The Latest from
@AmplifyTweets:
Facebook
The following is a blog post that has been adapted from an essay that I wrote for my class on Television Criticism. The professor asked us to look at the politics of Nickelodeon and decide whether or not it had a "feminist agenda." It was clear from the lecture that the answer being looked for was yes but I decided to complicate things just a bit!
In order to decide whether or not Nickelodeon has a feminist agenda it is important to, first, decide what a feminist agenda would comprise of. According to Webster's dictionary, The widely accepted definition of feminism in today’s society is, “the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes." This is a very simplified definition; most modern feminists acknowledge the wide intersections of oppression and seek to create equality with race, sexual orientation, ability, and other areas as well.
Since feminism is, at its core, about equality then a television station with a feminist agenda could simply be any station that seeks to represent men and women of all ethnicities, ability status, sexualities, and so on proportionality in their programming. A feminist television station could also be one that tries to create equality between these groups with proactive programming. Thus, in order to decide if a television station, Nickelodeon in this case, is a feminist television station we must look at two factors: whether or not its programming equally represents all types of people, and whether or not its programming seeks to further the cause of feminism.
Out of the six animated cartoons that Nickelodeon is currently producing and airing new episodes of, only one (The Mighty B) features a female lead (Nick Toons.) The live-actions shows are more balanced; two out of the four feature female leads (Teen Nick.) While it is true that early '90s "girl power" shows like Clarissa Explains it All broke new ground, it does not seem as if the success of this show changed the makeup of Nickelodeon programming, at least not for very long. It’s been over ten years since the final episode of Clarissa Explains It All and Nickelodeon’s shows are still highly male dominated.
With everyone so eager to share their opinion on the historic health care bill that just passed, I figured I’d throw my two cents into the ring. Rather than provide you with an opinion on how I think this is going to play out, I’m simply going to lay out the provisions of this bill (as best as I understand them from a survey of articles that range from The New York Times to Fox News to Feministing.) I couldn’t resist throwing in a little opinion though… which is why the provisions are categorized into Good, Bad, and Questionable. I hope this helps make this whole debate just a little bit more comprehensible.
- The Good:
Most awesomely, this bill will expand insurance coverage to thirty-two million uninsured Americans. This will be accomplished, in part, through insurance exchanges. These exchanges would allow small business owners, and uninsured individuals to buy insurance through state-based exchanges that include subsidies for people who make from 100 to 400 percent of the federal poverty level.
The bill also puts strict regulations in place that will (hopefully) ban insurance companies from charging higher premiums or even denying coverage of people with preexisting conditions, as well as ban companies from charging higher premiums for women. It would also require insurance companies to provide maternity care.
This bill will also expand Medicaid so that people who make up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level will be covered, and close the Medicare “donut hole” which is a costly gap that vastly pumps up the price of prescription drug coverage for senior citizens. The bill will allow parent’s insurance to cover their children through the age of twenty-six.
- The Questionable: With a few exceptions, this bill would require all U.S. citizens to purchase insurance or pay a $695 annual fine, and require businesses with fifty plus employees to provide them with insurance or pay a two-thousand dollar fine per employee every year if any employee receives federal subsidies for purchasing insurance. (However, the employer mandate has been removed by the Senate.)
- The Bad: Essentially, women’s health was thrown under the bus in order to pass this bill. Obama’s executive order that all abortion funds must be kept separate from any federal funds used in supplying health insurance will essentially cause all insurance companies to drop abortion coverage altogether; the alternative for the companies (maintaining records that separate out special ‘abortion funds’ from money that the policy-holder pays directly without government aid) is a record-keeping logistical nightmare.
This article by Jon Walker says it best: “The system of exchanges and affordability tax credits could easily be modified to ensure federal funds are not used to pay for abortions, while still not taking away the ability of women and small businesses to buy insurance packages that cover abortion. Having an individual mandate that forces women to buy insurance, but also a law that prevents them from getting insurance that covers a legal medical procedure, is a disgusting abuse of women’s rights.”
The other major fail in this bill concerns immigration. This bill as it stands would not allow undocumented immigrants to buy insurance on soon to be established exchanges, even if they are willing to pay the full cost out of pocket, with no government aid. Not only is this policy cruel, it also makes no sense fiscally.
