Video - Sharron Angle’s ad - National TV | Examiner.com

Video - Sharron Angle’s ad - National TV | Examiner.com

I came across this reading an article on the View and how angry Joy Behar was about it. I just have one thing to say about it: if Elizabeth Hasselbeck thinks this video is racist, then we have a problem. This is seriously one of the most racist things I've seen in awhile. I am all for immigration reform: yes, gangs, drug cartels and human traffickers do come across the border and yes, this needs to be dealt with. But to classify all illegal immigrants as dangerous gang members out to get innocent white Americans? That's completely ludicrous and insulting. Too bad I don't vote in Nevada, wish I did just so I could vote against this woman. And it is sad to me that increasingly, the only women in politics that receive media attention are the idiots and anti-feminists. But I repeat myself.

Sexual, or Sexualizing?

In light of the recent Glee GQ photoshoot scandal, I'd really like to share my thoughts on it as well as the queer issues that are being developed in Glee. I don't really need to provide links: just Google "Glee GQ" and you will be inundated with news and blogs about it, as well as the pictures themselves.

I am a Gleek through and through, and I have felt pressure from some of the feminist community to decry this photoshoot as hypersexualizing young girls in the media. Yes, the pictures are racy; yes, it is only the two women dressed scantily while Cory Monteith is fully clothed (although, think about it people, GQ is a men's magazine and must appeal to its target audience.) But I'm going to give my honest feelings and defend these two actresses that I admire so much. I say only the two actresses because interestingly enough I see certain feminists criticizing only Dianna Agron and Lea Michele while leaving Cory Monteith entirely out of the discussion, for whatever reason. I'll say this simply: those actresses are grown women and are entitled to do whatever they think is right for them. Now, that being said, it's clear to me from Dianna Agron's statement regarding the shoot that she had mixed feelings about it throughout. My feminist goal for all women is to feel informed enough to make their own choices regarding their bodies, and I can see her dilemma without judging it. Yes, they do portray high school students in Glee, but to echo Agron's question, why in the hell would any young girl be reading GQ in the first place? And honestly, they may not need to be watching Glee either. Glee never made itself out to be a purely innocent family show; it deals with mature subjects in a transparent manner. Therefore I deplore the PTC's extremely loose usage of the term "pedophilia," not only because the actors are all adults but because Glee is simply not a kids' show, and I am not criticizing the show for that; in fact, it's why I watch it.

Finally, I will confess something that we are all thinking but not admitting: I'd feel like a hypocrite saying anything bad about these pictures or the actresses in them because they are, quite frankly, HOT; if you deny being somewhat aroused by them, you're either lying or a gay man. Therefore to criticize them would be like a politician who makes a career out of busting prostitutes and yet enlists their services himself. And that's all I have to say about that.

I feel a little frustrated at this point because my original topic was about queer issues in the actual show, and I feel like I got distracted by this mess. I love Glee because it has brought many ADULT issues to the forefront in a mature and discursive manner, including queer themes and teen pregnancy and sexuality. I will further explore this when the madness has calmed down and we can turn our focus back to the show.

Seau Accused of Hitting 25-Year-Old Girlfriend | TMZ.com

Seau Accused of Hitting 25-Year-Old Girlfriend | TMZ.com

How many more of these celebrity reports are we gonna get?

Camping: or...

JESUS it's freezing out here, why the hell am I not at home in bed? 

~*~*~

Hi all,

I just got back from a camping/yoga/back-middle-of-fucking-nowhere-woods hiking trip, and it really made me think about how my experiences generalize to my everyday life. This is not necessarily about feminism, but more of a journal that I decided to share with all of you.

It started out just fine, a little hiking and sightseeing. I got my shoes soaked walking through the water, but that's my own fault. (I had fun warming them on our portable stove later.) Yoga outdoors can be a whole new experience, especially by the water. But my leader decided to do a 6-mile hike to our next camping location, something she'd told us about in advance but the full extent of which I was not expecting. It was strenuous, too strenuous for someone like me who is not in the best shape and certainly not used to highly physical activities. I couldn't keep up, I slowed the whole group down the first day. The next day it was too much. My leader had to carry my pack for me and honestly I was crying from exhaustion and sheer embarrassment. Oh my god, I thought, I seriously cannot do this. I wanted to prove that I didn't have greater limitations than the others, that I could carry my own weight. And I failed. It was one of the worst feelings in the world. I kept flashing back to elementary/middle school and being picked last in P.E., or not being able to run the whole way and being the last one to finish every day.

