Fun with Feminism

Bitchin' Times

2008-11-20T19:06:00.001-08:00

Hey All,

I should have posted this a while ago, but I am currently blogging at the Bitch magazine website, which is why this blog has been so sorely neglected. So for now, head on over to Bitch to read my thoughts on all things feminist. Thanks!

Help Save Bitch!

2008-09-15T21:16:00.001-07:00

This is seriously important. Spread the word!

http://bitchmagazine.org/post/bitchs-fate-is-in-your-hands

Some womanly advice. . .

2008-09-03T18:01:00.000-07:00

Hello Feminists!

Long time no see, I know, but now I am back from my post-graduation hiatus and am ready to resume my role as feminist blogger to the stars. Hooray!

I was thinking it might be fun to do some sort of weekly advice column here at FWF, as a way to kick off the new academic year. Shall we say it will run on Fridays? You can send your questions to me, and then I will type up answers and post them once per week (which was implied by the title of advice column, I suppose). Here is an example of what a question/response might be, to get your mind grapes working:

Dear Fun with Feminism,

I am a heterosexual female. While I want to be a fun feminist, sometimes I find myself in situations with my guy friends wherein they are being misogynistic but I am afraid that if I speak up that they will call me a horrible bitch, therefore reinforcing the stereotypes that plague us feminists in the first place. What should I do? Should I laugh along with their anti-women jokes, or should I take a stand?

Sincerely,

Not Laughing

Dear Not Laughing,

Your situation is not uncommon. All of us who have chosen to fly the feminist flag are plagued from time to time with the dilemma of just where to draw the line when it comes to our feminist politics. While each situation is different, I say in your case it is better if you do take a stand. For the most part, these guys you are hanging with probably have no idea they are offending you (and women everywhere). That is one of the most problematic things about sexism, most people don't even notice it! If you let them know their comments are unappreciated by women everywhere, they will probably thank you for it later. Plus, by laughing along with their jokes, you are nonverbally telling them that their misogyny is just fine by you, which it isn't.

Of course, there is the possibility that these guys will be embarrassed by your calling them out, and will attack you by saying you’re a bitch (or a manhater, or a dyke, or whatever else they can think of to feel less threatened). While no one likes to be called names, we can’t let that fear keep us from standing up for ourselves, and for one another. You are a woman and you should feel nothing but pride in that fact, no matter what your friends say. Go feminists!

Sincerely,

Fun with Feminism

So that is just an example, and I am sure all of your lovely brains can come up with questions that are infinitely more interesting. So do it! Send your questions/comments to Fun with Feminism and let the great experiment begin!

If you love something, write it on your ass.

2008-06-11T15:00:00.000-07:00

I read about these True Love Waits sweatpants in an article by Amelie Gillette, and when I heard about them again on NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! I figured I should post them here, as well. These sweats are all over the internet! Here is a picture:

The pants are available exclusively at KMart, in what I would assume is a partnership with True Love Waits, the religious group that encourages teens to commit to remaining abstinent until marriage. Of course, the best way to do that is to let everyone know you are waiting until marriage by writing it across your ass in block letters.

I don't care if people want to wait until marriage to have sex. What bothers me about this whole thing is the commodification of the ideology, and the fact that a nationwide chain store seems to have no problem printing a religious message on sweatpants. What does this have to say about a woman's body? (I am assuming women will wear the sweats, although I suppose they are technically unisex). In my opinion, manufacturing a conservative religious message for young women to wear stamped across their asses is taking the notion of the body politic to a whole new level. What's next?

I Now Pronounce You Man and... I Forget the Rest.

2008-06-10T14:19:00.000-07:00

Last night's episode of The Colbert Report featured Philip Weiss, author of the New York Magazine article "The Affairs of Men". According to Weiss, he identifies, as a man, with politicians like Eliot Spitzer who seek sex outside of their long-term marriage, and he thinks that marriage norms should be examined more closely in our society.

My issue with Weiss is not what he has to say about American morality when it comes to marriage. In fact, I thought he had a lot of great insights about his generation, and the fact that they did away with many of the taboos surrounding premarital or homosexual sex, yet they will not apply that same sense of sexual revolution to monogamous marriages. Although it's hard for me to say because I am not married myself, it seems like he is probably right that we as a country should be more open-minded when it comes to sex and marriage.

Where I had a problem with this article lies (surprise!) in its misogyny. Much like medications prior to the mid-1970s were tested only on men and then said to be safe for everyone, Wiess is claiming that "Americans" need to change their attitudes, but then he examines only the behaviors of men. What about the women in these marriages? Where is their agency? Weiss claims throughout his interview with Colbert that he is talking about married couples, but he is in fact only speaking of married men and their actions. Women have sex drives too! Women are in marriages too! When are we going to rectify the sexism present in marriage and start reflecting upon the experiences of both husbands and wives?

Take a look at the video and tell me what you think:

Some Ecards: For every occasion!

2008-06-04T14:56:00.000-07:00

This ecard web site has been making me laugh pretty hard. Here are a couple of cards for you to send out on various feminist occasions:

A thank you to some helpful friends:

A professor who isn't quite getting the job done:

A review of a recent movie that wasn't exactly feminist:

A message to a new date:

The possibilities are endless! Thank you, Internet!

Sex and the City: The Blogpost

2008-06-02T14:37:00.000-07:00

As a feminist who also loves television, I am constantly caught in a love-hate relationship with Sex and the City. On the one hand, it is a show that celebrates female friendships, sexuality, and independence, even if this celebration takes place in a decidedly unrealistic, television-like manner. On the other hand, it is a show that promotes consumerism, oppressive standards of beauty, and the quest for male attention at all costs. I don't think I would mind, except that SATC (as the journalists call it) is often held up as a third-wave or post-feminist masterpiece or at least debated as such. The reason for this, I think, is that there are so few shows marketed to women that actually portray contemporary female characters (especially ones who are not supernatural in any way) that SATC is just about all we women have in terms of "feminist" programming.

At any rate, I lined up last week with hundreds of other women to see a midnight screening of Sex and the City: The Movie. I am not going to review the movie here, as that has already been done in myriad places throughout the information superhighway, including this review by AV Club blogger Genevieve Koski. Suffice it to say, the movie met my expectations and I thought it was pretty much just like watching the television show, except with fancier outfits (and free popcorn!).

I wasn't going to post anything on this blog about the movie at all, since there is hype about it all over the place, but the experience of seeing it in the theater has been in my mind for the past several days. Never before have I been to such a large-scale event that was basically just for women. There were women and girls everywhere I looked, most of them dressed in their best approximations of SATC finery. As much as I felt a bit disgusted by some of the pseudo-feminism espoused by the show and its viewers, I also found myself getting swept away in a wave of girly excitement. We as women don't get very many media events, after all. SATC is the only recent movie I can think of with a practically all-woman cast, whereas I can think of several summer blockbusters that feature only men. What does this say about women? Where can we locate ourselves in this hot pink media blitz?

Unlike Carrie Bradshaw, I don't have a quick and clever answer to those questions. As a feminist, I want to watch Sex and the City because of its emphasis on the female, even if that emphasis is narrow and male-centric. As a television viewer, I want to watch Sex and the City because of the racy sex scenes and better-than-life wardrobes. It is my hope that the merging of these two parts of myself, which came together to watch SATC:TM, does not compromise my feminist ideology or my identity as a woman.

If I have learned anything about myself as a feminist up to this point, it is that being a feminist is confusing and full of contradictions. Is it wrong that, while part of me was appalled at the antics of the women in the movie theater last week, with their high heels and their highlights and their giggling, at the same time another part of me was loving every minute of it? I don't think so. I hope that we can all, as feminists, retain our ability to think critically while at the same time enjoying ourselves and our ability to celebrate in a room full of other women, even if the things we are celebrating are far from perfect.

Multicultural Feminisms

2008-05-19T15:20:00.000-07:00

For Feminist Pedagogy this week, we read a series of articles written by feminists of color, or from cultures outside of the U.S. The articles were:

“Student Resistance and Nationalism” by Michiko Hase
“It’s Not an Oxymoron” by Susan Muaddi Darraj
“Lost in the Indophile Translation” by Bhavana Mody

I find myself often avoiding thinking about multicultural feminisms, which is something that I am trying to change. I think it’s because, like some of the students Hase describes in her essay, I find myself getting defensive because deep down I feel guilty. I don’t like hearing that the feminist movement that I care about so much makes other people feel left out or undervalued. Avoiding the issues only makes me feel guiltier the next time they come up, and the cycle continues. The fact remains, however, that many women do not see themselves and their experiences represented in feminist literature, and that is problematic for all of us, regardless of our country of origin.

I have a hard time also trying to decide what to do about these issues. I convince myself that there’s nothing I can do, but I think that’s only because I am too lazy or uncomfortable to deal with them, or because they seem too complicated. I know that I should do more, even with this blog, to reach out to feminists of color, but I don’t know how to relate to their experiences, and trying just makes me feel like a poseur. I don’t know, that is probably a cop-out on my part, but it does feel sort of lame to, as a white middle-class woman, attempt to facilitate a discussion about the ethical implications of wearing a burqa. Does that make sense, or am I just justifying my own lack of effort?

I really enjoyed Mody’s article about Indophiles, but again I found myself feeling a bit frustrated. After all, she is describing her reactions to white people who like to drink Chai tea and eat curry, and I am one of those people! I can’t claim to understand much at all about India and women’s experiences in that country, yet I love to eat their food and read their short stories. What is a feminist White girl to do? Is the solution for everyone to just stick to their own culture, so that no one feels as if they are being misunderstood or disrespected? Does every culture need its own feminism, or is there a way to incorporate all of them into one?
These are issues that I am going to need to continue to process, and I would love to hear from anyone who has any ideas. I guess the first step is just to stop being so defensive of Western, White feminism and acknowledge that it has flaws. After that though, what comes next?

Watch this!

2008-05-13T21:49:00.000-07:00

Did you know that women like yogurt? Well we do, we all like yogurt. That is what television tells us anyway. Check out this hilarious clip from Current about yogurt ads. I think the host, Sarah Haskins, is super-charming. Some of my favorite parts are when she yells at the screen, "Say more stuff I generically relate to - then go to a wedding!" and when she tries to feed yogurt to Hillary Clinton. Peep it:

I hadn't thought about it too much before now, but I don't think I have ever seen a yogurt ad that showed a man eating the product. Don't men like yogurt? What about kids? Why isn't yogurt marketed to kids? The more I think about this, the weirder it is getting. Is yogurt directed at women because it is low in fat and calories? It is also delicious, don't men and children like delicious things? I am so confused...