Walker explains it well: “The more undocumented immigrants that pay for their own health care, the more taxpayers save by not being forced to pick up the cost of undocumented immigrants’ uncompensated care when they use the emergency rooms.”
What Comes Next? Recognizing that, for the most part, this was a big step in the right direction is integral; but that’s all it is, a step. Now its time to bring the focus squarely onto reproductive rights (including access to safe, legal abortions for people of all income levels) and push to get some pro-choice legislature through as soon as possible. Another push to make it so illegal immigrants can purchase insurance will hopefully happen as well, since denying them coverage, even when they can afford it, is detrimental to both the health of our country and the health of the people we are refusing to cover.
I started this post ages ago and then left it for awhile because I didn't know where I was going with it. After yesterday's blog, I think I've figured it out. So first, what I wrote then:
Last time I posted, I wrote about forgetting beauty norms and embracing the idea of being ugly because, why should we care anyway? Wouldn't we all be much happier if we were free to present ourselves in whatever way we liked best, rather than following beauty conventions? Today I'd like to acknowledge the hurdles & limitations that stand in the way of doing just that; the ways in which society enforces our obsession with beauty. Then I'd like to analyze these "incentives" for being beautiful and explain why it is all just silly, anyways.On Black Friday I braved the malls for an hour or so with a friend of mine, mostly because we wanted to see what the fuss was all about (in the parking lot on the way out we decided that we never needed to do this again... people go CRAZY on Black Friday!) On this shopping trip I bought some nail polish in the chaos and then promptly forgot about it, until it turned up under my bed today and I decided to use it to paint my nails.As I was staring at the bottle while my nails dried (not much you can do with wet fingernails!) I started to think about the name of the polish... Love & Beauty. In fact, Forever 21's whole makeup line is called Love & Beauty which got me to thinking about the connection that we CONSTANTLY make as a society between, you guessed it, love and beauty.
Relationships are often the biggest pressure-point when it comes to being beautiful. After all how will we ever attract someone to love us if we're not "pretty." I don't know... lets take a look. Just a bit of digging on google quickly uncovers something impressive. Based on psychological studies the idea that most people have (I have to be attractive in order to attract someone to love me) is not necessarily accurate. Rather, love seems to follow the age-old adage: love is blind. Sure some psychologists claim to have discovered the "golden ratios" for facial beauty but there are just as many studies out there that show people who are in love tend to see their partner as attractive regardless of what the societal standard may be! Inner awesomeness seems to radiate outwards and create positive associations, regardless of appearance. For instance:
" In one study, 70% of college students deemed an instructor physically attractive when he acted in a friendly manner, while only 30% found him attractive when he was cold and distant. Indeed, when surveyed for attributes in selecting a mate, both males and females felt kindness and an exciting personality were more important in a mate than good looks. Thus, to a certain degree, beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder."At the end of the day its important to keep in mind that looks will fade one day. You shouldn't choose a partner or seek to attract a partner based solely on the way you look - because that is not the way to fulfilling relationships. Peoples bodies change and grow all of the time; in order for you to accept those changes, your partner (if you choose to have one) should not only be accepting, but be supporting of the natural changes your body goes through. I'd rather have relationships (romantic or otherwise) with people who like me for who I am rather than what I look like any day - wouldn't you?
This is where the nail-polish and consumerism in general comes in; I find it striking how the company choose to link love & beauty together like this. I mean, the beauty part makes sense since nail polish is a "beauty" product... but love? This is a very blatant example of how companies like to capitalize on our human longing to be loved in order to sell a product; in this case the product is makeup, but more generally the "product" being sold is always a particular look that someone has deemed beautiful. Our magazines, television, movies, clothing stores, makeup stores, even grocery stores (diet foods!) all use the "beauty incentive" to sell us products to some degree. In this way beauty is incredibly dis-empowering. Companies create a beauty ideal and instill a wide-spread societal desire to meet that ideal; those same companies sell products that promise to get us closer to the ideal; companies make sure that the ideal remains constantly unreachable (for instance, look at how much models keep slimming down... always skinnier than is achievable by the average person) so that we "have to" buy more products in an attempt to reach it. Lather. rinse. repeat.
I have spent a large portion of the last year working to help others see the beauty that they posess, both inside and out, through poetry, discussions, blog posts, performance art, and so on.