I have not failed at anything in a long time. Maybe I was just trying to be someone I'm not. But this trip made me think a lot about my self-talk and how to handle the experience. "It's okay, you're just not cut out for it," others have said. And I would think, that's not okay. I want to be able to enjoy physical activities, god knows I need them. But maybe I could think of it more as, "I tried this; I failed, but at least I stepped out of my comfort zone when most people wouldn't have in this situation."

Activists I suspect are not used to failing either, but speaking personally I have seen my projects fall through, my ideas not realized, especially when I don't have the help or manpower to really make it what it needs to be. But as long as we try our damnedest to make it happen, it's okay, at least we are trying to do some good in our communities when most other people don't really care or have the time. Keep that in mind when your dreams don't turn out quite how you would like them to.

This video makes me sick:

Facebook | Videos Posted by Isa Elmazoski: Sep 9, 2010 1:29pm

I realize everybody has their feelings about abortion, but I cannot stand it when people play on emotions to talk about serious subjects. I have nothing against this woman or her sad story; in fact, I have my own thoughts about late-term abortions. But those thoughts are based on FACTS and the consideration of various factors and their pros and cons. This video is about pure manipulation and religious propoganda.

To my friend who originally posted this: I do not want to be insensitive toward your feelings about this video or the issue in general. But I had my own thoughts about it I could not keep quiet because it evoked strong feelings in me as well. I did not feel Facebook was an appropriate venue to voice those opinions so I reposted it here.

Our gay teens are in crisis

This week I have heard about more suicides from young gay people than I have in my entire life. I don't believe the numbers have significantly changed, but I do believe that we are becoming more aware of it through the media.

I also feel that the articles who question if the Internet is dangerous for our kids' self-esteem are missing the point. It is our gay kids who are being targeted. This is, as Ellen DeGeneres points out, a crisis. There needs to be culture-specific research on suicide prevention with young gay people. Our teens need to be aware of resources they have to turn to - Hotlines, shelters, counseling centers.

I feel as if I cannot allow myself to think about all the hatred in the world that these kids endured to resort to taking their own lives. If I do, I'm afraid it will consume me with anger and sadness. And frustration, because I feel there's nothing I can do to CHANGE it. But one thing's for sure: antigay bullying in schools has to stop. Authority figures must let their students know that it is NOT okay, and to give these kids recourse before it's too late. Unfortunately, teachers, principles and school boards are sometimes themselves complicit in the homophobia that plagues their students.

This unfortunate situation is why I would like to work with LGBT youth in the future. I have worked with violence against women for a long time, but there is a whole other type of violence going on against LGBT teens. Let's bring attention to it in our own community and reach out to these kids to let them know they have resources and support; maybe we can save one more life. 

Re: College Girl's PowerPoint "Fuck List" Goes Viral

College Girl's PowerPoint "Fuck List" Goes Viral

I shared this on Facebook and was surprised by reactions to it. When I read it, my initial reaction was, "Hey, men do stuff like this to objectify women all the time" and I wasn't that sad to see it turned around on men. But the further I read it, I thought to myself, is this really progress on the part of women? Acting like the worst part about men and turning the other sex into objects? Whether or not these particular men deserve it is up for debate. But her grading criteria - how aggressive he was in bed, the size of his penis - only subscribes to the stereotypes of what men should be like sexually, that they should all be stallions who take control and know exactly what to do. As one of my friends argued, well this is what some women like from a man in bed. My argument to that is that men who don't act this way in bed are made to feel inadequate and inferior, which can lead to distressing dysfunctions down the road. It would be the same if a woman is expected to be submissive and willing to do anything (oh, and have big boobs and be shaved). The argument "that's just what some men like" just doesn't work if you take into account how people are conditioned to act in bed based on gender norms. Anyone that deviates from these norms may experience criticism from their partners - or they may face public ridicule on the Internet, in this case.

To be fair, this "fuck list" reminds me an awful lot of the Tucker Max semi-autobiographical I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell, a book I actually found hilarious despite myself. And most of my friends who read the PowerPoint found it funny and entertaining in the same way. So maybe I should just lighten up. On the other hand, it may also be good to keep in the back of our minds that feminism is not about claiming pieces of patriarchy for ourselves. Let's not act like "female chauvinist pigs" (Levy) and pretend that it's empowering.

Oh, and don't write down anything on your computer that you wouldn't want the entire world to see. Because they might.

Revival with Atlas

Okay, in honor of the fall semester and beginning a brand new graduate program, I am reviving my blog from its summer rest. At least that's the way I like to think about it and NOT about the sheer laziness involved. Anyway...

