Monday, April 27, 2009

Too ashamed to age

Recently, I've been particularly interested in the health sections of the different online news sources that I read. When I came across this story, I already had an idea of what it would be about before I even read it: Older woman thinks looking younger through surgery will lead to her feeling better about herself, and she has these feelings validated by others who compliment her on her newly attained looks. Turns out I was right.

I can't say I'm against cosmetic surgery, because I feel that doing so would be an infringement upon a woman's right to choose what she wants to do with herself, which I believe in strongly. But I do have a problem with women in many societies having to deal with the idea that age is something to be ashamed of and youthful looks should be sought at any price.

In the article linked to above, Janet Cunliffe, aged 50, said she wanted to look like her daughter, Jane, who is 29 in order to gain some confidence about herself.
"I decided to do it because I was feeling low at the time, I'd just come out of a long-term relationship, so just to boost my confidence. My daughter inspired me at the time, so I just wanted to look like her and to make me feel a lot more youthful and to give me some confidence."
The problem of correlating one's physical appearance with one's worth is such an integral part of being a women in many societies that it's sometimes one that isn't thought about. It's definitely an issue that I struggle (often unsuccessfully) to think of ways to conquer in my life.

And this article, I feel, is not helpful. It draws attention to this woman because she has completely bought into the troubling idea that appearing youthful is the only way to feel good about oneself after reaching middle age. It validates her feelings of discontent with appearing her natural age, and helps give reason for other women to feel the same way.

So, question: How can we make this cycle stop?

Sunday, April 26, 2009

Michelle Obama: Image Control

I wasn't sure what to think of this article at first, with all the "fashion is not political news" crap that shows up in the media, when it comes to women in the public eye, such as Michelle Obama,

The article starts out describing how Michelle has been adamant about having the last say in what she wears whens he poses for magazines like Vogue, People, Essence, and More. But it isn't only through her wardrobe choices that she is shaping her public image.
She has given coveted interviews primarily to women’s magazines and news outlets that have allowed her to highlight her domestic side: her focus on motherhood and her efforts to settle her family in the White House; her interest in gardening and healthy living; her affinity for mixing off-the-rack and designer goods; and her efforts to open up the White House to ordinary Americans.
This effort to focus her image is seen by the article's author as a "remarkable political transformation."
Only 10 months ago, Mrs. Obama was described as an angry black woman by some conservatives and as a liability to her husband. Now, she is widely admired for her warmth, and her vibrant and accessible manner, and her race seems almost an afterthought to many Americans. She has the highest favorability ratings of any incoming first lady since 1980, and is even more popular than the president.
As I read this I was a little disappointed because there are so many more aspects to Michelle Obama's character than her domestic side. Why aren't Michelle and her aides highlighting these things?
The image that Mrs. Obama is projecting, however, fails to fully reflect the multifaceted first lady. A Harvard-trained lawyer and former hospital vice president, she is also a tough-minded professional who cares deeply about influencing public policy and sometimes promotes legislation at her events.
Some analysts feel that Michelle may be trying to build her popularity through more traditional means in order to be able to push for action in policy areas she cares about in the future. I'm not sure what I think about this. What about you?

Saturday, April 25, 2009

From Fortune 500 to the PTA

Yesterday I found this article in the Fashion & Style section of the New York Times website. I thought the placement of the article was a bit odd, so I began reading about men in Pelham Manor, New York, who are dealing with losing their jobs in a recession which is leaving more men unemployed than women.
In this intimate town of 5,500 in Westchester County, with a median household income of almost $137,000, the streets are lined with meticulously landscaped homes with an average value of almost $1 million. These days, though, for-sale signs are popping up all the time.
The article followed several men who had lost their high-paying jobs and are now spending more time with their children and doing more parenting. But throughout the article it was made clear that these men all seemed to have lived experiences of masculinity in which providing was the most important aspect of being a good man/husband/father.
Other research shows that men tend to get more depressed than women when they lose jobs, but in cases where people are laid off in waves, such as when an entire plant closes down, they often experience less angst than those who are laid off individually.
Of course, this particular article concerns men with a kind of monetary security that is not at all common for most families in this country, but what do you think about the recession and the implications of differing gender roles due to unemployment levels?