This mission comes after years and years of struggling with my own demons; in fact, I've been fighting to feel pretty and worthwhile for so long that I think, maybe, I have lost sight of the bigger picture. In my quest to help myself & others feel beautiful, I’ve stopped asking questions. Questions like…
What is beauty, anyway? How can EVERYONE be beautiful?
Why do I even want to be pretty? Why are beauty and self worth so intertwined in our culture?
Why does it feel more important to be beautiful than nice, or smart, or interesting, or funny... or any of the other awesome traits people have?
Now, I’m not saying that all of the work that I (and so many others) have done is worthless by any means, but at the same time I have to ask…
There’s about a million and one things that I want to do with my life at this point in time.
I can still feel myself buzzing from the success of the play that I helped to put on. (More on that soon, promise!) I want to take that show and blow it up, make it bigger and better and do it again and again until I have reached out to so, so many more people.
I want to work with Rape Crisis Centers and find some way to educate men and women to the point where we all understand what rape is and how we can avoid it. (The only answer? Rapists need to stop raping.)
I want to be a sex therapist, I want to help women and men who struggle to accept their bodies and let themselves feel good.
I want to do family counseling, specifically I want to help families to accept their children, or siblings, or cousins, or partners who are different from them (maybe even queer, if you will, in some way.)
I want to work with eating disorder survivors, helping to broaden the definition of eating disorders to something that comfortable fits the experiences of everyone who suffers, and then find a way to end that suffering for them once and for all.
I want to work for a suicide prevention hotline.
I want to write novels for young teen girls that encourage them to be smart and bold and to love themselves just as they are while they never, never stop reaching for their impossible dreams.
(I decided to keep posting body image-related stuff from my past today -- since I am so busy with this play project that I mentioned on my other blog post. I can't wait until it is over and I can reflect here on Amplify and hopefully even share some video clips!)
A recent class discussion on body image really got me thinking. The professor shared a very apt analogy about pants and how they can make or break someone’s whole day. She asked us to think about our skinny pants; the pair that most people have, the pair of pants that make you elated when you can fit into them and miserable when you can’t… for some people those pants spell out the climate of their whole day. She likened life to those pants; some days, they fit, everything goes right and you love yourself; other days, you can hardly you’ll them over your hips, you feel defeated and huge…you wonder why anyone would even want to look at you. Its scary how easily I could relate to this metaphor.
This is when I began to wonder why it had to be this way. In the last few months I have made great strides in feeling better about my body, loving every inch of it… but even I still had that size-too-small pair of skinny jeans just sitting and taunting me in the drawer.
Earlier this month, my school celebrated Go Red for Women day with a table that attempted to raise awareness about heart health for everyone. While I appreciated their efforts, I felt as if the event left a lot of very important, yet underreported, information out so I decided to remedy that here! This is coming a little bit late for the national holiday but that's okay, heart health is definitley important enough to talk about any time of the year.
I was incerdibly surprised to learn this, but, according to the U.S National Library of Medicine the symptoms that women tend to display when having a heart attack are often different than the ones doctor’s usually associate with heart disease. Although chest pain is the most common heart attack symptom in women and men, women can also have a heart attack without having any chest pain; women also often lack the radiating left-arm pain that is commonly associated with heart attacks.
Fatigue, nausea, shoulder and jaw pain, headaches, and muscle spasms are all heart attack symptoms that show up in women much more often than in men; since many of these symptoms can be attributed to stress, heart disease is often overlooked in women.
I'm posting a body positive piece today because (hopefully) this week I'm going to be premiering a monologue show about body image that a bunch of students at my school helped to produce! It's a project I have been working on for almost a year now and I am really excited to see it become a reality :) The show is part of an Eating Disorder Awareness Campaign that we're doing at my school - I'll try to blog more about it later in the week! But for now, here's part of one of the monologues I wrote:
I remember coming home in tears, hating myself over the fact that I’d been made fun of on the bus in middle school for my hairy legs. I remember wearing jeans even in the summer because my “thunder thighs” embarrassed me more than I was willing to expose. I remember purposely buying tight tank tops to wear underneath clothing to suck in my “gut.” I remember counting calories in a little blue notebook to the point of obsession, the point where I finally just had to say STOP, I’d rather keep the ten pounds then lose my sanity along with them. I remember wondering if boys wouldn’t date me, girls wouldn’t befriend me, because I was too heavy, too hairy, too ugly. Like millions of other people of all ages and sizes, I keep these thoughts locked deep within my heart; luckily for me, unlike many others, these thoughts are only memories.