I really wanted to begin by talking about Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand (It is pronounced like "Ein" not "Ann" by the way, I did not know until recently), because I undertook this whale of a book over the summer and much to my dismay and despite my best efforts, I actually finished it. I mainly read it because my honey Val (you can read his nerdy blog here) is a dedicated Objectivist and I wanted to understand his point of view. In turn, he agreed to read a modern feminist book; I chose Feminism Without Borders by Chandra Mohanty, (which he still has yet to read past the Introduction I might add.) I'm not really going to rehash AS bit by bit; it's already been done and dear god it would take about two weeks to read. Many feminists have torn this book apart as the glorification of capitalist greed and hegemonic masculinity that it is, and in many ways I share their sentiments. But it gave me so much food for thought. I find her ideas slipping into my arguments, more particularly the parts about us taking responsibility for our lives and being the best we can be, valuing individual freedoms and eschewing imposed self-sacrifice for the sake of it. Wouldn't counseling titans Alfred Adler and Carl Rogers say the same thing to an ailing client? And say what you want about Rand being too individualistic, she grew up in a collectivist society and saw it go to its most dangerous extreme. That's why she came here. I really don't think Rand's ideas work on a global scale - she was writing at the very dawn of globalization and has not seen the effects of global capital on Third World countries. But I can take her ideas and live them in my personal life for self-empowerment while avoiding her fatal mistake-wanting to impose the ideas on every culture, regardless of its context. It simply won't work. Rand would certainly not have agreed with sexism and racism, but she also wanted to act like those societal factors don't exist. (And don't get me into her ideas about "hero worship," I want to barf in my mouth a little bit.) But let's face it, Dagny's a badass and she has lots of sex with whomever she wants. That's awesome.

So in conclusion, if you're looking for two completely different points of view on global economy, read AS and the Mohanty book mentioned above. They are both enlightening. If Val ever gets around to it I'll let you know his thoughts. 

Next time: Mockingjay! I finally finished the trilogy, and will share my thoughts on it.

Young Feminists DO Exist

Are young feminists in an existential crisis or something? Because apparently people think we don't exist, according to this blogger: Fair and Feminist She like most of us is a little upset by that so she's doing a little blog carnival of young feminists. I'm participating and proudly wearing my badge:

Weekly Arts update

There are so many books, movies, music, and artists I would like to share with everyone that it would be impossible to write an individual review for all of them. So I think I'll just update you weekly on what I'm reading/watching/listening to/discovering w/ mini-reviews :)

• Watching: Bram Stoker's Dracula. Haven't finished it yet, very confusing right now honestly. Visually there's just too many things going on. Watching Keanu Reeves try to do a British accent is very entertaining though. I'll probably give it 3 out of 5 stars when I finish it. As a sidenote, it's interesting to see this film as the novel really set the precedent for all modern vampire literature and film. Certainly it was the inspiration for Anne Rice and (now) Stephanie Meyer in establishing the vampire as a sex symbol.
  
  
  

• Reading: Catching Fire by Suzanne Collins, the second book in The Hunger Games trilogy. Just as thrilling as the first one, in some ways even more so because you really have no idea what to expect after the climax of the last book. These two books are both very revolutionary and very feminist, in my opinion, a la V for Vendetta in many ways, but Collins takes a completely new spin on it. Even only being halfway through it I give it 4 out of 5 stars. 

• Listening to: HIM (aka His Infernal Majesty). Yeah I know, all the pseudo-artistic posers in my high school listened to it, but because I rejected music like this for years I am just now being exposed to it, thanks to my lovely partner. I've sampled all of their albums, and they're actually not bad, brooding and romantic in some parts. I give it a 3 out of 5 stars. Would recommend his more well-known songs like his cover of "Wicked Game."

In Joy and Sorrow - H.I.M.  

See you next week.

Were the World Mine: Review

Just saw this wonderful musical called Were the World Mine, about a gay boy who discovers the power to turn everyone in his homophobic town gay, to give them a chance to "walk in his shoes." Meanwhile, he is performing in the school play, A Midsummer Night's Dream, and much of the dialogue incorporates lines from the play. It's not really a conventional musical, as most of the singing takes place in dream sequences and doesn't stop the action in the movie. It's both adorable and poignant. The main character has a fantastic voice, as do most of the other cast. It also does a really good job of addressing hegemonic masculinity (via the rugby team and its coach) and the homophobia directed at Shakespeare (as many of the rugby players are cast as women in the play.) I give it a 4.5 out of 5 stars.

Were the World Mine on IMDB

Is feminism anti-capitalist?

So I'm taking a transnational Feminisms class, and nearly all of the material we've read (Mohanty, Ong, Ngai) share a sentiment that the only way to liberate women globally is the downfall of capitalism. Now, I am aware of the detrimental effects of global capital, especially on Third World women. But I must offer the same question to you all that I asked myself: Is feminism necessarily anti-capitalist? If so, is there any socioeconomic system that inherently serves the interests of feminism?