Friday, April 24, 2009

"Skinny Bastard" by the authors who brought you "Skinny Bitch"

I remember the first time I picked up a copy of Skinny Bitch, I was with my mom and sister in Barnes and Noble and my mom was looking at diet books for herself and my stepdad. I can't remember if it was my mom or my sister who first picked up Skinny Bitch, but I was instantly put off by the title, took a look at one page, and was completely turned off by the language used. I didn't have to read very much to realize the main tactic the book's authors was using: Fat-shaming.

Having not actually read this book, I can't say whether or not the authors included discussion of health benefits when it comes to striving for healthier eating, but to me, it seems clear that their main goal is to use shame to get people to buy their book and try to change their eating habits.

Because why rely on the information you have about the importance of eating healthy when you can scare women into buying your diet/lifestyle ideas by hanging the f-word over their heads where it can thrive on their possibly low self-esteem?

Well, Rory Freedman and Kim Barnouin, the authors of Skinny Bitch, have written a book called Skinny Bastard, which will go on sale Monday.
“Skinny Bastard” follows roughly the same outline as “Skinny Bitch,” with the language retooled to appeal to male psychology. Whereas the introduction to “Skinny Bitch” reads, “If you can’t take one more day of self-loathing, you’re ready to get skinny,” the men’s version does not assume low self-esteem: “Chances are, you haven’t done so badly, despite the few extra lbs you’re carting around. ... But don’t kid yourself, pal: A hot-bodied man is a head-turner.”
The problem with even just this small amount of text, which I feel might be symptomatic of the entire premise of this book, is that it conflates physical appearance with the epitome of achievement and of happiness. Of course, there are benefits to being sure that one eats healthily, but one could do that and also not conform to the standard of physical beauty dictated by this society.

The problem of focusing on physical appearance above all else is something that effects people of all sexes and genders, and it often does not have good outcomes. The fact that these women seem to be targeting specific genders with specialized shaming tactics is really troublesome for me. It seems to be more problematic in Skinny Bitch than it might be in Skinny Bastard (the authors added a chapter about heart disease and prostate cancer to highlight health benefits in this book), but the overarching problem of thinking one physical appearance (aka "skinny") is the "right" kind, I imagine is still there.

Granted, I have not read either of these books, but the authors really make no effort to try to conceal their methods, even on their website. If anyone has read Skinny Bitch, please feel free to leave your opinion on their tactics as a comment.

If you haven't read this book, would you buy a book with a title like Skinny Bitch?

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Why TV sucks: Part three

I decided that this segment would better be titled "Why TV sucks" so I could include this commercial that I have never actually seen but found via a guest post at Shakesville.



No comment.

Other parts in this newly re-named serious: One. Two.

NEWSFLASH: Without Chivalry, Respectful Heterosexual Relationships Are DOOMED...According To One Guy

As I have blogged about in the past, sometimes I feel like I am often defined by other people in terms of my politics, especially when it comes to my feminism. It seems like politics and feminism are the first topics people reach for when they talk to me. This has even happened on several occasions with people I didn’t really know.

A few nights ago a friend of mine sent me an instant message. “Guys are bastards,” he moaned, complaining about the type of guy who doesn’t know how to respect any human being, let alone a female. Then this friend started talking about his personal code of conduct when it comes to women. He opens doors for women, walks closest to the street on the sidewalk. He calls it chivalry, and he said he does it out of respect. It’s not that he thinks girls aren’t as capable. It’s just about respect.

I admit that I have not spent enough time thinking about this kind of chivalry that is framed by those who practice it as being beneficial for all those involved, but this is what I came up with that night and I still find validity in.

I believe that he believes that his behavior is to be respectful and to show he cares. I think that was why he was unmoved by my attempts to show him that he was actually being harmful. He is able to justify his behavior because it works for him. He doesn’t need to care how others might see his actions. He is free from the consequences.