Transitioning to college was a strange and exciting experience, however, the biggest change for me wasn’t sharing a room, spending so much time on out-of-class work, eating in a dining hall, or even being away from home… the biggest change for me was a mirror. At first it was funny: why would someone ever place a full length mirror in the bathroom, directly in line with our toilet? Then it was a bit annoying: why do I have to watch myself pee? Eventually, it became enlightening.
Look Bill, I’ve avoided calling you (and Rush, and Glenn Beck, and all of your conservative friends) out on this for awhile. But enough is enough. Let me say this nice and slowly for you, so we can move on:
Inspired by the post I wrote awhile back about sustainability, I decided to continue on an environmental train of thought for a bit since, honestly, I don't think one blog on this topic is enough! Thus, I bring you this short & sweet list of simple ways to be more sustainable. Let's see how many of these we can incorporate in the next week!
1. Pee in the shower. I'm not even kidding. Toilet flushing makes up nearly 27 percent of indoor water use in a home, on average peeing in the shower once a day saves around 1157 gallons of water a year!
2. Purchase and use re-usable shopping bags (or just save the disposable ones and bring them back with you) whenever you go purchase something. If you buy something small, forgo the bag and toss it in your pocket or purse.
3. If you get a period, consider using a menstrual cup in lieu of tampons and pads. Not only are they more environmentally friendly (think of all of the plastic/paper/etc. that you throw out each month), they're also more friendly to your body. There's no risk of toxic shock syndrome when you use a menstrual cup, because they don't contain the chemicals that tampons do (they're dyed white etc.) Also, think of the money you will save when you're not buying pads/tampons every month!
4. Start a scrap paper bin and throw all of those annoying class handouts, fliers, or whatever pieces of paper you're given but never use into it - then, when you need to jot something down really quickly, you'll know what to use! (And recycle when you're done, of course.)
5. Make it a point to start unplugging your electronics when you're done with them, especially at night when you're headed to bed! Needlessly wasting electricity is not cool. Not to mention - don't forget to turn off lights, heaters, and so on when you leave a room. Personally, this is one I need to work on!
Today has been a discouraging day. The large pile of homework sitting in front of me, coupled with all of the intolerance I've found myself witnessing lately has really brought me down. So I decided to take a break, and try to cheer myself up the best way I know how... by starting a project on a whim that attempts to change the depressing atmosphere around me by encouraging others to engage in small acts of kindness and love. It was either that, or buy myself a chai latte! ;)
This is a short blog post because nothing has happened yet, but I'd really like it if you all could check out (and maybe participate) in the little chain of happy thoughts that I am trying to start!
Quoted from my personal blog:
After finishing a post- secret for homework in one of my classes, I took out an extra index card and wrote a message on it that challenges the finder to brighten someone else’s day (how vague can I get, right?) and then pass the challenge on to someone else.
At the bottom of that message I decided to direct people here.
Why don’t you do the same?
If we all make an index card with an instruction, and then place it somewhere random. We could start a revolution! (Or, at the very least, make someone smile.)
Then people can come back here, and post what they did and how they passed it on.
How big will it get? Only one way to find out…
I know this isn't the most orignial project, but at least its something. Writing for Amplify and being a part of this community has inspired me so much in recent months to take my frustrations and turn them into something positive - I hope organizing this can be a way of giving some of that inspiration back.
Thanks for taking the time to read this, everyone :)
(I wrote this a long time ago for my old blog, but I feel like its one of the best things I've written as well as the most important... so I edited it a lot and then posted it here for you because I really feel that this deserves a wider audience!)
During a discussion that I had about domestic violence and sexual assault today I began to think about just how little information there is out there for those who have loved ones dealing with sexual assault and domestic violence. All too often, well intentioned loved ones end up hurting both the survivor and themselves due to a lack of knowledge, and their struggles to deal with their own emotional stress. I hope that this article can serve as a resource for those who are struggling to care for loved ones who have been abused.