I've been arguing with my partner about it for several months now. He is an objectivist, and Ayn Rand's philosophy is a glorification of capitalism (at least as I understand it, I haven't read enough of her writing to make a judgment.) He argues that capitalism gives us all the freedoms to choose our profession and move ahead in the world, and all socialism does is limit our choices. I honestly think he values the ideals of social democracy more than capitalism itself. However, I ask the question of whether we can realize the great things about social democracy (i.e., freedom, equality, self-determination) without economically fucking the rest of the world over?


Is socialism the answer? I honestly have no idea. I think that we can grow on certain models from other countries in which the government provides health care, childcare (with both maternal and paternal leave), education, and all of the things that people really need to even think about trying to get ahead professionally and economically. In other words, I truly believe in a controlled capitalism - but then, is that really even capitalism at all?


Capitalism in its current form has made the entire world financially unstable. I think it will take several generations to sort through economic systems to see what will work, because it's clear that not the same thing will work for every part of the world. So I'll put the question to you - how do we level the economic playing field without sacrificing the benefits of a free(ish) market? And how are our social philosophies (freedom, democracy, etc) tied up with our economic policies? I'd really like to know what other people think about this because I certainly do not have a definitive answer right now.

Reaping the Benefits of Straight Privilege

Is it possible, even as a LGBT rights activist, to avoid the privileges of heterosexism? Certainly, we know how one can be victimized by it. I have this assignment to write an autobiography about how I have either benefited from or been victimized by heterosexism, and I think I could argue that I've experienced both benefits and disadvantages. Heterosexism is different from homophobia: it implies the privileging of the heterosexual norm above all other forms of sexuality, which doesn't necessarily entail a fear of homosexual desire so much as a feeling of being superior to it. So naturally I'm trying out my ideas here, and I'd like to know your experiences as well:

I think I benefited from heterosexism the most during adolescence, where fitting in to avoid harassment and ostracism is key. Having been in straight relationships for my entire life, obviously I have never had to deal with the issues my gay friends did in high school. I never encountered prejudice, hatred or harassment because of my sexuality, I was never singled out or bullied. I never had to hide my identity from my family and friends. Of course, I also never questioned my identity really and nobody questioned it for me - because everyone assumed I was straight, I am certain they were immediately put at ease without even thinking about it, because heterosexuality is unquestionably the norm for them. And I cannot say I've never encountered prejudice or antipathy; I have been attacked by my peers for my beliefs not only in gender equality but for gay rights as well. Still, I cannot claim to really know what it's like for someone to be attacked directly for their identity. As a straight ally, I had the benefit of always looking in on homophobia from the outside rather than having to directly experience it myself. 

Of course, even being in heterosexual relationships, there are still ways you can be victimized by heterosexism. I believe heterosexism affects relationships between men and women in a negative way, especially when you take gender roles into account. As heterosexual beings, we are expected to take on certain roles in the relationship as a woman and as a man. Heterosexism does not just privilege straightness, it privileges a certain kind of straightness, in which people conform to the masculine and feminine roles prescribed for them. If I am dominant and assertive in my relationship with a man, not only am I told to step down a notch but my partner's masculinity is immediately questioned. Perhaps even gay couples feel this pressure to take on these rigid masculine/feminine roles, but that's a matter to be further explored.

I'm not going to say I never questioned my identity in high school, and for sure I'm questioning it much more now that I'm growing older and feeling more secure and confident to do so. But because I have established myself as heterosexual, I find that people were constantly reminding me that I am straight, and never giving me even the option to consider being something else. As a proponent of LGBT rights, I have been attacked for my beliefs, and it didn't much matter if I was straight or not, I was still promoting a "sinful lifestyle" and every other manner of insult heterosexist people could throw at me. Even into adulthood I find I cannot even make jokes or light comments about lesbianism or bisexuality without someone getting suspicious about my sexuality. Not that I much care whether they think I'm gay or not, but I think it's sad how people think that if I care about gay rights I must be gay and therefore suspect. It's as stupid as people saying that only women care about feminism and women's rights. 

Someone saw my rainbow button on my backpack once and commented, "Why do you have that, people are going to think you're gay." I replied, "Well I'm an ally and I believe in gay rights." "Yeah, but you're not gay, and everyone will think you are," she replied. As if that would have been so terrible. I don't think she thought that people thinking of me as gay would be horrible so much as just inaccurate, but she was still way more concerned about what people would think of me than I was. I think even subconsciously she knew that by having that button I would be subjected to heterosexism whether I was gay or not, and while I thought it rather conformist thinking I did appreciate her concern because it means she is at least aware of heterosexism even she doesn't know how to name it. 