Doll-to-doll carpeting?

2008-05-12T14:07:00.001-07:00

Hold on to your hats, folks! The nefarious internet archive of offensive advertising has just coughed forth another specimen from its slimy bowels. Behold:

The text of the ad reads as follows:
Though she was a tiger lady, our hero didn’t have to fire a shot to floor her. After one look at his Mr. Leggs slacks, she was ready to have him walk all over her. That noble styling sure soothes the savage heart! If you’d like your own doll-to-doll carpeting, hunt up a pair of these he-man Mr. Leggs slacks. Such as our new automatic wash wear blend of 65% “Dacron®” and 35% rayon–incomparably wrinkle-resistant. About $12.95 at plush-carpeted stores.

Looking at this ad brings to mind a few things. First of all, this was not published all that long ago, and honestly I could see something fairly similar being printed in some of today's magazines. Secondly, in addition to the woman in the ad being literally stepped on by the man, she has also been morphed into a tiger, perpetuating the myth that women are exotic, subhuman, sex objects. According to this ad, the "savage hearts" of women must be tamed, like a tiger who is captured and put in a zoo. The hunting rhetoric in this ad is outrageous! They even call the pants "he-man." Yikes. Of course, the assumption here is that women secretly want to be hunted down and tamed, and all it takes is a $12.95 pair of pants to capture one for your very own.

Thanks to Leona and Boing Boing for the heads up on the ad.

2008-05-11T23:53:00.000-07:00

Earlier tonight I was over at my pal Lesley's, to watch one of our weekly double features. This week our theme was "girls on a mission," so we watched All I Wanna Do and Sleepover. Although Sleepover did have lots of cameos from famous people and was pretty girl-positive over all, it is All I Wanna Do that was surprisingly feminist and inspirational (although I can't say exactly why that surprised me, beyond the fact that I just figure most movies will be fairly formulaic). Here is the cover:

The movie takes place at an all-girls' school in the early 1960s (although it was made in 1998 and stars tons of recognizable gals). The main characters are a group of students who call themselves the DAR (Daughters of the American Ravioli) and are dedicated to helping one another achieve their dreams and resisting societal expectations. It was so refreshing to see girls talk about wanting to help one another become scientists and writers instead of just competing for male attention! (Though there are some romances in the movie as well, so don't worry about a lack of that, they are just not front and center to the plot.)

The basic premise is that the students think the school is totally oppressive, until they learn through their rebellious hijinx that boys are going to be allowed in to their school the next year. At that point, the girls start to realize that out in the real world, women are treated as second-class citizens, and that an all-girls' school is a great environment for them to learn in. They become empowered as females and start to work together to affect a change. I won't give away the ending, but it is inspirational, if a bit cheesy. I had feminist goosebumps!

Plus, as an added bonus, all of the music and clothing in the movie is really cool. Everyone wears these adorable dresses and haircuts, and they play awesome 60s pop music at their school dances. And even though the girls are cute, they are also fairly realistic-looking. They also use all of this charming and hilarious slang, like "up your ziggy with a wa-wa brush!" I am not sure what it means, but it is funny. I recommend it to anyone who likes teen movies but doesn't want to have to sacrifice their feminist politics. It is a win-win!

Table for one, please!

2008-05-08T00:07:00.000-07:00

So I have been thinking a little bit lately about being single. Although the media devotes a certain amount of attention to the single life, most of what we are confronted with is the life of couples, preferably young, robust heterosexuals with children. When we are confronted with singlehood, it is usually in the form of someone trying to find love and eventually succeeding. The underlying message, of course, is that being single completely blows and that we should try our damndest to avoid it at all costs. Here is an image to drive the point home:

I am not immune to this message. I feel crappy about not being in a relationship all the time. Having someone to make out with on a regular basis is fun! But there are fun parts of being single too, and there is no reason to feel bad about it or wish you were something else. Inspired by a lack of realistic representations of single life, and a crushing societal pressure to be in a relationship, I will now present you with a window into the life of a real single woman: Me. I try not to let this blog get too diary-esque, but I think it's important to get the truth about single life out there so that we can think realistically about these things. Here is a rundown of my incredibly single day:

- I woke up at 11:00, because I went out last night and had several whiskey cocktails. I then proceeded to google-stalk a boy I met at the bar last night and send him an email. I live alone, so I was able to complete all of this in the nude, which is nice.

- At 1:00 I went to work, and drank coffee and wrote articles about the library (where I work) for three hours. Then I walked home and talked on my cell phone.

- At 4:30 I ate some miso soup and sat on my bed and watched episodes of Bravo's Top Chef on YouTube. Inspired by the show, I added some peas and corn to the soup to jazz it up.

- At 6:00, my pal Leona and I ran some errands. I bought a book about crocheting, some cheap slutty shoes, some grapefruit chamomile salt scrub, and myriad other frivolous items. We also ate fish tacos - delicious!

- Around 9:30, I went over to a friends' house to watch more Top Chef. I ate far too many baked potato chips and incorrectly guessed which contestant would be asked to pack their knives and go. I also saw some hilarious photos of cats that look like Wilford Brimley. Awesome.

- I came home at 11:30 and sang along to a Linda Ronstadt record for a while. Then I took a bath with the aforementioned salt scrub and read some of this awesome book, Hypocrite in a Pouffy White Dress. You have probably already read it, being the savvy feminists you are. If not though, I encourage you to check it out.

Now we are caught up, it is 12:30, and I am writing this blog. Now I am not making any sort of a claim that single life is better than being in a relationship, or vice versa. Only that it seems to me that all I hear is how kickass it is to be in a relationship and how everyone in their right mind should work as hard as possible to be in one. Guess what? Being single is fun too! I get to wake up whenever I want, go to bed whenever I want, spend money on unnecessary items, watch reality television at my leisure, and read without being interrupted. It's not so bad being a single gal (or guy), and there is no reason to bust your ass convincing yourself that you are unhappy, or unworthy, just because you don't have a "plus one."

So what about you? What does your single (or non-single) life look like? We could turn this into a whole scientific anthropological experiment! True Life: I Am Single, and I Am Not Depressed About It. Revolutionary!

On an interesting side note, a google search for "single woman" returns web sites where one can order brides from Russia and the Ukraine. Hmmm.

She works hard for the money.

2008-05-06T13:07:00.000-07:00

So I don't know about you, but I have never been notoriously super with money. People start talking about stocks and bonds and investment portfolios, and I quickly try to change the subject to Top Chef or Rock of Love 2. This is not something that I am proud of, and slowly I have been trying to learn more about what rappers so affectionately call, "The Benjamins."

Still, I don't think it takes a genius to see that most of the media dealing with money issues is directed toward men, and that money matters are thought of as being "men's issues" and not a concern for little ladies like me (just take a look at most of the financial experts brought in on CSPAN for evidence of this phenomenon). After all, men are still pressured to be the breadwinners, and this translates over into investing. Plus, they still make more money than women, so it is not a surprise that they are the ones most often addressed in financial publications. This makes it hard (for me at least) to connect with financial information and feel confident about money stuff. What's a money-illiterate feminist to do?

Well, I have recently discovered a few sources. First off, there is a fun podcast over at Quick and Dirty Tips called Money Girl. From what I can tell (and I have only listened a few times so far), Money Girl answers listeners' financial questions in a way that is entertaining and easy to understand. Plus, each episode is super short, so there is no information overload.

Also, I was browsing over at Feministing and read a post by Jen Moseley reviewing a blog she likes, Feminist Finance. Again, I have only just started looking at this blog, but it seems to me that it is a great source of information about money and feminist politics. With a little luck, and the help of a few savvy superwomen, I will soon be a feminist investing machine. You can be one too! If you have any great sources for non-sexist financial information, post that shit.

Adventures in Feminist Pedagogy

2008-05-05T09:34:00.000-07:00

We are given the option in my Feminist Pedagogy class to reflect on the readings in blog form, as opposed to printing them out on paper. I have decided to take that option this week, so here they are. Feel free to comment, and get in touch with me if you want to read a full copy of the articles being discussed.

Lee, J. (1993). Teaching feminism: Anger, despair, and self-growth. Feminist Teacher, 7, 15 - 19.

In this piece, Lee explores the anger that can arise in students (and instructors) when discussing feminist issues in the classroom. For many students especially, an introductory class may be their first real exposure to many of the topics covered regarding women's rights and patriarchal cultural norms. It goes without saying that this makes many students angry, but what should they do with that anger? Is it productive or counter-productive?

To tackle those very questions, Lee examined the writings of several of her students. Many of them were angry at the social injustice they learned about in class, and they described feelings of helplessness and despair. However, Lee goes on to suggest ways that that anger can be worked through and made productive, and that is where I found this article to be most insightful. Anger is a natural emotion, and in my opinion people learning about women's issues should feel angry, and should then be encouraged to channel their anger into fostering social change.

I can appreciate how a task like this is easier said than done. I have felt angry and helpless in the face of these issues many times, and have not always turned those feelings into something positive (in fact, usually I don't). However, the alternatives to feeling angry are either to become so desensitized that you no longer care about the issues, or to refuse to learn about them in the first place. To me, anger is a welcome alternative to both of those choices, and so we must learn to work through it.

Stitzel, J. (1979). Unlearning not to speak: Feminism in the classroom. Frontiers, 4 180 - 184.

In this article, an alleged conversation is recounted where a man makes a disparaging remark to a female server in a restaurant, and a female at another table comes over and tells him that she finds it inappropriate. Stitzel recounted this exchange to her students and asked for their reactions, which she explores in the piece. I appreciated her reflexivity in admitting that she was the woman in the booth at the restaurant, but that in reality she had not said anything to the man.

I really enjoyed the case made for a safe, feminist classroom space in this article. When Stitzel recounts the conversation in the restaurant to her students, it is easy to identify with many of them who say they would not have spoken up about the man's treatment of the server in the restaurant, because they would be afraid for various reasons. There have been myriad times in my own life where I have chosen to do nothing in the face of the objectification of women, something that I justify to myself the same ways the students justified their disapproval of the woman's behavior in the restaurant (it wasn't her place, the man was just joking around, etc.).