There is only one thing you have to remember when caring for a loved one: your job is to empower.
Rape and Domestic Violence are not crimes of passion, they are crimes of power. Abusers are not so overcome with lust or rage that they abused; as evidenced by the fact that abusers can stop when they feel they are in risk of being caught, and abusers only abuse those who they feel are too weak to fight back. For instance, a domestic abuser would never strike their boss or someone else with power over them, which indicates that it is not the abusers temper that causes them to abuse, but rather a desire to control the victim.
For these reasons the most important part of a survivor’s recovery is their regaining the power that was taken from them through the abuse. Thats why I make it a practice to refer to those who have suffered abuse as survivors, rather than victims, whenever possible – yes, they have been victimized, but what the focus should be on is their ability to survive their attack and become stronger through their experiences.
What a loved one can do is to help a survivor in the process of gaining that power back for themselves. Obviously, this process and the actions a loved one can take will differ case by case but to start, I have provided a few guidelines to keep in mind…
I'm fairly sick this week, and a stuffy head is not really conducive to writing. Thus, you get this... a post that has been hanging around in my harddrive since last March. I have no idea why I never put it up but, whatever, here it is!
I used to comfort myself with the idea that, one day, someone would fall in love with me in spite of my imperfections and see the beauty in me... and then they could help me see the beauty in me.
I'm not going to lie, that happened, but looking back I wonder why I felt that I needed someone else to love me before I could really love myself. The truth is, I didn't and neither do you!
Just for today, why don't YOU try to be the "someone else out there" who finds you beautiful...
Its time for us all to stop worrying about our imperfections. I want to share this image that I was introduced to via Sociological Images...
As cheesy as it sounds, its time for us to stop worrying about being imperfect, no one is perfect. The truth is, its our imperfections are what make us interesting, unique, and loveable... your imperfections are ab important part of you, so stop beating yourself up over them! Its time to stop reaching for this constantly changing, always fleeting idea of perfection and accept the thing that you are perfect at... being you!
As a psychology student, I understand why psychologists feel that labels and standards are important; however, as a woman who knows many people who struggle with disordered eating (including myself) I hate the way the psychology community treats eating disorders.
For instance, one woman in the comments of an article I read* has gone through several diagnoses, from anorexic to exercise bulimic to EDNOS**, depending on which doctor was treating her at the time; because she felt as if the psychiatric community could not help her figure out conclusively what was wrong with her this woman ended up alienated from therapy and, thus, forced to heal largely on her own. This is not good.
Eating Disorder diagnosis and standards are useful tools; they help psychologists to have a universal understanding of what a patient is going through, for one, and they also help people to figure out what they are suffering from and how to begin treatment. However, the strict category model currently used by the DSMIV is also incredibly problematic.
I have friends and relatives who have struggled with disordered eating. For that matter, I've struggled with a disordered relationship to food off and on for my whole life. If there's one thing I know, its this: no two people with an eating disorder look or act the same. Eating disorders, at least in my opinion, are a lot less about behaviors and a lot more about mental processes. What do I mean by that? It's simple.
Lets take Weight Watchers as an example. A person who has a healthy relationship with their body and food can go on Weight Watchers and lose weight without losing themselves; that's not necessarily true of someone with an eating disorder. The last time I went on Weight Watchers I did it for a week and three days exactly before I quit and never looked back. I did this because I knew the way I was behaving was not healthy: I was obsessing over food, making graphs and calculating points for hours each of those days, I was pushing myself to eat less and less points each day, and I felt horrible if I ate up to my points limit for the day. Essentially, my thought processes behind the healthy diet became incredibly unhealthy. I wasn't eating a dangerously high or dangerously low amount of food, nor was I exercising excessively... what I was doing was obsessing, and hurting myself with my own thoughts. I may not have had an eating disorder in the traditional sense, but I certainly needed guidance to help me rectify my disordered thinking about food.
Most people I know have a story like mine; many of them have stories much more intense then mine. I was lucky, my experience ended fairly positively as I found a therapist who could help me feel comfortable with my body and my food choices, and my parents found a way to finance that therapy. Unfortunately, due to strict insurance policies and even stricter diagnosis guidelines many people's stories do not end like mine.