Finally, I still have a lot of fear and trepidation about what would happen and how my life would be affected if one day I found myself actively questioning my identity and exploring other options. It may be a conscious choice, it may happen because of an unexpected development of my life, but either way, sexuality can be and is fluid and I am open for any changes in the future. That doesn't mean I wouldn't be scared to death about it. First of all, I would have to give up the security of being in a heterosexual relationship, not only by giving up many of my rights but also the implicit acceptance by many people in my life. I would have to go through the entire arduous process of coming out to my family and friends, and having to educate people who don't understand or deal with the hostility of people who refuse to understand. These prospects alone I believe may have been a factor in my staying in serial heterosexual relationships. It doesn't matter how much I say I do not care and that I would be fearlessly "loud and proud" about my sexuality, I understand what obstacles I would have to face. And therefore I am a victim of heterosexism before I even consider not being heterosexual. 

Dynamics of Men and Women in Mixed Groups

I've recently had a couple of experiences in a class that have thoroughly pissed me off and that I feel I cannot keep quiet about. My professor told me that even if we disagree we must band with all the potential allies we can get. I really appreciate it when men want to be a part of women's studies but at the same time I feel the conversational dynamics (or lack of) pose a great problem for alliances between men and women in feminism.

This guy in my class completely trashed a well-known theorist in our class, claiming that it was "complete and utter nonsense." WTF? This theorist is incredibly intelligent (yes, dude, she IS smarter than you), she's been doing this for a long time, and most importantly, she is worthy of some form of respect. He said this with no backup whatsoever, not "I don't like her because..." or "I just didn't agree with her on..." I'm sorry, but to say it's nonsense is just another way of saying "I didn't understand it therefore it must be nonsense."

I spoke with my professor about it at length, and she gave me some really good advice. She told me to look to him as an ally, even if we disagree, and that it's not worth it to get so pissed off. She advised me to let it go. I took this to heart and went to class the next day determined to remain chill and forget about it. 

Then the next day one of my classmates was sharing an anecdotal experience that was relevant to our discussion. This guy completely turned on her, practically spitting out that anecdotes are useless and not generalizable for theory. He continued this argument over and over even though the rest of us as well as the professor were trying to defend her and explain to him that she wasn't implying that at all, in fact she was presenting it as the exception to the rule. His final comment was "Well, I reject the anecdote." I just about lost it. I responded by telling a story of my own and saying pointedly "I know that's an ANECDOTE but I was just sharing my own experience."

My professor just about jumped my ass and told me to calm down, which was partly justified because I know that one of my biggest weakness is the inability to control my temper and keep my big mouth shut. It's like word vomit. I just couldn't stand the pointed, potentially hurtful comments directed at one of my peers. No, the fight may not be worth it, but it is when they start bullying other people. I just won't stand for that.

The point to this story is that I wonder sometimes if this is just how men tend to act in mixed groups. They feel they have to talk over people, argue about everything and be totally inconsiderate of others in order to get their point across. This is the way they are trained from birth to interact with people, while women are taught to be quiet, acquiescent to others' views, and to build relationships no matter what. Neither being assertive nor considerate of others' viewpoints are bad things, but there is a point where it is just counterproductive to a discursive, respectful environment. And next time he pulls this bullshit, I will be all over his ass, I don't care if I get kicked out of the class.

Keeping it Simple

It has been an exhausting week. I've worked 48 hours at work, and so did not get much of a spring break. So much stuff I wanted to get done that didn't. I love my job, I love helping women but sometimes I feel like it's going to consume my whole life, when I need to focus on other things, like V-Day for instance, or getting into grad school or taking my dog to the park. Maybe I should take a step back for awhile. I think when you work in social services, your life and individuality starts to bleed into your work, it becomes a part of you just because of the sensitive situations you constantly find yourself handling. But you have to be able to step back, to harden your skin, and be careful not to get too emotionally involved. If I let every case of domestic violence get to me (which some of the more severe ones do) I'd be crying at work all the time and never get anything done. Not only that, but in this area you find you are constantly giving of yourself to others, because they need love, they need all of the compassion and support they can get. This sometimes leaves us empty, bled out, with nothing left to give to ourselves, nothing left to sustain us.

"I told myself I was strong enough

That I had plenty of blood to give
And each elbow cradled a needle
But listless and faint ain't no way to live" ~Ani Difranco, Swim

So when I feel this way, I do what one of my coworkers used to call "pushing my reset button." She described it as doing something, just for you, that can re-energize you and get you out of the funk you're stuck in. So I got nostalgic and bought....a Backstreet Boys concert DVD.