When navigating these types of issues, the question of responsibility always comes up for me. Where does responsibility start and end? Whose job is it to police the actions of other people? If we say nothing, that might perpetuate the acceptance of sexism. If we speak up, not only might we be overstepping our bounds and embarrassing people, but we might be actually hurting the feminist cause by upsetting those around us. It is for these reasons that safe discussions in the classroom are so useful. We can practice a dialog about these issues so that, when they are presented to use outside of the classroom, we will have some idea of how to react.

hooks, b. (2008). Eros, eroticism, and pedagogy. In Cultural Studies, pp. 58 - 63.

With this essay, hooks describes her thoughts on eros and passion in the classroom. She states, "One of the central tenets of feminist pedagogy has been the insistence on not engaging the mind/body split" (59). Still, oftentimes in the classroom we as educators are discouraged from seeing the mind and body as one, and acknowledging that eros and passion are important parts of the learning process.

hooks does not define eroticism as exclusively sexual, but rather as pertaining to the body. She calls for acceptance and acknowledgment of the body in the classroom, something that I find quite interesting. This is not an issue I have thought much about, but it does seem that bodily issues are excluded from learning, as if the mind was something completely separate. Because it is impossible to separate mind and body (and even if it were possible I don't think it would be a good idea) we must work toward incorporating eroticism and the body into the classroom without fear.

I really connected with her examples of cultural artifacts that portray passionate student/teacher relationships (like Dead Poets' Society) and her account of how those relationships are not readily accepted in reality. Teachers and students are encouraged to remain "disembodied spirits," and anyone who displays too much passion for a certain subject is often regarded as crazy or dangerous. This is not just a classroom issue, I see it expand into politics and other areas of life as well.

The emphasis on removing passion from the teaching/learning process is unfortunate, and hopefully it is something that can be changed. hooks makes many excellent points in this essay and has given me a lot to think about. On the one hand, this is an issue that needs addressing, and needs to change. On the other hand, I am having a hard time imagining a scenario where overt passion in the classroom is readily accepted, and not met with criticism and suspicion. What is the solution? For now I suppose it is simply to talk and think about these issues, and hope to come up with something better.

Waxing Nostalgic

2008-05-03T13:06:00.000-07:00

Hello!

I was having a conversation with some of my fabulous WGS colleagues the other day about porn, and the expectations it puts on women (and men) to look and behave a certain way during sex. The conversation steered itself specifically toward pubic hair, and the (weird, in my opinion) trend of women being expected to shave their ladyparts. What is the shaved thing all about? Do any of you have any inside info on this, as to why some people are attracted to a bald nether-region? To me it just seems like a lot of upkeep, and sort of strange and pedophile-esque. I have known guys who have also been crotch-shavers for various reasons (to make their dicks look bigger, I think) and I have felt the same way about that - baffled, and kind of weirded out.

Anyway, my pal Leona sent me this link a while back to a timeline of Playboy models that ranges from 1971 to 2008. You can check it out here. What stands out to me is not only the pubic stylings of the ladies, but how much sexier and more natural the women look in the 1970s as compared to now. It seems as though the Playboy beauty standard has gone from pretty and natural with a full head of pubic hair to smooth and silicon-filled in only a short three decades. The difference really stands out when you see all of the models in a row like that. Why is this the case? Why has what people are attracted to (or what Hugh Hefner and co. think people are attracted to) changed so much over time? Or do you even think the standards have changed? Weigh in and let us know.

Here is a photo from the 1970s timeline:

And here is one from the 2000s:

Don't they look different? What gives? Personally, I prefer the 70s lady. She is so cute! And she probably spends a lot less money and time waxing, which gives her more time to pose on leopard skins. It's a win-win!

FYI, women do not have balls.

2008-04-29T23:49:00.000-07:00

Sorry I have been gone for a while, I have been up to my feminist eyeballs in my master's thesis. It should be done soon though, so expect more posts as a result. Anyway, speaking of "balls" (although I was referring to the eye variety), they are something that has been on my mind as of late.

We have all heard people refer to someone who is particularly bold or brave as having "balls" or being "ballsy." Clearly this is a problem, because women do not have balls and therefore it is implied that women cannot be bold or brave (or that if we are, it is because we are acting like men). This is equally true when people use phrases like "cojones" or "huevos" or when they say someone has "stones" or whatever other clever euphemism for balls is being thrown around as a compliment at that particular moment. I don't think it takes a genius to see why this is sexist, so that is not really what I want to discuss here (although if you say "balls" to mean brave a lot, you should try and stop).

What I am having a problem with is an acceptable alternative to this phrasing. I hate using the word "balls" in this way, so I usually say that someone has "guts" or is "gutsy," but I think that is pretty dorky, to be honest. Is there a cooler, edgier word I could use? Something that is gender-neutral? Because I have heard people use "ovaries" as a counter to "balls," but since that is an equally gendered term I think it is just as much of a problem. We need something that refers to all people, not just those who have balls or ovaries!

What do you say when someone does something especially bold and daring? What about the word "moxie," is that equally dorky? I think it might be. This is a real problem, because I think most people use "balls" or its equivalent because they don't want to sound lame, not because they are particularly sexist. So let's put our brains to this and try to come up with a viable alternative. It's important!

I am having a really hard time thinking of anything that is not incredibly lame. I think sticking with the anatomy theme, for whatever reason, resonates with people so let's try to do that (e.g., guts). Here are some ideas to get the brainstorming going:
-Hearts, heartbeat, strong heartbeat? Bloody heart? (trying to keep it extreme)
-Innards (similar to guts, but perhaps classier?)
-Sweetmeats (they say this about animals and I have always thought it had a nice ring to it)

I don't know, clearly I need help on this. So let's get to it!

To further illustrate my point about the term "balls," here is a set of iron balls you can get to put on your truck so that people can see how badass it is. God forbid people think your vehicle might not have testicles!

You Wanna Be on Top?

2008-04-08T23:20:00.000-07:00

OK, so I watch America's Next Top Model. I realize that a reality television show about women in the modeling industry might not exactly jive with my feminist ideologies, but what can I say? I am a sucker for wigs and high heels. Besides, being a feminist is all about being able to think critically, and I am just practicing (at least that is what I tell myself).

Anyway, beyond the obvious reasons why ANTM might not be promoting a super-feminist paradigm (mainly that it values women mainly for their looks, and encourages women to compete against one another instead of work together), I have been noticing a few other things going on with the show that I thought I would bring to your attention:

1. Tyramail. For those not familiar with the show, these are the messages sent by hostess Tyra Banks to the contestants, giving them details about upcoming modeling challenges. I don't know if the women on the show were coached or what, but every time a piece of Tyramail is delivered, all of them shriek at top volume and gather around to read it aloud, in unison. It is not only incredibly obnoxious, but is also perpetuating the stereotype that women, especially conventionally beautiful ones, are shrill idiots. Stop it with the screaming already!

2. Whitney (the plus-sized model). I am all for plus-sized models, but Whitney's presence on the show is confusing to me. Can someone out there tell me what constitutes a plus-sized model? Because in the episode I just watched, Whitney tries on a dress that is a size 10. The average dress size for American women has recently increased from a size 12 to a 14. That means that Whitney is two sizes smaller than the average American woman. I understand that designers want skinny women to wear their clothes (another issue altogether), but when a size 10 is a plus size, what does that make all of the larger sizes? And who is supposed to model them? Super-plus-sized models? That sounds like a type of tampon. I don't know a lot about the fashion industry, but I am puzzled by the reasoning behind this.

3. The editing of the show in general, and the ways it portrays women's relationships. OK, I know I said I would steer clear of the obvious, but I can't get over the emphasis on bitchiness and backstabbing that goes on on ANTM. Girls are yelling at one another because someone poured out the coffee, or because someone used the phone for too long. Then clips play of the girls shit-talking one another about the incidents in the confessional room. I realize this is a reality television show and that people want to see drama, but this is also a reality show with only female contestants, and I can't imagine that the ways in which the contestants are portrayed are doing much to help our feminist cause. Why can't we see just one media representation that depicts women as caring for and helping one another, instead of cutting each other down? It may be my commie, leftist, grad-school brain talking, but I think that those in power (the media, white males, etc.) want to show women fighting with one another to maintain the status quo, which is that women are frivolous, immature, materialistic, and mean. Of course, we savvy feminists know this is far from the case.

So what is a feminist to do? Should I keep watching ANTM because, let's be honest, I kind of like it? Do I tell myself it is for research purposes? Should I stop watching it because it conflicts with my ideals? (As a side note, I do only watch in on YouTube, so it's not like the advertisers on the show are getting my support or anything.) After all, I know that the show (sometimes) portrays women as competitive, mean, materialistic, idiotic sex objects. Could this be part of the reason why I like it? Because I too have fallen into the trap of competing with other women? I am certainly not immune to the social pressures faced by the show's contestants.

On the other hand, the show boasts an exclusively female cast, with a female host (Tyra Banks) who is a single, childless, black woman, and an expert in her field. Couldn't that be considered feminist? As opposed to shows like The Bachelor or Rock of Love, ANTM contestants compete for career advancement, not male attention. So what to do? Do I watch it or not? Being a feminist is confusing and difficult. Good thing it is also awesome.

Babeland's Sasi

2008-04-07T00:02:00.001-07:00

Videos in Babeland (see above)

2008-04-06T23:42:00.000-07:00

I want to point all of you to the world's best YouTube channel, Babeland Video. I am sure all of you savvy readers out there are familiar with Babeland, the women-friendly sex store, and now you can check out their videos too!

Although I am sure we all try to stay up to date on sex safety and the latest innovations in sex toys, these things are not exactly advertised during the commercial breaks on VH1. That is where Babeland Video comes in. Their super-cool staff has picked out 25 different products/issues (with more being added all the time) and they talk about each one with an instructional video. No more going to the sex store and feeling intimidated or weird not knowing what to buy, you can check all this stuff out on video before you ever set foot in the store!

There are products for men and women, gays and heteros, and everyone in between. Plus, the (male and female) staff members are really diverse-looking and definitely make you feel like anyone can buy sex toys and have fun with them, you don't have to be some six-foot tall dominatrix in a pleather catsuit to know about this stuff. Did you check out the newest Babeland video that I put above this post, about the Sasi vibrator? It remembers what you like! It is like having your own personal sex robot! Crazy. Thanks Babeland, for taking us into the future with your instructional and fun videos.

The F Word? Seriously?