So I'm sure most of you know by now that many of the Men's Rights blogs out there are FREAKING OUT right now because several organizations, like MADRE, have made a commitment to focusing their aid efforts in Haiti on women and children. If you're not familiar I'll let the blogger at The Spearhead explain his take on this situation:
This may seem like a valid, if blown out of proportion, argument at first glance. However, there are a few reasons why I am incredibly reluctant to give creedence to the people complaining about MADRE and like organizations.However, some relief groups have decided that women deserve more aid, and have come up with a number of reasons why men should be left to die from injuries and disease while women get preferential treatment.
[...]
It is not clear whether such discrimination in the wake of disaster is legal in Haiti. In any event, if men are needlessly dying because these women’s groups are hoarding supplies for women only, the Haitian government should send troops in to seize the supplies and distribute them equally to needy men and women alike. That would be a true act of mercy.
I call them anti-choicers because that is what they are. Some people claim this is the same as them calling me anti-life, but its not. Its not, because I am pro-life... who isn't? I think senseless killing is wrong; which is why I am a pacifist, I care about animal rights, about anti-violence initiatives, and about gun-control. You know what I'm not about, though? Controlling other women's bodies and lives.
If faced with a pregnancy I'm honestly not sure if I would adopt or carry to term, my own feelings about conception, life, and adoption are far too complex for me to ever know how I would react to this situation (only being in the situation, honestly, would let me know.) However, regardless of the choices I would make, I respect other women far too much to try and force my own choices, my own views, onto them.
That's why I'm pro-choice. I don't like the idea of abortion but, even more than that, I don't like the idea of a world where a pregnant woman is not in control of her own body and not allowed to make decisions about whats forming inside of her body.
The following comment (made by user kellieherson) on this Jezebel article really got to me when I spotted it a few months ago, because I feel like it sums up almost exactly what I was going for with Self-Esteem Awareness Month:
I can only speak to my own experience, but I think it's a pretty common one regardless of body type: I've always felt like my body belonged more to everyone else than it did to me. They were clearly thinking about it more, and they seemed to think they were the authority on it. Luckily, I realized early in puberty that the best I can do is just say "fuck that" and take care of my body the best I can-- feed it, clean it, clothe it, whatever. That's all. (Having blissfully un-body-conscious parents helped.)
I bookmarked this quote to use over three months ago and promptly forgot about it, yet when I unearthed it again today it still rang true, possibly even more so than when I first discovered it. To put it quite frankly: my self esteem has been fairly low in the last few days. You'd think putting together a play about body image (more on that later) as well as blogging constantly about body acceptance would leave me feeling pretty damn good, but, I suppose you'd be wrong.
I blame my jeans: I've had two pair rip in the last month due to age. That's about 1/2 of my jeans collection (at least the ones that still fit) which meant, you guessed it... a shopping trip was in order. Now, its no secret that I love clothes. I have an embarrassingly large collection of skirts, dresses, and shirts and I spend way too much of my limited down time making up no outfits for fun, I guess its my guilty pleasure. That said, I hate shopping for pants. I carry most of my weight in my stomach, meaning that pants are the one thing that always need to be at least one size bigger than my typical dress size, add in the fact that almost every pair of pants I buy is too long and the fact that women's pants sizes vary based on brand and cut... is it any wonder I hate this?
I found this really interesting:
Things like this may seem small in a way, some of the commenters on the original blog post, which analyzed this image/caption within the context of "whiteness" as America's standard default, seemed to feel as if the analysis was unimportant and unnecessary.The Associated Press, a news service subscribed to by news outlets all over the world, distributed a story about the first Obama Administration State Dinner. In the story, sent in by Elisabeth R., Samantha Critchell describes Michelle Obama’s dress as “flesh-colored.” She writes:
"First lady Michelle Obama chose to wear a gleaming silver-sequined, flesh-colored gown Tuesday night to the first state dinner held by her husband’s administration. "
[via Sociological Images]
For reference, here are some of the comments left on the post:
Now, granted, most of the comments on this post were supportive (I would expect as much from a blog devoted to analysing Sociological phenomena) but those few negative voices really stuck with me: mostly because I'm used to hearing them so damn often.
