I found Mieu’s work on diaper discourses in Kenya very informative. I was intrigued by the idea that adult diapers are used as metaphors for immoral and unethical behaviour and thus as a means to govern and control sexuality and sexual desires. Furthermore, although I don’t necessarily agree with it, I thought there was an interesting parallel drawn between the idea promoted by the state that diapers are hindrance to progress, development and modernity, diapers are something we as humans “grow out of”. “When a forty-year-old child who is addicted to drug[s] and is using diapers, it means that we, as a society, have failed our children” (Meiu 2014:857)

I agree with what you are saying. I also believe that, while she focuses on female agency, which gives us an insight into the complications a woman faces regarding reproduction and abilities for future migrations, patriarchal structures are not really mentioned and the role of the man only briefly. She talks about men facing a “conundrum”: on the one hand the duty to fulfill their gendered and religious expectations and on the other the desire to migrate, which would often be easier without a family. I was struck by the fact that in her ethnographic example of Malyuun, her brother and husband both tried to convince her to go ahead with the c-section, even though c-sections were so widely condemned. 

I also agree that perhaps it is too simplistic to categorise types of masculinities into a binary. Siu et al, outline how the pressures to conform to masculine activities and behaviours, disadvantage HIV positive men in their uptake of treatment. Siu et al, explain how the men were not willing to accept physical weakness and so rejected medication and the seriousness of the disease. 

The point raised by Paulina on the diapers metaphor is striking. Leaders’ political homophobia mobilises a strong symbol that infantilises, humiliates and suggests ‘‘dependence and helplessness’’ (586), in opposition to ‘‘modernity and progress’’ promoted by the state. This article shows how sexuality is not distinct from political life, but a part of citizenship discourses. Bodies epitomise in a certain way the nation, as foreigners using prostitution are seen as destroying ‘‘not only the bodies of individual citizens but, exponentially, whole generations, the country itself.’’ (576) Like in Lowe’s article, bodies emerge as a ground of both private and public concern. 

 

The social and moral requirements of gender outweighed the biological sex of an individual. A woman is fully gendered based on her ability to reproduce as the process of reproduction and conceiving is seen as an act of ‘marital and maternal devotion’. Female circumcision is understood to aid this by socially refining the body. While ‘both leave scars, an indication of past acts and future potentials’, a C-section on the other hand, relocates the process of reproduction which is seen as problematic. I found it interesting that a the symbolic meaning of a C-section meant that it was refused in favor of a natural birth in order to reduce the risk of future infertility despite the complications that may arise from a natural birth including potential death. 

life, but a part of citizenship discourses.” And my question is: to what extent love and sexuality are ideological? As for Meiu, the ‘diaper discourses’ do only concern sexuality but also a broader context in which citizenship in Kenya is debated in relation to health, reproduction, and modernity.

It might be that love and sexuality can be understood not by simply concerning them as the ‘culture’ of 

love or sexuality, but by examining on the specific agenda of mobilising a particular way of understanding of love and sexuality.

I also found the way caesarean sections are perceived by somali refugee women interesting – ‘somali refugee women perceive caesarean sections in the context of the need to protect their reproductive potential and thus their present and future security’ page 192

In addition, to what my colleagues have mentioned, I do believe, seen as “religion plays an intrinsic role in shaping reproductive beliefs and practices, [whilst] by no means [is] the only factor” (191). Incorporating the religious perspective towards women unable to produce children would strengthen Lowe’s argument, and provide a clearer picture towards women’s ‘choice to survive’.