Yep, that's right. And before you look at me shamed and horrified, let me just explain that I bought it not necessarily because I'm still a fan (although, let's face it, I really am) but more that the Backstreet Boys were a staple part of my girlhood. Sometimes it feels really good to just get back to the basics, and nurture your inner child (or in my case, my inner 'tween dork). Why? Because it's fun.

In light of that confession (try not to laugh too hard) I would urge each of you to think back to something that really made you happy as a kid. Even those of us who had dark childhoods have that one thing that makes them jump up and down and giggle. Whether it's a Disney movie, a favorite game, or a place that makes you feel safe, (or a 90's boy band) that's your reset button.

I've never written something like this because I used to think that every single blog entry had to be a well-thought out argument about feminism, and thus was writing about once a month. Then I realized, this is a blog, not only about feminism but about me. And since I practice feminism in my everyday life, I hope each of my experiences reflect that. That means opening up and revealing things about myself that make me the woman I am. So, I want to send an unabashed thanks to the Backstreet Boys for their small part in making me that woman.
P.S. - Thanks to Sarah for watching it with me when no one else could and appreciate it the way I do :)

Enjoy:

Queering my education

I'm taking a "Queer Issues in Education" class, and Paul, my professor asked us to write reflections on our queer experiences in our education, and how we have been affected by homophobia and heterosexism.

As for me, I have never really had a formal “queer” education; it’s always come in subtle bits and pieces, and a lot of it unfortunately had to be self-taught. I was lucky enough to take the very first American Women’s History course at my high school, which, though in a small way, queered my academic perspective from that point onward. I knew that one of my most beloved teachers in high school (who incidentally was the one who taught the women’s history course) was gay, though I was never able to meet her partner, because the privileged few of us who knew her orientation kept it quiet out of respect for (or maybe fear for) her reputation as a teacher. Plus, it was her personal life, so whose business was it anyway? Still, I wonder, did she feel she had to hide or did she simply regard her private life as just that, private? Unfortunately, I never really got the chance to ask her.

hooks vs. Lorde: The two Titans

So I've decided to make it a black lesbian feministy spring break and read all of my black feminist literature: bell hooks, Audre Lorde, and Alice Walker.

It amazes me how hooks' and Lorde's styles are completely different but basically saying the same thing. I must confess I've always been more of a Lorde fan and the more I read of hooks the more frustrated I get with her. I've read the bulk of From Margin to Center but pretty much skimmed the rest because every single chapter begins with something like: The feminist movement has always been co-opted by white bourgeois spoiled women who ignored and repressed the needs and issues of poor women and women of color. Jesus, woman, I get it, okay? Must you hit me over the damn head with it every time? It's not even like I take offense as a white woman, because I know what she is saying is true. My issue with her is that sometimes she makes assumptions and claims about white women's experience with nothing to back it up, not an example, or a quote, nothing. There were several parts in the book where I actually said to myself, "Uh, I don't think that's ever happened." Or when she makes a general reference to white feminists I found myself going, "Which white feminists?" I think she makes a lot of assumptions about white women's experience without really knowing anything about it. Even parts that are true, about feminism initially focusing on housework and motherhood as a source of oppression, doesn't make white women's experiences any less genuine. They are simply different from black and/or poor women's experiences, and yes, a lot of it stems from privilege and white supremacy.

The thing that really pissed me off was the chapter about parenting. As far as I know, bell hooks does not have any children, first of all. First, she accuses white middle-class feminists of viewing wifehood and motherhood as sources of oppression and wanting careers. I believe it was more because women as a whole want their work as mothers to be valued the way that it should, just as much as work outside the home. Then she turns around and makes the complete opposite accusation that white feminists now are saying that motherhood is the most important thing a woman can do, at the expense of her career. Okay, the only woman I have ever heard say that is Phyllis Schlafly, and she is the most anti-feminist crazy bitch I've ever seen. So where are you getting this from, bell?

This is why I love Audre Lorde: she makes the same points, and she expresses no less anger and frustration at white feminists for ignoring the issues of black feminists. But she's able to put it in a way that does not completely alienate her audience. I've also never seen her make a claim that she did not back up with an example from her own experience or a quote from another theorist. In other words, Lorde FTW.

My next reading is Alice Walker's "We are the ones we've been waiting for" which I'm very much looking forward to, even from reading the first five pages. I'll probably write on her next.

Gender and Sex in Italian film

So I have watched two Italian movies in the past couple of weeks that both treat gender and sexuality in starkly different ways, though they were both made in 1974 and both were directed by women, ironically.