Dan 10:45 am on November 29, 2009: It’s just bad writing. Banal. Sophomoric. Nothing more. I’m sure you believe this is insightful, but you’re merely elevating the trivial.
ryan 11:04 pm on November 29, 2009: Wow, people really care?
I got a funny petition today, from a friend, in my inbox. Funny, because it claimed that Obama was pushing to make it so that illegal immigrants could recieve Social Security benefits. At the same time as this was funny, to me, because my friend sent it to me so that I could laugh at it... it was sad, at the same time because the particular copy that I recvieved had been digitally signed by over nine hundred people. Over nine hundred people who actually believed this was true.
This reminds me of Prop 8 in California, which passed (partially) because a lot of people didn't bother to fact check. Many people didn't even know what they were voting for because the amendment was confusingly worded. Even worse, however, is the fact that many people knew they were voting to prevent equal marriage, but did it because they were afraid of made up concequences. For instance, the idea that their church would be forced to perform same-sex marriages; this claim, made by anti Prop-8 smear campaigns, was completley untrue... and yet people believed it, and voted with this imaginary concequence in mind, because they didn't bother to check up on the facts. If everying in California (and Maine, for that matter) had been honestly informed about what their vote would mean... I have a feeling the results may have been quite a bit different.
Back to the petition: the saddest thing about this is that this petition has been circulating since May 2006, with Bush listed as the instigator up until he left office. Conservatives and liberals alike have been ignorantly circulating these lies for three years now. Sure, many people probably read it, shook their heads, and moved on like I did... but at the same time we know at least 900 people, the people who signed the petition I recieved, believed this was true enough to attach their names to it.
So there's been some controversy lately over what Tyra calls a "multiracial" photo-shoot that she put together this season on Top Model (it also happened in season four.) There have been plenty of people accusing Tyra of putting her models into black-face because she painted them & dressed them to represent stereotyped views of ethnicity other than their own. Tyra somehwat refuted these claims on her show by explaining what traditional blackface is; and, yes, its true that what Tyra did on her show wasn't blackface in the most traditional interpretation... but you know what? It still pisses me off.
Here's what rubs me the wrong way: Tyra claims that she did this shoot, partially, because as a black woman she has been frustrated for a long time about the way the modeling industry isolates black women (and pretty much any woman who doesn't look stereotypically Caucasian.) Okay, I get it, I'm with her there, and it SUCKS that there are fashion designers and magazine editors who will exclude models for not being white... but what Tyra did? Isn't helping.
Instead of celebrating bi-racial women by shooting bi-racial women, Tyra has turned a group of mostly Caucasian women into representations of these races. In essence, she is simply supporting the newly "trendy" practice that magazines like Vogue have been taking part in: painting white models to do "ethnic" photoshoots. (Each link shows a different example of this trend in recent photoshoots!)
This comment by Sapphire, author of the novel Push which is the basis for the recently released movie Precious, has cemented it in my mind: I NEED to read this book (I've already purchased in) and see the movie ASAP.
On top of the fact that this movie, while very real & depressing, shows a realistic woman pulling herself ahead on her own, without any sort of 'savior' the actress, Gabi Sidibe, who plays Precious is quite possibly the most awesome person ever!"I really wanted to show a young woman who changes her life without falling in love and without getting married," Sapphire told me, "and without plastic surgery or a physical change."
In other words, she didn't want Precious to succeed via some sort of near magical and unlikely intervention, like losing a hundred pounds and actually looking like Cinderella. "I wanted to show how somebody can take concrete steps and work on her deficiencies and move her life forward," she said, "which is what millions of women are going to have to do."
Every time I see/read an interview with her I am charmed again and again by her honesty and her confidence - she truly is a role model to women of all shapes & sizes :)Don't believe me? Here's a selection of her awesomeness:
Its true that this movie/book has its issues - many reviewers have been complaining about the 'fairy-tale' ending that allows Precious to be saved by a caring teacher, rather than ending up in the foster-care system/juvenile detention system that might be more realistic. Still, its nice to see a movie that depicts a woman pulling herself up on her own - without a romantic subplot/ a masculine hero to help her along. Even moreover, its awesome to see a mainstream movie honoring the acting abilities of a woman who does not fit the typical Hollywood idea of a star.
First I'm going to show you a video that will make you very mad, and very sad.
[Click to watch @ Sociological Images!]