To challenge him, I asked my friend if he treated his male friends the same way. Surely he respects them as well. No, he told me. With guys, the behavior was reciprocal, where it was not expected to be reciprocal with girls.

So, it’s really not about respect. It’s about gender. When this guy is with a female, he must do things for her, care for her, protect her…because she is a girl. When he’s with other males, the behaviors are returned because men are not perceived as needing to be cared for, of being protected. It really is just about being a good guy.

As I tried to explain this, my friend proceeded to tell me that I was actually the one being hurtful because it is a lack of this kind of chivalry that leads to instances of “guys being bastards,” such as sleeping (raping) drunk girls, cat-calling, and such. In his mind, chivalry is what teaches men to be respectful of girls. Really, this kind of chivalry only teaches men to see people for their gender, not their ability, not their state of need at a particular moment. Just their gender.

And then this friend ended the conversation by saying that I would never convince him to think otherwise about this topic because I was arguing from the assumption that I was right. I thought for a minute.

Why else would I possibly argue about anything?

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

17-year-old women can now purchase Plan B without prescription

Remember when U.S. District Judge Edward R. Korman of New York told the FDA to reconsider a 2006 decision that only allowed women 18 and over access to Plan B without a prescription?

Well, that's exactly what happened.

Visual Aid

200 pages in the April 2009 issue of Allure Magazine.

52 miniature Post-Its marking full page advertisements (not including multiple ads by the same company if they appeared one after another, ads for stores, instead of specific products, fashion spreads, or ads that do not fill an entire page).

6 broad categories of product types (including hair, make-up, and perfume).

It really is amazing how much space is taken up by advertisements in magazines such as Allure. Really, it's a wonder they can fit in any editorial content at all. It's completely another experience when you have a visual like this in your hands.

(And yes, there was a reason for me to do this. It has to do with some research I am beginning.)

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Two 11-year-old boys commit suicide after enduring anti-gay bullying

First this.

Now this.

As Cara says in the second link, "And clearly, we need to wake the fuck up."

Overheard on a train

The following is a guest post submitted by Samantha. She's a 20 year old full time college student at Knox College where she's a biology major hoping to go into research.

This weekend I was heading home to celebrate my birthday with my family and while on the train I sat across from a woman and her husband. I had taken out my computer to do some homework on the train they noticed how big it was (it has a 17 inch screen) and started making sexual jokes at me and each other, saying “it’s size that matters” or “it’s the inches that are important” or “I’d rather have longer battery life because it doesn’t matter how big it is if it doesn’t last long.” I have never met these people in my life and they felt comfortable making me uncomfortable with these sexual jokes. It’s one thing if I’ve been friends with someone for a while and they start making jokes, but complete strangers? Not ok.

Later in the ride the conductor came through telling us that we have to get our bags down early because once the train goes below ten miles an hour the lights would go off. Well the man asked the conductor when he should grab his bag. The conductor started to repeat that they would give an announcement when his wife interrupted her saying, “He meant me, I’m his bag.” The poor conductor didn’t know what to say and finally decided on “that’s not nice.” The wife’s response was “he can say anything he wants because I’ve got these” while showing all the rings that were on her fingers. There were about 4 rings and they were covered with diamonds. She is teaching her children, three girls and two boys, that it’s ok for men to be derogatory toward women as long as they give them expensive presents! They’re also teaching the boys that it’s alright to be derogatory towards women as long as they can give them shiny things in return. Also that every woman will forgive them for their remarks as long as they bribe them with something shiny and expensive. The saddest thing about this incident was that I know that there really are some women (besides the wife on the train) that think like this; that it’s ok for men to say anything they want about women and they’ll be fine with it as long as they buy them expensive gifts.

How is her daughter ever going to learn the correct way a man should treat her if the only examples she has is of her mother who lets her stepfather saying derogatory things in very public places; not that it would be more appropriate in private but if it’s a private joke or something then it should definitely stay in private. I just feel terrible for her children, it’s so sad that they have to grow up in this environment. I hope that they have some kind of role model that can show them that it’s not ok for husbands to be derogatory towards their wives as long as they can compensate with jewelry.