2008-04-03T19:25:00.000-07:00

Hey Feminists! So, I know I haven't posted in a while, but it was Spring Break for us graduate students, and I was in lazy mode. Anyway, school is back in session and I am facilitating in a Women's and Gender Studies 101 class this term, so I should have lots of exciting stuff to tell you about.

I will start by recounting something that happened in class earlier this week. It was the first day, and so the instructor was outlining for the students what the rest of the term will look like. Then she asked, "who in this room considers her/himself to be a feminist"? My hand shot up, as did about two others, in a room full of 50+ college students! I know this probably sounds naive, but I was completely shocked! I think I have spent so much time around like-minded people (like all of you fab folks who read this blog) that I had completely forgotten that most people do not share my feminist ideologies. Go figure!

When the students in the class were asked why they chose not to identify as feminist, most of them gave reasons like, 'feminists are so militant, it's impossible to talk to them,' or 'I don't want to be associated with feminist stereotypes.' So here's my question: How can we overcome feminist stereotypes? I mean, it's what I am trying to do with this blog, but I am pretty sure that the only people who read this already have fairly feminist viewpoints to begin with. After all, feminism is in the title (but I refuse to change the name. I am proud to be feminist).

So what to do? I am honestly willing to dedicate however much time it takes to this cause if we can only think of the right course of action to take. A different blog? Some sort of 'zine or something? I just don't know how to reach a larger audience and convince them that feminism can be fun and awesome. Please give me your suggestions here, I would really appreciate it.

Somehow I don't think this cartoon will quite get the job done, although the rockin' 80s style of the feminist is coming back into fashion.

I don't agree with that in the workplace!

2008-03-20T12:47:00.001-07:00

Ahh, sexism in the workplace. Not only is it the reason that women are paid only 78.7% of what men are paid for doing the same job, it is also the subject of a series of features in the April issue of Portfolio Magazine. In her article on sexism, Harriet Rubin asks, Just what the hell is up with sexism in the workplace in 2008?

A few decades ago, during the whole women's liberation movement, feminists worked to shed light on the fact that ladies just weren't getting treated fairly in the working world. And you know what? Things improved, gradually. But the problem now seems to be that a lot of people think that the job was completed forty years ago, and that sexism is no longer an important issue. As Rubin says in her article, "Senior chairman and chief headhunter Gerry Roche groaned when I told him why I was calling. 'There isn't sexism anymore,' he said."

It's nice that we eradicated sexism. That's why women currently hold only 14.8% of Fortune 500 board member seats, and why people couldn't help but comment that the women featured in Wall Street's 50 Women to Watch looked decidedly... unfeminine. Could it be that more "feminine" women are not taken seriously in the workplace, and therefore do not get promoted to high levels?

To me, the problem here is that the entire structure (like so many others) was created by men, for men. And now that it's all the rage for people to claim that sexism doesn't exist anymore, they can pretend that the reason women get passed over for jobs and promotions has nothing to do with gender. Bullshit.

There are some really great interactive features on the Portfolio web site, if you want to read more about the backlash women are currently facing in the workplace. Check out the Sexism Backslide slide show, the Gender Wars Timeline (I won't even get into how I feel about that title), or the Sexism or Not? Quiz. Fun for the whole family!

The crazier, the better, apparently.

2008-03-17T16:29:00.000-07:00

There is an article today by Ian Daly, a writer for Details Magazine, that deals with an archetype that has puzzled me for a decade: The Crazy Girl. The article, entitled "Why Can't You Resist This Woman?" is about why women-on-the-edge appeal more to men than their sane counterparts.

I don't know how to feel about this. On the one hand, I think Daly is on to something that we have all seen play out in movies for a long time now; crazy women are popular with men. Daly says it's about sex, and he is probably right. But what does this say about non-crazy women? Are they boring in bed? And have we still not moved on from the whole 19th century notion of female hysteria? (It was treated with orgasms, by the way, so maybe that is where the whole sexual connection was made, and maybe we shouldn't be trying so hard to move away from it...)

Anyway, as a woman who considers herself to be mostly sane, this craziness fetish has always bugged me. It's just one more impossible standard to live up to that makes it so that no men will ever want to date me (or any other sane woman). Or, if they do date me, they will secretly wish that I would threaten to kill myself, or start singing showtunes at the dinner table, or do whatever it is those wacky dames do to make themselves so alluring. Am I wrong, or is this incredibly frustrating? And is it, in a certain way, fetishizing mental illness instead of taking it seriously? Call me crazy, but the whole thing seems problematic to me.

Fad foods make for funny film fodder.

2008-03-13T23:38:00.001-07:00

I may be a little late with this, since Bitch Magazine publisher and blogger Debbie Rasmussen posted it to her blog last month, but I thought this video by Julie Klausner was pretty hilarious:

I know fad dieting is so silly, but am I the only one who is secretly always hoping one of those crazy diets is going to work? As much as I can logically say that it's ridiculous, and that health is more important, and that women shouldn't be so weight-obsessed, I would be lying if I said that I wouldn't try a weird fad diet if I thought it was going to work. Have I just been socialized beyond the point of no return? Aahh!

Stand by your man?

2008-03-12T14:11:00.001-07:00

It seems like everywhere I look today, people are weighing in on Silda Wall Spitzer's decision to stand by her husband while he apologized for soliciting prostitutes. The debates are all over the place, with some people saying she should have punched him in the face, while others, including everyone's favorite, Dr. Laura, say that it is Silda's fault her husband solicited hookers (because she didn't make him feel like enough of a man).

The real issue here, I think, is not that Silda stood by her husband while he apologized for his infidelity. That is her private decision, and he is a politician for crying out loud, so I am sure that factored into her decision. The real issue here is that everyone thinks they can pass judgment on Silda Wall Spitzer's actions. All of a sudden, the media are focusing their attention on HER instead of on her whore-loving husband. If people feel the need to get all uppity and judge someone, why not make it him? Why are her actions even being debated in the first place?

I think that it boils down to the fact that she is a woman, and somehow there are lots of people out there who think that they have the right to judge a woman's actions, especially when it comes to a domestic situation like a marriage. Can you imagine how the media would behave had a female politician been the one soliciting hookers? I am willing to bet that the focus would not be on her husband.

The Daily Show's own fabulous Samantha Bee gave her take on this issue last night:

Interesting how much funnier it is for everyone to see the tables turned, as if they can't imagine a woman being with prostitutes, or that her husband (dressed like a woman, of course) would stand by her if that were the case. Oh, double standards, what would we do without you?

Ooh La La!

2008-03-11T16:01:00.000-07:00

A recent story in the Telegraph reports that women are the new sexual predators in everyone's favorite land of wine and cheese, France. French women now have twice as many sexual partners as they did during the 70s, and nine out of ten women over the age of 50 are now sexually active in France, compared to just half that number in 1970.

Le Nouvel Observateur asks "are women just like men?" in response to this data, which was compiled from 12.000 in-depth interviews. Now that women and men in France have closer to the same number of sexual partners (with women now having an average of 5+ and men having an average of 13, so not all that close if you ask me) apparently the French are afraid their women are becoming masculine. "The good old dichotomy (male predators, females patiently awaiting the warrior's return in front of the cave entrance) is in big trouble," says the French publication.

Good old dichotomy? Who the hell wants that dichotomy back? If you ask me, the more assertive women can be about their (our) sexuality, the better. There is no reason to say that a woman who has premarital sex or sex after the age of 50 is behaving "like a man." When can that behavior become something that is "like a woman"?

Still, chapeaux off to you, French ladies. I am surprised any of you are having sex at all, after I saw these old French advertisements on Jezebel this afternoon:

Sure, these are from a satire magazine, but still! For you non-francophones, that first one translates to "I am like a fish in water" and the second one reads "after the rape." Sacre bleu! You have got to be kidding me!

Happy Belated International Women's Day!

2008-03-10T01:33:00.001-07:00

Sorry that I didn't post on the actual International Women's Day (which was Saturday), but I was regrettably away from my computer. Of course, that won't stop me from weighing in on the Day, because that is what this blog is all about. I am all about women, of course. I am one myself, and I know several others personally. I would suspect that many of you reading this are women as well. Hooray!

I can't help but think, though, that having an international day for women just further marginalizes us. I mean, by having one day out of 365 where we celebrate women, don't you think that just drives the wedge between women and men even further down, and somehow makes women seem like a weird subculture instead of a gender that makes up more than half of the world's population? We don't need to be celebrated with a day, we need to be treated like human beings with equal rights.

I don't know, the whole thing just seems sort of shitty to me. There would never be an International Men's Day, because no one thinks of men as a separate group of weirdos that need a day set aside for them in order to placate them or something. Still, I don't want to take away from the work that the IWD people do, or the fact that women should be celebrated. I think it's great that IWD is associated with peace and justice, and that women are associated with those things as a result. I am proud as hell to be a woman, and I want to celebrate every woman. I just wish we didn't need to set aside a special day in order to do it.

Apparently, our problem is that we are just plain stupid.

2008-03-06T19:20:00.000-08:00

So, my friend Lyndsay directed me to this Washington Post article earlier, entitled, "We Scream, We Swoon. How Dumb Can We Get?" It is an article written by female staffer Charlotte Allen on some of the recent reactions of female Obama supporters. In it, she hypothesizes that perhaps females are considered to be the weaker, dumber sex because we are in fact weaker and dumber than males.

Says Allen, "our [women's] brains [are] permanently occluded by random emotions, psychosomatic flailings and distraction by the superficial." Ladies, do you feel that your brains are permanently occluded by these things? If so, that must be the reason why we women are apparently unable to function in an office environment, support decent literary efforts, or run a successful presidential campaign (according to the article). Allen concludes with the sentiment that we women should just embrace our intellectual inferiority, "then we could shriek and swoon and gossip and read chick lit to our hearts' content and not mind the fact that way down deep, we are . . . kind of dim." Ahh, doesn't that sound like the shrieking, swooning paradise that every woman dreams of? I know I wish my life were that way.

Obviously, I am frustrated by this article. I understand some of what I think Allen is trying to say here, and that is that women are not exactly the same as men, and therefore we should not be judged using the same standards. She went about it in kind of a fucked up way, but fair enough. But to go ahead and call us "dim" is to judge us using the same standards used to judge men. Allen cites several studies that have shown women and men to have different mental strengths and weaknesses. So does this mean that men are smarter than women? No, of course not. It just means that some of us are different in some ways.