This woman was raped, while she had health insurance, and was promptly DROPPED by her insurer after submitting a claim for anti-HIV medication that a doctor recommended she take for a month to try and prevent the contraction of the virus, since she was drugged at the time of her assault and was not sure if the rapist used a condom. Her insurance company dropped her because they claimed that she "didn't pay" and then, after she explained the situation, refused to pick her claim back up because she now had a "pre-existing contition."
[Check out this Huffington Post article on an awesome movement to defend women's rights to affordable health coverage: "I Am Not A Preexisting Condition"!]
To make a long story short: this woman's insurance provider found a bullshit excuse that allowed them to drop her coverage, so that they would not have to pay for the medication and therapy she needed after her rape.
Excuse my language, but I feel it is warranted: how the fuck is this allowed in our country? How can a company promise people that they will provide services, only to wiggle out of that promise when the services are actually needed. More specifically: how the fuck can the people who work for this company, who make these policies, sleep at night knowing that they are leaving people who need their services, like rape and domestic abuse survivors, without a lifeline all so they can turn just a little more proft.
To the people who claim that this is simply good old American capitalism at work, all I have to say is f*ck you. No, wait, I actually have a little more. To the people who want to let the "market" dictate health care and are adamantly opposed to real government intervention... how would you feel if this was you? How will you feel on the day that you file a legitimate claim and get denied through one of the many loopholes that insurance providers weave so cleverly into their policies. Honestly, its not much of a stretch, just look around... you could very easily be next, and I have to tell you... capitalism? You may have its back, but its not going to have your back when its your illness, you medical needs, draining profits away from the insurance provider's pockets.
I've said it before, but I'll say it again: there are some things that we simply should not be trying to profit off of. Human life? Yeah, that's one of those things.
Somewhere in the back of my mind I’ve always wondered what would happen if a male politician was attacked for his appearance, thus experiencing the kind of “politics” that many female representatives deal with on a daily basis. (See: Hillary Clinton’s wardrobe choices, “cankles,” hairstyle, and so on, just to give one example.) This wondering meant I was not as surprised as many were when the Corzine Ads started to run in my home state of NJ, warning us that Candidate Chris Christie likes to “throw his weight around.” What did surprise me, however, was just how much attention & outrage this snide little attack caused.
[View a clip here, from a segment on this issue that Good Morning America did.]
I had expected, maybe, a counter ad; maybe an editorial talking about dirty politics and sticking to the issues… what I hadn’t expected was for the news networks to call Chris Christie on and address this issue directly and call Corzine out for his fat-shaming. “Can you believe that you were being attacked, in a race for governor in the Garden State, on the basis of your weight?” An anchor on MSNBC actually said this to Chris Christie, and let him respond. Without any discussion about how obesity is a “disease” and “dangerous” and “maybe it should be a factor in the electorate’s decision –making process.” None of that… just honest outrage on behalf of this man. What the hell? No, seriously, what the hell.
Where is this enlightened conversation when a woman running for office is being picked apart based on appearance?
I began to wonder: if a similar attack were levied upon a woman, what would the response be like? Soon, I realized, I already knew the answer. Rewind just a few months: does the name Regina Benjamin ring a bell? When Regina was appointed to the position of Attorney General by President Barack Obama, plenty of comments were made about her weight. Unlike Corzine’s comments, these remarks were made openly – there were no double entendres, people simply flat out said that they felt her weight would stop her from properly doing a job. Unlike Corzine’s comments, the news networks were actually supporting this argument and questioning this woman, who had amazing credentials, simply because of the way she looked.
It's no secret that The Daily Mail tends to fail, quite a bit, in terms of non-sexist reporting, but this recent article on date-rape drugs really takes things to a new level.
As Jezebel reported, the article begins with what is possibly the worst opening sentence ever:
In just twenty-four words the author of this article, Daniel Martin, manages to (1) dismiss the very real experiences of many women who have been drugged and taken advantage of, (2) imply that women who do binge drink/get drunk deserve whatever happens to them and (3) imply that many women who feel they were raped weren't actually raped but, rather, are simply lying about sex that they regret."Date-rape drugs are largely an urban myth used as an excuse by women who booze themselves into a stupor, it has been claimed. "
That's quite a bit of fail for such a tiny sentence.