Lisa Wertmuller's film Swept Away is a story about an upper-class woman and her lower-class servant getting stranded on a deserted island together, where they experience a switching of dominant/submissive roles in both class and gender constructs. Rafaella is haughty, self-indulgent and ignorant of the ways in which other people in the world are oppressed. Gennarino is a Communist from South Italy who takes the opportunity to teach Rafaella her place and a lesson in humility, as personal vengeance against the oppressions of the upper classes of North Italy. They fall in love, or so Wertmuller would have the audience believe, but in the end when they return to civilization, Rafaella abandons Gennarino to rejoin her privileged world.


Turning this perception of the good class/bad class on its head is Wertmuller's portrayal of traditional gender roles on the island. This Wertmuller makes no attempt at complicating in the least. Rafaella?s character does not represent a changing self-consciousness in the status of women but a reversion of such. Yes, she verbally assaults Gennarino before and during their stay on the island, but Gennarino eventually resorts to physical and sexual violence in order to teach Rafaella not only the significance of her class status but also her place as a woman. This attitude is further evidenced by Gennarino's similar treatment of his wife upon their return from the island. Throughout the film, it tries to convince the audience that not only does Rafaella submit to physical, emotional and sexual abuse to survive but that she enjoys it, so infatuated is she with Gennarino. Though it is revealed in the end that Rafaella feigned this enamoredness, she endured far more than what was necessary for her to survive. Therefore I cannot find any evidence of a progression of women's status in this film, only a regression of feminist values. Gender violence cannot be justified as an allegory for class and political revolt. Constructs of gender cannot be analyzed separately from those of class, and this film attempts to do that by complicating one without doing the same to the other.

Touching on similar themes but in completely different ways is Liliana Cavani's controversial film The Night Porter. It's controversial because it's a love story between a Nazi officer in a concentration camp and one of its Jewish prisoners and their (completely consensual) sadomasochistic relationship (yikes). Yet somehow, Cavani seems to pull it off without being offensive, because they meet again in 1957 and renew their relationship. The way in which it is different from Swept Away in its treatment of the S&M relationship is that the couple does not stay in prescribed gender roles. Each shows dominant and submissive aspects, masculine and feminine, completely turning the gender construct on its head. The genuine love story in a war-torn setting combined with the S&M aspects basically make it a Casablanca meets Secretary kind of film. I'm not trying to compare the films, though I highly recommend both of them. The film does not resort to physical violence of one gender using force to control the other, as is evident in Swept Away. While Lucia (the Jewish woman) seems completely the submissive or the "bottom," (in one scene he ties her down with a chain), Max (the former Nazi) is completely at her feet, submitting to her every whim even while they play their parts. In this way gender roles are reversed and perverted, with the feminized man and the butch woman, so to speak: Lucia is stoic and defiant, as a man is expected to be, while Max is emotional, temperamental and entreating toward Lucia, which are traditionally "feminine" traits. There are some very touching scenes - such as when you discover that Lucia kept a dress that Max had given her in the camp for 15 years. In addition to gender, there is also major threads of homoeroticism running through the film, suggesting that Max had an affair (whether physical or emotional) with a male Nazi dancer before he met Lucia. Practically every scene is dripping with sexuality, even objectification, while still maintaining its human aspects.

As you can probably tell, I loved The Night Porter and basically loathed Swept Away. If both involve sadistic and masochistic elements, what is the difference between them? In Swept Away, violence against women is used as revenge, control, and to show dominance of men over women. In The Night Porter, there is physical violence sometimes used, yet there is a cyclical nature to who is dominant and who is submissive and rejects gender structures. There are also queer aspects of The Night Porter in which norms of morality are questioned, which is probably why it is so controversial. Swept Away, despite its desperation to shock and arouse with its sexual scenes, merely serves the dominant heterosexist and misogynist agenda that people are so used to.

What is the more important issue?

When we set up table at the Organization fair last Friday, an awkward new grad student was the first guy to come up to us. He asked interestedly what V-day was about, and I gave him the generic responses, thinking that he'd nod and then move along. Then he stopped when he saw the V-day platform which states "Rape, incest, sexual slavery and genital mutilation must stop." He pointed at it and said, "Where does male circumcision fall into that?"

His question threw me off guard, and I had to think about it for a second. I guess he thought I was avoiding the question because he leaned in, scrutinizing my expression. I tentatively answered with "Well, it's a very controversial issue. I have my own views about it, but some may equate it female genital mutilation in the East." I explained to him that V-day mainly refers to female genital mutilation in parts of Africa and the Middle East, in which girls are horrendously mutilated by having their clitoris cut off or their vagina sewed up until marriage. The guy said he understood but that "male circumcision can fall into that too. Some of us are absolutely traumatized by the experience." 