I have to say that, as a woman, I do not feel that Allen speaks for me in her authoring of this article. She uses the pronoun "we" to mean all women, but I personally do not want to be included in a group that just wants to shriek and swoon and gossip. That is not what women are about, and when we allow ourselves to be reduced to silly stereotypes we aren't doing ourselves any favors. My identity as a woman is about a lot more than that. We all know that women can succeed in any field, and that women are strong and sensible and intelligent and caring, and all sorts of fantastic things. Sure, not every woman is perfect, but that has a lot more to do with personality than it does with gender.

So what do you think? Is there any validity to this article? Is Allen just trying to fit women-shaped pegs into men-shaped holes? Does she have a WhD, a woman-hating degree? (Sorry, lame joke, but I felt compelled to just go for it). I'd like to hear some other opinions on this.

Funny Ladies.

2008-03-04T15:26:00.000-08:00

I can't say that this is something I am particularly proud of, but I tend to stay away from most magazines. With few exceptions, magazines make me frustrated and rarely offer any new information that I couldn't have gotten from a less infuriating source. They are full of ads for things I can't afford, photos of people I don't care about, and sexism that I can't stand. Case in point, the new issue of Vanity Fair, with its cover story, Who Says Women Aren't Funny?

First of all, lots of people say women aren't funny, including Vanity Fair. Secondly, although I guess Vanity Fair was trying to do all of us a favor with this article, I don't think that goal was exactly accomplished. First of all, the article dismisses some of the more relevant issues surrounding women and humor, saying things like, "In 1999 a young female writing assistant tried unsuccessfully to sue the producers of Friends, claiming that the male writers were sexist and disrespectful, which was a little like suing Pepsi because its carbonated soft drinks are so bubbly." Because it's totally cool to be sexist and disrespectful, it just comes with the territory! Could this be one reason why we don't see many funny women in the mass media?

Also, the article highlights the beauty of today's successful comediennes without really discussing the implications of that beauty. Says Vanity Fair, "It used to be that women were not funny. Then they couldn’t be funny if they were pretty. Now a female comedian has to be pretty—even sexy—to get a laugh." Doesn't anyone find that problematic? Now, instead of relegating funny women to the back of the bus, so to speak, we will dress them up in skimpy dresses and high heels (no ugly women please). There, are you happy now?

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of beautiful women on television today who I find hilarious. And I am glad to see them there. I just think this article is addressing some of the wrong issues. I don't think we should be patting ourselves on the back when the only funny women who can get attention from the mass media are also the ones who have pretty hair and wear a size 4 or less. Here is the photo from the Vanity Fair article:

Can't Vanity Fair look at this through a more critical lens, instead of praising themselves for giving women the recognition they deserve? IS this the recognition women deserve? And what about men? As long as we live in a culture where movies starring Jonah Hill and Seth Rogen are lauded as the new funny men in Hollywood (and I love those guys, don't get me wrong), and female comedians are either marginalized or made over in Hollywood's image, I just don't see the equality. Any thoughts?

Not even superheroes can fight body issues.

2008-02-28T15:29:00.000-08:00

In a recent scholarly paper, researchers Karen Healey and Terry Johnson used physical stats from the Marvel Comics' Web site to show that the vast majority of female superheroes are underweight, though the males are mostly normal. Just to remind you, in the BMI scale, below 18.5 is underweight, 18.5-24.9 is normal, and over 25 is overweight. Here is the chart of their findings:

As you can see, the BMIs of the male superheroes are much closer to those of the 20-29 human males (making them average in size), whereas with the BMIs of the female superheroes, this is not the case (the superheroes are significantly underweight). As the researchers point out, "this result is surprising, considering that many of the women sampled are martial artists or extremely capable physically and should, if anything, have a BMI that indicates a higher body fat level than is actually present."

Seriously! These women are supposed to be major ass kickers! Doesn't that mean they should be a little on the bigger side? And if superheroes can't escape the pressure to be thin and beautiful, how are normal women supposed to? Thanks to Jezebel for the heads up about this paper, which you can read in its entirety here.

Vibrators, Not Vegetables!

2008-02-26T22:12:00.001-08:00

Oscars=Total Sausage Fest

2008-02-25T17:16:00.000-08:00

What gives with the Oscars? Am I the only one who was sort of surprised to see what a complete dude-fest it was? I know that Hollywood movies are primarily made by males, but it took seeing all of the films together for me to really see how true that is. According to this Times article, "Research found that nearly four times as many males as females had speaking roles in the five films nominated for best picture, a statistic that has remained constant for three decades." WTF?

Apparently, women have 41% of all speaking roles in films directed by women (which is still not much, if you ask me), but it's not as if we ever get to see films directed by women nominated for Oscars. In fact, a woman has never won the best director award, and females are rarely even nominated. This year was definitely dominated by men to say the least, with all of the best directors and best picture creators being males.

It is situations like this that make me so angry when people try to say how far we've come in terms of women's rights, or when they try to talk about feminism in the past-tense (because now we are all equal!). Movies are seen by hundreds of millions of people, and if the most critically acclaimed and popular movies are all made by men, then it is those messages that are getting out into the world and shaping peoples' ideas. Over time, it doesn't even seem weird to most people that women are underrepresented at an event like the Oscars that should have nothing to do with gender, because no one expects to see women there or even gives it a second thought. So when you notice something like that, shout it out!

Props to Helen Mirren, btw, for saying last night that men receive more acclaim for their acting because better and more interesting parts are written for them than are written for women. Will this shit ever change?

No wonder Oscar is a dude.

College is no place for women's rights or sexuality.

2008-02-25T14:57:00.000-08:00

Heather MacDonald, a fellow at the conservative think tank the Manhattan Institute, had an essay in yesterday's Los Angeles Times railing against the "phony" rape epidemic on America's college campuses. She had lots to say about rape on college campuses (more of which can be read by visiting this Jezebel article where I read the story in the first place), but the statement that stood out the most to me was this one: "Young iconoclasts can take up another discredited idea: College is for learning. Fighting male dominance or catering to the libidinal impulses released in the 1960s are sorry substitutes for the pursuit of knowledge."

Okay, let's take deep breath and think about what MacDonald is suggesting here. That young, college-aged women should be learning in college, not paying attention to their sexual needs, OR standing up for themselves when it comes to "male dominance." Because discovering yourself sexually or learning to assert your rights as a woman have NOTHING to do with the pursuit of knowledge. Also, I'm sorry, but aren't MacDonald's suggestions here some of the EXACT attitudes shoved on young women that make them afraid to report rape in the first place?!? If that is not the most counter-productive, misogynistic pile of shit I have ever heard, I don't know what is. Here is a conversation I am imagining a young college student whom I will call "Alice" having with Ms. MacDonald:

A: [Timidly] Ms. MacDonald? I was recently sexually assaulted by a male student, and I am not sure what to do about it. I know you consider yourself to be an expert in these matters, so I thought I would come to you for help.

MM: [Shocked] Why were you in a sexual scenario with a young man instead of studying?

A: Well, I liked him and we were fooling around, but it went too far and even though I said no he forced me into things I didn't want to do.

MM: Oh! Well, he was just asserting his male dominance over you. I think you have two options here. Allow him to dominate you whenever he wants, or completely cloister yourself away from all sexual temptation and just study all the time. (But for God's sake don't study anything that has to do with feminism, philosophy, sociology, psychology, or sexuality. We don't want you getting any crazy ideas!)

The End.

Fun with Condoms (I mean it)

2008-02-24T21:19:00.000-08:00

So, as feminists, I think we are all aware of our responsibility to ourselves and others when it comes to safer sex. One of the most important (and, at least for me, most difficult) areas in which to negotiate gender norms is between the sheets, after all. It is with this thought in mind that I bring up a trend I have been noticing in some of my more recent conversations: lack of condom use.

Look, I am not trying to come at all of you like some sort of overprotective grandma who can't get her head around the notion of premarital intercourse. I understand that you crazy kids get horny sometimes and just want to go for it, even if you have forgotten to bring the required accessories (condoms) along with you. But I am here to tell you that it is just not worth the risk! Use a condom, for pete's sake!

For some reason, this seems to become more of a problem the older people get. It's like once you have had a couple of drunken slip ups during which you forgot a condom and no one's genitalia dried up and fell off, you think you are invincible when it comes to STIs and pregnancy. You aren't! Use a condom!

I would never name names or divulge incriminating details on this blog, but I will say that some very smart and savvy people (women and men alike) that I am lucky enough to know have confessed to me as of late that they don't always use condoms, even during a one night stand. This is a risk that is not worth taking, especially if you are a woman. I hate to make it a "woman's responsibility," but the truth is that if a one night stand results in pregnancy, it is the woman who is left with a uterus full of unwanted fetus.

So again, I am not here to chastise anyone, but our reproductive rights (both women's and men's) are so important, and a hot, unplanned hookup is not worth risking all of that. So throw some condoms in your purse or wallet, and be prepared no matter what. Besides, condoms can be fun! Look at these cuties:

Hooray for condoms!

Be a mind sticker.

2008-02-18T21:53:00.000-08:00

This old Tab commercial is sooo creepy (and also hilarious). Apparently, the reason to drink diet soda is so you can "be a mind sticker." That means staying thin enough that your husband will still want to bang you when he gets home from work. Like the ad says, there are benefits to having a good shape, and getting to make out in front of a six-pack of Tab is one of them.

Now, I am all for diet soda, yet I have obviously done something wrong here over the years, because even though I have had two diet cokes today, I don't think any middle-aged businessmen are currently creepily fantasizing about the Tab-induced intercourse we are going to have later. Is it because I prefer diet coke? Damn.

Also, this song is terrible! If you are going to try and scare us women into drinking diet pop so that we keep our shapes, at least give us a catchier song.

Now, the $64,000 question: what ads are on today that we barely blink an eye at now, but three decades from now will have people laughing their asses off at our ignorance?

Happy VD!

2008-02-14T15:14:00.000-08:00

I just wanted to say Happy Valentine's Day to everyone! I know this may not seem like the most feminist of holidays, given that most of the advertising campaigns surrounding it promote only the worst gender stereotypes, but that doesn't mean that us feminists can't enjoy ourselves. If you feel like being politically active, check out the V-Day events happening in your area. If not, just have fun! Whether you are in a relationship or not, everyone loves celebrating, especially when booze and candy are involved.

Men ALSO hate getting dumped.

