I liked doing. At the same time, the female friends I did make usually had a lot of the same interests as me. I think that actually made those friendships stronger because we already had things we genuinely liked doing together. Looking back, I think the things I grew up doing had a pretty big effect on the people I connected with.

Overall, these readings have made me think about the body in a completely different way. I used to mostly think of the body as just the physical part of a person, but now I see how our experiences, how people treat us, and how we are raised can all affect our relationship with our bodies. “Throwing Like a Girl” connected with me the most because I could actually compare Young’s ideas to my own childhood. My dad raised me differently than what Young describes for many girls, and honestly, I’m glad he did because I loved doing all of those things with him. Growing up that way taught me not to automatically put limits on myself just because I was a girl. At the same time, it showed me that the way we grow up can affect more than just what we do physically. It can affect our friendships, our confidence, and the way we see ourselves. I never really thought about my childhood this way before reading these articles, but now I look back on it a little differently.