Monday, April 20, 2009

Today in "Haha...Oh wait, they're serious?"

Today is April 20th. 420. You know what that means...


...the Alliance Defense Fund is hunting down the ever-evasive "homosexual agenda" by sponsoring the fifth annual "Day of Truth."

I know. I'm dying to find out more about this whole "homosexual agenda" thing these people keep bringing up. It sounds like fun!

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Blake Lively illustrates why we must continually educate ourselves

I was trying to catch up on some blog reading when I came across a post by Monica Roberts at TransGriot about Gossip Girl's Blake Lively saying that sometimes she feels "like a tranny."

Lively will be appearing on the cover of Allure magazine in May, and she had this to say:
"I don't know, I'm…large?" she said to the magazine. "They put me in six-inch heels and I tower over every man. I've got this long hair and lots of clothes and makeup on. I just feel really big a lot of the time, and I'm surrounded by a lot of tiny people. I feel like a man sometimes."
Besides being confused as to why being taller than men was equated with being a transwoman in Lively's mind, Monica's original post really struck me.

I have been following the boycott of Feministing and Feministe started by voz, and I've been doing a lot of reading. It made me realize how much I have learned over the course of two years since I began identifying as a feminist, and how much I still need to learn.

For example, when I first started reading posts related to the boycott, I was unfamiliar with the term cisgender, and my first instinct was to do a Google search and try to figure it out. I admit that this was not always my first instinct. Sometimes (more often in "the real world" than online), if I didn't understand something, I would ask someone of what I felt was the appropriate group to explain a term, concept, whatever, to me. But through reading I quickly learned that the responsibility of educating myself is up to me.

I have not always been successful in my attempts at talking about issues outside of my own experience, especially offline. I have failed to be properly sensitive. I have used terms that I didn't realize were hurtful and incorrect until after the fact.

That's the case with the word "tranny." I now know that it is completely inappropriate coming from a cisgender woman, but I didn't know that when I was in high school. I had a friend who often used the term to refer to characters in her surrealist fictional pieces, and I often used the term in conversation with her, not at all understanding what it actually meant or that it could be hurtful.

I'm not asking for a pat on the back about this. I just want people to know that if we are not actively trying to educate ourselves, our ignorance could very easily end up hurting people we want to help.

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Why Men Don't Call Me Back

I've had the experience of men not calling me back after it seemed like they were interested in me. I've had many friends who have shared this same experience and we ponder over why these males fail to return our phone calls. Thus when I saw a link to an article about why men don't call women back, I'd thought I would read it and see if it had anything insightful to say. The article was written by a "dating coach," Rachel Greenwald and according to the article, the number one reason why men don't call women back is something the author labeled as, "The Boss Lady." She described men as seeing women as, "Terrific -- smart and successful -- but he decides he'd rather hire her than date her. In such a situation, women typically guess that men are intimidated by their success or strong personality. But men said they get enough aggression at work all day, and when they come home they want to be with someone softer, more nurturing. They do want someone intelligent with an interesting career, but they prefer a warm demeanor." What Greenwald is saying is that we need to tone down what we think of as our, "success or strong personality," and get, "a warm demeanor." This sounded a lot like essays I read for my "Victorian Literature" class last term, about how women should always put forth sweetness. I thought maybe I was misinterpreting what she said, until I read on further to see her dating tips. The first one was "Soften your delivery." Women are supposed to, "[tone] down your conversation style from combative or challenging to gracious, and even a little flirtatious, goes a long way." Instead of having intelligent conversation, where a point can be made, women should flirt. Dating tip number two was to "Look like a women." Women are supposed to "think Scarlett O'Hara not Hillary Clinton." Instead of dressing like a successful woman, involved in a field that is largely dominated by men, women should dress like a character from "Gone with the Wind." The last tip is to "Select what you need, not want." Us "Boss Ladies" should go for a "nurturing, giving type of guy can be optimal (maybe he's a teacher or chef instead of Wall Street broker?)" because obviously there can't be two people making money in a relationship, right?