2008-01-30T17:45:00.000-08:00

A new book was released a little while ago, entitled Things I've Learned From Women Who've Dumped Me. The book was put together by Daily Show and Colbert Report producer Ben Karlin, and includes essays by such esteemed contributors as Dan Savage, Andy Richter, David Wain, and Bob Odenkirk.

I must admit, I have not yet read this book (although I do want to), and if you have read it, I would like to hear your thoughts on it. To me, however, despite some problems I see right away in the Amazon.com description (e.g. "flowers work", as if that is all women care about), I am really happy that this book has been published. Not only does it show men caring about relationships, but it shows cool, funny, attractive men caring about relationships!

Those of you who read this blog know how bullshit I think it is that the media often portray heterosexual relationships as some sort of guard/prisoner relationship, where the poor, free-spirited man can't wait to get away from his overbearing woman captor. This is not the reality of heterosexual relationships, as anyone who has been in one knows, and I am psyched to see a hip, fun, book painting the situation in a new, and more accurate light.

Now, of course, I just have to read the book so that we can do a thorough analysis.

Hats off to you, Nellie Bly!

2008-01-25T18:44:00.000-08:00

Do you ever feel like, as a feminist, you need a little bit of extra inspiration? Sometimes it's tough fighting for our rights, day in and day out. A girl (or boy) can get tired! Well, next time your spirits need a boost, take minute to think about one of history's most inspirational ladies, Nellie Bly.

On this day (January 25) in 1890, journalist and feminist extraordinaire Nellie Bly set a new record for world travel, completing a journey around the globe in only 72 days. She went to England, the Suez Canal, Sri Lanka, Hong Kong, and other exotic locales, all while unaccompanied by any man (which, especially in those days, was quite a feat).

Prior to her global journey, Ms. Bly feigned insanity in order to expose the abuse and neglect that was occurring in the field of women's mental health. After she returned from her trip around the world, Nellie Bly retired from journalism (after writing a bestselling book, of course) to become the president of the Iron Clad Manufacturing Co. and one of America's leading industrialists. She even invented the steel barrel!

Now this is a woman all of us feminists can look up to, indeed.

Because feminists care about vaginas.

2008-01-24T14:57:00.000-08:00

I am sure you have all heard about the new-ish horror movie Teeth, which stars a teenage girl with a racy and dangerous secret, a vagina dentata! Now, we could certainly devote an entire post right here to vagina dentata and its implications for women everywhere, but I think that a fanged vagina speaks for itself.

As feminists, however, it is our duty to keep up-to-date on all things vaginal, and with that in mind I would like to draw your attention to a New York Magazine article entitled Ten Movie Vaginas Even Scarier Than the One in 'Teeth'. The list ranges from the plant in 'Little Shop of Horrors' to the Eye of Sauron in 'Lord of the Rings'. Of course, the article plays liberally with symbolism on a few of the entries.

What I want to know, then, is what does a list like this mean for women? Is it somehow empowering, because it shows examples of vaginas that kicked ass and took names? Or is it demeaning, because it paints a picture of vaginas as things to be feared and avoided? Because of the wording of the article (the word 'scary' for example), I find this list problematic.

What do you think?

Happy 35th Roe vs. Wade!

2008-01-22T23:18:00.000-08:00

Well everybody, today marks the 35-year anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade decision. Hooray for reproductive rights!

Sure, we're all happy that 35 years ago the US Supreme Court legalized abortion, finally giving us women control over our own bodies. But the battle is not over. There are still lots of people out there who want to take those rights away (I am talking to you, misogynistic Republicans), and we can't stand for it. To paraphrase the Beastie Boys, we've got to fight for our right to our reproductive organs!

So don't just sit there, basking in the glow of the champagne toast that you have undoubtedly poured for yourself to celebrate this special day. Do something about your rights! Whether that means donating time or money to Planned Parenthood, talking to your friends about reproductive rights, or wearing a fly pro-choice t-shirt, every little bit helps.

I will end this post by quoting a t-shirt I spotted in the ladies' locker room this afternoon. It read, "reproductive rights: don't fuck with them, don't fuck without them." I couldn't have said it better myself.

Proud Vibrations.

2008-01-18T13:54:00.000-08:00

So a good friend of mine (who shall remain nameless unless she chooses to identify herself at a later date) called me the other night to relay this story:

A few weeks ago, said friend suffered a minor tragedy when her favorite vibrator died. After two weeks of going without, she decided it was time to splurge on a new one, and did some sex shop research online to figure out where to go. She found the address of the sex shop, got in the car, and drove there, only to sit in the parking lot for 15 minutes working up the courage to go in and purchase the new vibrator.

"I was nervous," she said. "I am a strong feminist who has bought tons of vibrators over the years, but for some reason I always feel like buying a vibrator makes me seem single and desperate."

Eventually, of course, common sense and the desire for a new vibrator won out over nervousness and shame, and my friend went into the store and came out with two shiny new vibrators. Still though, her story raises some good points.

Of all of the things my friends and I talk about, masturbation is still one of the more taboo topics. We are all confident women, why do we still feel some sort of need to seem non-sexual? Why does admitting to owning a vibrator (or looking at porn, or talking about masturbating) make us feel ashamed and embarrassed? As one of my pals said recently, "I would rather talk about anal sex with my girlfriends than about masturbation." Why?

It's not as if this is a problem faced by men. I know plenty of men who have no problem recounting masturbatory tales in mixed company, complete with details about their techniques and pornography preferences. They feel no shame admitting to masturbating. They don't seem to think it makes them seem desperate or unattractive. So why should we?

As with so many issues faced by us modern ladies, there is no clear logic behind this. Sure, society tells us that we are sexual objects, not sexual beings. Men can think about us and masturbate, or they can have sex with us (and maybe we will enjoy it and maybe not), but we can't take responsibility for anything ourselves. This may be the case, but it doesn't make any sense. And it blows.

Time for us to take action! Start admitting to your friends that you own a vibrator and you use it, whether you are single or in a relationship. If you don't have one, think about getting one! Don't be embarrassed, there is nothing to be ashamed of! It's harmless and fun! If you're not sure where to start, check out the Babeland Blog. They have all sorts of testimonials and reviews, and there is nothing creepy about the site. It's cute!

So next time you feel weird about masturbating, or owning a vibrator, or liking porn, or whatever other solo sexual activities you might feel hung up on, stop yourself. There is no reason to feel weird. You should feel good about yourself! Say it loud, "I have a vibrator and I'm proud"!

See? Doesn't she look like she's having fun?

Stop it with the sexism!

2008-01-16T13:17:00.000-08:00

So as we all know, the presidential race is heating up, with plenty of sexism being used to stoke the fire. Many political pundits are using inappropriate language when referring to Hillary Clinton, or focusing on her gender as a reason to discourage people from supporting her. Chris Matthews, the host of Hardball on MSNBC, is a perpetrator of this sexist language, big time.

I always read these emails encouraging me to tell people how I feel about their inappropriate sexist behavior or their clubbing of baby seals or what have you, and I am often too lazy to actually say anything to those people. That is why, in this case, I have done the work for you! Just copy and paste the email below and send it to Hardball. The email address is there and everything. Oh, and thanks to Feministing for bringing this issue to my attention. As a grad student who is too poor for cable, I am not always up on the latest political punditry sexism.

Let the emails begin!

To: hardball@msnbc.com
Your sexism is uncalled for.

Dear Chris Matthews and the staff of Hardball,

Please refrain from using sexist and misogynistic language on your television program. You have referred to Senator Clinton as a "she-devil" and a "strip teaser." You have called her "witchy" and called any men who support her "castratos in the eunuch chorus." This type of language is unnecessary and inappropriate. Please focus on the politics of the presidential candidates instead of degrading one of them for being a female.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Your Name Here.

Here is a photo of the sexist, just so you can stay motivated:

These are my confessions. . .

2008-01-14T21:21:00.000-08:00

I am sure this is no shocking revelation to anyone, but I think that we (and by we I mean people in the world) are most often discouraged from revealing our true feelings. In fact, in many instances, if someone reveals his or her true feelings, that person is made to feel crazy (here is a hilarious Onion article about that very phenomenon). As a woman, I feel this happens more to women than it does to men, but a man might have a different story (and if you are a man reading this, please weigh in). I am sure we have all read a thousand articles proving that if a woman shows her true feelings she is either weak (if she cries at all - see Hillary Clinton) or a bitch (if she gets angry), and we have all probably felt societal pressure to keep our feelings and opinons to ourselves.

Anyway, all of this pressure to keep our true thoughts and feelings bottled up at the risk of seeming insane has got to stop. I don't know about you, but I am tired of playing it cool all of the time and pretending that I don't care about anything when the truth is, I DO care, about A LOT of things. Now, I know that this one blog post is not going to change all of us. I know we aren't going to start tomorrow telling our bosses or professors exactly how we feel about them, or telling every person we sleep with exactly how upset we were when they didn't call us back, or stopping people on the bus to tell them that we think their sexist jokes are inappropriate, etc. That is obviously too much to ask for from just one blog post.

I do think, however, that we can use this blog post as a way to get some of these thoughts and feelings off of our chests, and make others around us feel a little bit less crazy in the process. So please take a second to think about an opinion or feeling you have that you've felt like you couldn't come clean with, for whatever reason. Do it for feminists everywhere, and maybe we can slowly start to reverse this crazy tide! I will start:

- I hate the phrase "you guys", but I can't seem to stop myself from using it and I can't think of a viable alternative, so I never say anything when people use it around me, even when I am in a group of all females.

- I spend copious amounts of time googling people who I haven't even talked to in years, just to see if I can spy on what they are up to. I also wonder all the time if people ever do this to me, and what they think of the results if they do.

- If I ever have a dream in which I am wearing a particular outfit, I try as hard as I can to replicate that outfit upon waking, just in case the dream was trying to tell me something.

- I played out a whole scenario in my head on my bike ride home today in which I was wrongfully accused of poisoning the dog of a boy I had sex with, and I had to defend myself while at the same time being so charming and obviously innocent that he profusely apologized and decided he liked me again.

- I wish I was more interested in politics because I know they are important, but sometimes (okay, most of the time) I get bored reading about them and switch to reading about celebrity fashion instead.

Those are just a few to get you started. I would love to hear from everyone! If this takes off, maybe confessions can be a more regular feature on the blog, a place where we can all tell everyone what we're really thinking without being made to seem insane. Imagine that.

Hey Ladies!