This was the main path that our conversation took. And to be honest, it kind of irritated me. I'm not saying that issues such as male circumcision are not important to talk about. But when we are trying to talk openly to people about women's issues, sometimes they have a way of immediately transmuting it into a man's issue. On the other hand, my Transnational Feminisms professor pointed out to me when I related this story to her that Western feminists sometimes have a way of objectifying the East as backwards, misogynist, and savage. Not that female genital mutilation isn't all of those things, but this guy was actually pointing out that the West in some ways is no better than the East - we have our own forms of mutilation here, except that they are performed by a doctor instead of a midwife with a shard of glass. Personally, though, I like that I can live in this country not living in fear that I'm going to have my clit hacked off.

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

• Book reading: The Hunger Games. OMG, yay for young adult post-apocalyptic literature. And a heroine in the lead, no less!

• Music listening to: Dar Williams, various albums. I'm trying so hard to get into her, but compared to Ani, most folk singers seem downright docile.

• Last movie watched: The Duchess. Damn good movie. Tiny lesbian(ish) scene between Kiera Knightly and Lady Bess, yum. Ralph Fiennes is brilliant as always.
  

Coming Up

I like that the Women's Studies/GLBT studies section of Barnes and Noble is way in the back corner...it means that only the people who care go back there. It is my safe haven. Sometimes I just like to go and sit in that corner and soak up the feminist spirit, as if all the feminists and queer activists of the past are whispering encouragement in my ear.

V-day is starting up again. I haven't done a damn thing, or at least feel like I haven't. I know it will happen one way or the other. I feel so ambivalent about V-day now: trying to get it together is so stressful that I wonder if I want to do it anymore, but like my V-day goddess Georgia says, I cannot bear to hand it over to anyone else at the moment. Are you out there, my beautiful V-warriors? We need your help now. Seriously, just email me.

Meanwhile, I'm doing my own little personal research project on bisexuality and the main differences between gay&lesbian and bisexual experience. The best book I've come across so far is "Look Both Ways: Bisexual Politics" by Jennifer Baumgardner, the author of the wonderful Manifesta. It's got a broad perspective but is still achingly personal about Baumgardner's relationships with men and women. Sometimes it stumbles into the pitfalls of "why sex with women is better than with men," but for the most part it is pretty balanced.  I'll let you know when I find out more.

• Listening to: The Science of Things by Bush. Like it okay, so far. Moody but attractively understated.

• Most recent movie watched: Across the Universe. Oh my, it's beautiful. I get something different out of it everytime I watch it, whether it's issues about war&violence, gender&sexuality, race, class or anything. Julie Taymor is a genius.

• Reading: The Heart of Yoga, and The Mummy by Anne Rice.

Jumping on the Hatewagon

It's funny how a good sports scandal can bring out the worst in people. As much as I would like to avoid such topics, some are so ubiquitous that I feel compelled to address them (such as Tiger Woods.) Mike Leach was fired last week for the alleged mistreatment of one of his players. Since then, there has been a firestorm of controversy as to whether it went down the way Adam James says it did. Did Leach really lock him up in an electric closet or just trying to let him rest? Was the other guy there to guard the door making sure he didn't leave or to get him water? Who knows, but that's not really what I'm interested in. There has been a surge of support for Mike Leach - Team Leach shirts, "Bring back Leach" groups on Facebook with a million members in it. You know what people are saying about Adam James, the alleged victim? One of my friend's Facebook statuses said, and I quote, "[James] should crawl back into his closet...like the little bitch that he is." And there were many more like it last week. There has been a slew of hatemongering, and it's all been directed at James.  The reason this situation disturbs me is because it is eerily similar to the situation a rape victim finds herself in when she comes forward to accuse someone who is held in high esteem, such as, I don't know, a sports player. All the hate and judgment is directed toward the victim. The victim is put on the stand instead of the accused. And I want to point out that after the bowl game a lot of players came forward in support of their teammate, and feel like things are better off without Leach. I think that says something about the strong bond a team can have, which is one of the positives of team sports. Football is considered by many to be a practice of hegemonic masculinity (thanks Dr. Dunham), but I do believe there are positives to this kind of masculinity as well. It seems to be the fans that are the problem. Hate is not going to bring Leach back. And I don't understand why they are so loyal to him when in fact he is not very loyal to Tech, as evidenced by all the crap he pulled with renewing his contract last year. Whether James's allegations are entirely true or not, what disturbs me is how eagerly people will jump on the Hatewagon in support of a sports coach. A sports coach. That's all he is, seriously - he's not a hero or an activist, and he certainly isn't an angel. He does not deserve the pedestal the fans put him up on just because he was fired. He did this to himself, and I firmly believe it was not without reason.