This article made me glad that sometimes I don't get a call back. All this time I've been dealing with self-esteem issues as they relate to the opposite sex, when really I just come off as too successful, I don't dress like Scarlett O'Hara, and I am attracted to people that I think are going to successful rather than simply "nurturing."

Objectifying women and promoting assault is never okay

I discovered Save the Ta-Tas when writing this post, and the campaign has been deeply troubling to me ever since. At first, when I discovered the website, I thought that Save the Ta-Tas was a sort of cultural event that I had been slow to catch onto. But many of my friends had never heard of it before, either, so I want to address the issues it presents in case some of our other readers are unaware.

Save the Ta-Tas sells t-shirts and other accessories to raise awareness of breast cancer and raise money for research. The problem, as is evidenced by the name of the campaign, is that in order to do the good work of raising money and awareness, Save the Ta-Tas relies on objectification of women and other more horrifying tactics.

Yes, refering to breasts as ta-tas is going to attract a lot of attention, and going the "funny" route might be likely to generate more quick revenue than other advertising ideas. But if you have to turn to sexism to generate money, can you really claim to be doing a service for the cause? I think not.

The entire campaign is based around objectifying women, turning them into nothing more than their breasts (ta-tas). Why do we need to raise money for breast cancer research? Because cancer is a long and difficult battle that no one should have to deal with? Well, no. From the looks of this website, we need to raise money for breast cancer research because breast cancer hurts ta-tas, and "Ta-tas Are Awesome." This objectification by focusing solely on breasts is also illustrated by the "Caught you lookin' at my ta-tas" t-shirt.

Then there's the disturbing trend in this campaign of promoting violence against women and their breasts. For example, there are several disturbing onesies for babies that have text reading, "Gimme your ta-tas and no one gets hurt," and "Be vewy vewy quiet I'm hunting ta-tas."

Both of these particular onesies are baffling and very troublesome. They promote the idea that women's bodies belong to others who can demand them for themselves and even "hunt" them. It's esepcially disturbing considering these are on garments meant for infants. Yeah, I know, there are other connotations, but these aren't even cute. They're frightening.

Then there's the idea of disembodied breasts fighting each other ("My ta-tas could beat up your ta-tas") which not only pointlessly brings up violence (this time woman v. woman or breast v. breast) but seems counterproductive to the idea of breast cancer research. We're supposed to be battling cancer with these shirts, I thought. Not other women's body parts.

Then there's the most disturbing example of promoting violence against women on the entire site. The "Save a life grope your wife" t-shirt leaves nothing to the imagination. It tells the reader that by groping (aka assaulting) their wife, they're actually doing her a favor. And that's a damn lie. An anonymous commenter on my Mad Housewife post said that she had survived breast cancer after her husband found her lump. In response to that comment I said that the t-shirt (image below) only had its wording to go on to spread its message, which leads me to believe that because the word "grope" was chosen (which means assault) that it is assault they are promoting, not consensual touching that happens to lead to the discovery of a lump.

And that's not okay. Ever.

Friday, April 17, 2009

Marital rape law to be changed in Afghanistan

On Wednesday I wrote about women in Afghanistan protesting a new law that would severely limit their rights by legalizing marital rape, and making it illegal for women to work or go to school outside of their homes without the permission of their husbands.

Apparently, President Hamid Karzai has decided to change that law.

What do you think?

h/t Shakesville.

Day of Silence

Today is the National Day of Silence. On my college campus people wore duct tape over their mouths to bring to light LGBTI harassment and subsequent silence faced by members of this community.

This year's event was in memory of Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover who hanged himself after being taunted for being gay, even though he did not identify as homosexual. He would have been 12 years old today.

Although I did not participate in the Day of Silence, my heart goes out to those in the LGBTI community, especially on my college campus after recent events (which I will detail in a few weeks after everything has been decided conclusively).

Did you participate?