2008-01-13T20:45:00.000-08:00

Hello Feminists,

So it is a new year, and one in which I will redouble my efforts to blog about all things fun and feminist. After all, 2008 is not shaping up to be any better for us feminists than 2007 was, and without our dilligent discourse (and alliterations), things just might go to hell in a handbasket.

I know it has been discussed to death all over the television, Internet, and print media, but no feminist foray into 2008 would be complete without a brief mention of Hillary Clinton, the first ever female presidential hopeful (I know other women have run for president, but none of them have made it far enough into the race to be considered "hopeful"). So what does everyone think of the coverage of Clinton's campaign so far? Have you all seen the "important news briefs" that relay how she teared up at a press conference?

I have been reading lately that older women are supporting Clinton, but younger women are coming out and saying that they don't feel she speaks to their generation. It seems that women aged 45 and up have dreamed for so long of a woman president that they are happy to connect with and support Clinton. The younger women interviewed, however, said that they don't feel Clinton represents them, and that feminism isn't the same issue for their generation as it was for their foremothers'.

I can only speak for myself, but I am a 25 year-old feminist who has also dreamed of seeing a woman in the White House, and for whom feminism is still very much a priority. Perhaps Clinton doesn't represent the younger generation of women in the same manner she does the older, but she certainly represents us in a way that a man couldn't. Now I am not saying that every feminist out there should support Clinton just because she is a woman, but I do think that all people, feminists especially, should think twice before they say that her gender doesn't matter. After all, one look at a graphic like this, claiming to be in support of Senator Clinton, and we can see that it most certainly does.

Struggling Feminist Movement

2007-12-10T13:20:00.001-08:00

Hey Everybody,

Yikes. So I know I haven't posted anything in about six weeks, but I am planning to actually pay for Internet access in my apartment some time soon, so I should be forcing my opinions on you (and hopefully hearing yours too) more regularly from now on.

In the meantime, my friend Alyssa sent me this article from the always hilarious Onion. The headline reads "Man Finally Put in Charge of Struggling Feminist Movement." Not only is this article insanely funny, but it manages to subtly draw attention to several commonly held beliefs about gender. So it's entertaining AND it's making good points about gender norms! It's nice to see some proof that the two can co-exist.

What do you think? Is this article just amusing satire, or does an article like this discourage men from participating in the feminist movement?

Cocktails!

2007-10-20T16:17:00.000-07:00

So I am currently reading the book The Cocktail Waitress: Women's Work in a Man's World by James Spradley and Brenda Mann. It's about an ethnographic study conducted in the 1970s on cocktail waitresses in a college bar. So far, the main point is that even though the women in the bar have to work harder than the men, the men are in charge no matter what the situation.

It is frustrating to read this book (although I do recommend it because it is interesting so far) because so much of the content rings true in my own life. It would be nice to think that three decades worth of enlightenment would have moved us all a little further along the social evolution chain, but in my opinion they really haven't.

Take, for example, the chapter I just read on the jokes shared between the cocktail waitresses and the bartenders. At any point in the night, it is perfectly socially appropriate for a bartender (all male, of course) to make a comment about a cocktail waitress's appearance or sexuality, and at that point she is allowed to retort back, but only in a way that allows him to remain in the power position in front of the other bar customers. Call me crazy, but I don't think that type of interaction has changed much. I find myself walking on thin ice in joking situations with men all of the time, because it is necessary as the female to let him set the tone for the conversation.

I think that's the reason this book is frustrating me so much, because I can identify countless scenarios in my own life wherein I allow men to have all of the power without even thinking about it, and now that I am thinking about it I don't know how to stop it without getting a reputation for being a bitch. It is the EXACT SAME DILEMMA that the cocktail waitresses in the book have! Sigh. I just wish we'd made a little more progress by this point so that I wouldn't have to deal with it. . .

SERIOUSLY??

2007-10-16T20:47:00.000-07:00

Okay, so this might be old news to lots of you who weren't out of the country all summer, but I have been catching up on some old celebrity gossip, and while perusing The Hater I ran across THIS:

Revenge plastic surgery? That's right, apparently Heidi from The Hills had such a hard time growing up with a flat chest and a prominent nose that she had highly publicized plastic surgery to get back at her tormentors.

Now, I am not taking any sort of stance on plastic surgery here. But the very wording of this headline makes it clear that Heidi from The Hills did not have this surgery for herself, she did it to get positive attention from other people (the guys she used to hang out with at the beach who looked at other girls' boobs, according to the article). To me, that is a mistake. And publishing this on the cover of an international magazine is harmful to young people everywhere. It's reinforcing the idea that "revenge plastic surgery" is a good idea. Look! It gets you on the cover of a magazine, looking better than ever!

To make matters worse, this article has Heidi saying that she "would rather be dead than have small boobs," and that she knew the surgery was risky but she didn't care if she never woke up, it still would have all been worth it. Are you kidding me?!? Also, she talks about how supportive her boyfriend was the whole time, how he kept saying "that's my girl" when she would talk about the surgery. I'm sorry, is anyone else APPALLED by this? I feel like I'm going insane.

Dominant Traits

2007-10-15T20:17:00.000-07:00

Recently I have had some pretty frank conversations with my female friends about our sexual preferences, and some patterns have begun to emerge that I find quite interesting. All of the women I have (informally) polled so far are strong, outgoing, independent feminists, and all enjoy rough, agressive sex.

At first this might seem a bit counterintuitive. After all, I think the myth is that the stronger a woman is in life, the more agressive she will be in bed. However, this trend makes sense to me. Most of these women are making decisions all day long, and if they are in relationships they are usually playing the decision-making role there as well. It only stands to reason that in a sexual scenario they prefer to let someone else be in charge.

There are a few things, though, that I am still curious about. First of all, all of my friends so far have cited at least one man (or woman) they have been with who is unwilling to participate in the type of sex they want to have, usually because (s)he is shy and reserved in bed and doesn't want to behave disrespectfully. If outgoing women want to be dominated in bed, why don't shy (wo)men want to dominate them? And is it disrespectful if the other person is asking for it?

I am also curious about women who are shy, reserved, and dependent on others in their day to day lives. Are these women secretly dominatrices in the sack? Not surprisingly, I don't really know any women who match the above description, but if you do, please fill me in. I am curious. In the meantime, I will continue to poll, so if you feel comfortable, drop me a line and let me know your opinion on this matter.

Like a Bat Outta Hell('s Belles)

2007-10-14T22:54:00.000-07:00

Hello Feminists,

So, I realize that I have been out of the blogosphere for two months, but I am attempting a comeback. I will start slowly, by letting those of you in the Eugene area know about a show coming up that might be of interest to feminists and heavy metal lovers everywhere. That's right, the Hell's Belles are back!

For those of you who don't know, Hell's Belles is a band of five kick-ass females who play ALL AC/DC, ALL the time. Here is a photo of the band:

Hot! And, it is refreshing to see some sassy ladies subverting the whole "cock rock" aesthetic by playing music usually associated with dudes. I wonder if we will ever progress far enough to get to the point where we can see all male tribute bands covering all female material. What do you think? Are there any guys out there willing to start a Sleater-Kinney cover band?

More to come...

Burlesque Queens

2007-08-02T18:52:00.000-07:00

Hello Feminists!

I was reading an interview today on the av club with neo-burlesque star Dita Von Teese. In it, the interviwer asked Ms. Von Teese about feminism and the art of burlesque. She replied that she doesn't care if people want to take a feminist message of empowerment away from her performances, but that she doesn't have any sort of political agenda and wants only to entertain and make people forget about their problems.

What do you think of this? Is burlesque dancing feminist? Does it matter that Dita Von Teese doesn't care about sending a feminist message, if some people get one anyway? There are other people who feel just the opposite, after all, calling her and other dancers prostitutes because they accept money for their bodies. But is that empowering, or disempowering? I have been struggling with this in my mind all day.

I think the idea (explained in more detail in the interview) about glamorous women during the burlesque era being characters that were created in dressing rooms as opposed to natural beauties an interesting one. In a way, it was an ideal that allowed more women to be thought of as beautiful and glamorous, because all anyone needed was a few hours in front of the mirror with makeup and curlers. On the other hand, it reinforced a beauty standard that required women to put in an INSANE amount of effort. Should we be glad or upset that it is coming back in to fashion?

Our beloved pop culture has been experiencing a burlesque revival over the past few years. Some people say that it is because our culture has become so sexually permissive that we want our entertainment to be more innocent (a la the burlesque striptease, as opposed to the crotch in your face type of striptease). Other people (Von Teese being among them) just say burlesque has come back into style because it's glamorous and cool. Any thoughts, on any of this?

My spidey sense tells me you might be pregnant...

2007-07-26T20:02:00.000-07:00

Feminists, get ready to have your days made. In the 1970s, Planned Parenthood teamed up with Marvel Comic's Stan Lee and published a Planned Parenthood edition of Spiderman! This comic is awesome. Not only does it include the comic staples of aliens, sinister plots, lots of fistfight action, and choice expletives like "holy guacamole", it also includes valuable information about pregnancy prevention!

A plot synopsis won't do this thing justice, so I am just going to include a few of my favorite panels here and urge you to visit the link to the issue(found here, on Andrew Farago's LiveJournal page) yourself. It's priceless. And informative!

Here, evil villain "The Prodigy" explains his sinister plan to get the teenagers of America pregnant:

But wait! Spiderman doesn't think these kids are ready to get pregnant!

Your hair is everywhere...

2007-07-25T19:30:00.000-07:00

I am currently reading the book In Our Time by Susan Brownmiller. It is a first-person account of the start of the American Women's Liberation Movement.

In the third chapter of the book, Brownmiller describes a scene that took place at the Emmanuel College conference of 1969 (a conference on women's rights). A radical feminist group called Cell 16 performed a Chinese revolutionary drama onstage, during which they cut off their long hair in front of 600 audience members.

The audience had a very strong reaction to this public hair-cutting. Women were crying and screaming for the cutting to stop. Roxanne Dunbar, a member of Cell 16, tried to explain to the crowd that "long hair belongs to men". Later on in the evening, Dunbar and some fellow activists broke into an ABC news anchor's bag and destroyed the video footage of the event, so that no record would remain.

Although this public shearing is mentioned only briefly in Brownmiller's book (which is great so far, by the way) I have been thinking about it ever since. Why did a group of activist, feminist women react so stronly to seeing other women chop off their own hair? What is about long hair that makes it so feminine and powerful?

According to Dunbar, it is heterosexual men's fondness for long hair that makes us value it so highly. Women are taught that long hair makes us look sexier and more feminine, and that men will pay more attention to us if we grow our hair long. This message is constantly reinforced in the media, and in our interpersonal interactions.

So as feminists, should we eschew long hair for short? Does it matter? If a woman wants to grow her hair long, does it matter where that desire comes from, or as feminists should we just support her right to look however she chooses?

The more I think about it, the more there really is to hair. Think about how America reacted to Britney Spears's head-shaving incident, or how the stereotype of a butch lesbian involves a short, spiky haircut. When a woman goes through a major life transition, she often radically changes her hair to match her changing moods.

This is a complicated issue, and I am not surprised that the women in Dunbar's Emmanuel College audience reacted so strongly to seeing women cut their hair. I wonder, do men have anything comparable to women's hair? It's not as if an audience would mind terribly if a man cut his hair short in front of them.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Have you or anyone you know cut your hair as a feminist statement? Would you? Why do you think we care so much about hair?

Eating Disorder Patients Getting Older...

2007-07-23T19:28:00.000-07:00

According to an article on the Yahoo! news site yesterday, doctors are seeing a new and disturbing trend when it comes to eating disorders, their patients are getting older.

Although the majority of patients with eating disorders like anorexia and bulimia are still females in their teens and early twenties, some studies show that more than 35 percent of new patients seeking treatment for eating disorders are over the age of 38.

The Yahoo! article lists several possible reasons for this trend, but all are speculations at this point because more research is needed. Still, it is a growing issue, and regardless of the root cause(s) it reflects a problem with female body image in society that does not relent as we grow older (I say female because 94% of eating disorder patients are female, I am aware that some males suffer from this disease too, though).

When are we as a society going to stop making women feel like shit about their bodies? Am I the only one who hoped this problem got better with age? Unfortunately, it apparently does not.

When I Make Myself Imagine

2007-07-18T17:42:00.000-07:00

Konichiwa, Feminists!

I just read this poem by Sei Shōnagon from her collection of writings, The Pillow Book, published somewhere around the year 1010 A.D. Here is a painting of Sei, and her poem:

When I Make Myself Imagine

When I make myself
imagine what it is
like to be one of
those women who
live at home, faith-
fully serving their
husbands-women
who have not a sin-
gle exciting prospect
in life yet who be-
lieve they are per-
fectly happy-I am
filled with scorn.

According to Wikipedia, Sei was a court lady around the year 1000 A.D. in Japan. During that time, women were not allowed to use the same alphabet as men, and Sei was looked down upon by her fellow court ladies for doing so (and for her alleged promiscuity -ow!) I found it interesting that her words could still be so relevant today, 1000 years after they were written. I often have to keep my scorn in check when I think of all of the women who choose to stay home and "faithfully serve their husbands".

It is, regretfully, a gut reaction on my part to feel pity or scorn for women whose life ambitions do not extend beyond the home and marriage. I am constantly reminding myself that these women have made choices that they (hopefully) are happy with, and that they do not necessarily deserve to be pitied and scorned. Isn't it possible that they are happier in their current state than they would be had they made different life choices? And who died and left me in charge of passing judgement on these women?

As feminists, I think it's important for us to champion all women, even those who choose to dedicate their lives to serving their husbands. I know, it's difficult, but no one said being a feminist was easy. If it was, everyone would do it, and then we'd have no one to compare ourselves to when we want to feel cool.

So thanks, Sei Shōnagon, for choosing to write during a time when women were not allowed to put their words to paper in the same manner as men, and for paving a road for feminists everywhere. A millennium later, your words are still inspiring us.

Trojan Evolve

2007-07-16T19:42:00.001-07:00

Here is the condom ad that is prompting both Fox and CBS to refuse to air ads mentioning pregnancy prevention. Is it just me, or is this ad much tamer than the controversy implies?

The first rule about pregnancy prevention is don't talk about pregnancy prevention.

2007-07-16T19:04:00.000-07:00

So, in exciting network television news, Fox and CBS are refusing to air certain condom ads on their television networks. The networks are willing to air condom advertisements that highlight disease prevention, but refuse to air any advertisements that make mention of condoms' pregnancy prevention abilities. Apparently it's just too controversial.

I don't even know what to say about this bullshit. What closed-minded conservatives like Fox and CBS fail to realize is that many young people are not growing up in ideal families where parents serve as fonts of sexual education information. For some television viewers, the information being broadcast about condoms on network television is the only information they are getting, yet the networks still won't do the right thing and broadcast the facts about condoms. Thus, these young people experiment with sex (because they will, regardless of the content Fox and CBS choose to keep from them) without the knowledge that condoms can prevent pregnancy. Thanks, networks!

What exactly is the motivation behind this refusal to mention pregnancy prevention? I am assuming it has something to do with religious groups, and their dislike of condom talk. The weird thing though, is that these networks are willing to broadcast condom commercials, just not ones that mention pregnancy prevention in any way. It's like agreeing to run a series of ads for a restaurant but refusing to mention that they serve food there. It doesn't make any sense!

Denying young women (and men) access to valuable information about birth control is wrong. It's irresponsible, and breeds the type of misinformation that can only lead to unwanted pregnancies. It is a lose-lose situation, and I only wish that Fox and CBS could pull their heads out of their right-winged, misogynistic, ignorance-perpetuating asses long enough to see that.

Cows Want to Run!

2007-07-12T16:51:00.000-07:00

Hola Amigas y Amigos! In the country of Spain, some sassy feminists have begun an underground text messaging campaign to add a running with the cows component to Pamplona's annual running of the bulls. Says one anonymous supporter, "If the boys run ahead of the bulls, we (women) have to run with the cows. It's pure logic."

This petition was born out of the fact that many women do not feel comfortable with or included in the running of the bulls each year. Although the campaign to include cows is described in the group's press release as "tongue in cheek", I think it's great that women are speaking out and striving to make this cultural event more gender equal.

The "cows want to run" campaign manifesto states that adding a running of the cows "would make our festival greater and place Pamplona at the vanguard of traditional fiestas with total quality between males and females, men and women". To that I say, ole!

Welcome to the Jungle

2007-07-11T18:01:00.001-07:00

So Candace Bushnell, the creator of Sex and the City, has a new show airing on NBC next season called Lipstick Jungle. It's about three high-powered career women (a movie mogul, a magazine editor, and a "fashion diva") looking for... wait for it... love and fulfillment in... wait for it... Manhattan.

Not only is this well-worn territory, but I feel from watching the online clips of this show that it is bound to fall short in the same ways that Sex and the City did, only more so. Like Sex and the City, this show is marketed as being about powerful, independent women. Like Sex and the City, this show appears to actually be about conventionally attractive women trying to get sexual attention from men whom they secretly wish to marry.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for conventionally attractive women, and this show doesn't seem to be all bad. I just wish that we could move beyond this bullshit of having to make everything about men, even when we pretend that it isn't. Take, for example, the show's tagline: "They aren't looking for Mr. Big, they are Mr. Big". You have got to be kidding me. In order to get the message across that these women are successful in their careers, apparently we have to pretend they are men.

Also, I think the title of the show is problematic. Lipstick Jungle conjures up not only images of women who are successful because of their appearance, but it also implies unhealthy competition between the women, feeding into the whole "cat fight" fantasy. In fact, there is a scene in the show's online trailer where, when one of the characters attempts to refute a male colleague he responds with "mee-ow!". How progressive.

I am sure it is too much to hope for a show about successful women who can actually serve as feminist role models. Instead, I hope that shows like this one stop pretending to be something they are not. Oh, and I wish they would get rid of their stupid logo with the high heel as well, but that is probably asking for too much.

As Amelie from the AV Club said in her column The Hater, "That heel dangling off of the logo might as well be a guillotine blade dangling menacingly above our heads".

Show us your relationship status!

2007-07-10T18:57:00.001-07:00

Hello Feminists!

Today I was having a conversation with my good friend and fellow feminist Alyssa about myspace. Obviously, there is a lot going on on myspace that pertains to our feminist agenda, and most of it will not be discussed in this particular post (examples include underage sexy photos and the trend of young girls creating fake profiles pretending to be other young girls).

What will be discussed here today is myspace's obsession with relationship status. For those of you not familiar with myspace, it is a social networking site that allows you to build a profile of yourself and then link your profile to others (click here for an example). When users create or edit their profiles, myspace asks for specific information: age, religion, sexual preference, location, etc.

While much of the information requested by myspace can be left blank, the "status" section cannot. In fact, "status" is the only piece of information that cannot be left blank. Users are forced to choose among the labels of "married", "divorced", "in a relationship", "single", or "swinger" when creating their profiles. Leaving this section blank is not an option, nor is choosing more than one label.

Why is that, I wonder? I know that Alyssa and I are not the only myspacers out there who have a problem with this forced categorization. After all, many relationships do not fit neatly into a box, and this myspace requirement creates a lot of undue social stress. Let's say you have just begun a new relationship. At what point do you change your status from "single" to "in a relationship"? If you do it right away, your new beau/belle might think you are jumping the gun. If you wait too long, he/she might think you are not invested in the relationship, at which point he/she might dump you for someone whose myspace profile makes them seem more committed. Myspace might cost you a meaningful romance!

Pressure is also put on those of us who have recently ended relationships. It might feel too soon to change your status to "single", but you can no longer keep the "in a relationship" status selected or your friends might think you sad and pathetic for not moving on. If you opt for the more playful "swinger" (as Alyssa did) you leave yourself open to receiving scads of messages inviting you to participate in swingers' parties (as Alyssa did).

Does anyone know why myspace forces this issue? I know myspace is owned by uberconservative Rupert Murdoch, but is he seriously so uptight that he can't handle a little ambiguity when it comes to relationship status? Modern feminists like us do not want to be defined by our romantic relationships (or lack thereof) and I for one do not think we should be forced to.

See Jane Fold.

2007-07-09T16:46:00.000-07:00

So, after ten years of "feminist" journalism, Jane Magazine is being closed down. I myself have never been a subscriber of Jane, but I do know the magazine had a reputation for being less-than-feminist, despite its claims to the contrary. After all, while Jane may have been a step in the right direction for women's magazines (since it apparently focused more on issues and less on the opinions of men than some other women's publications) it still featured conventionally attractive models and celebrities wearing expensive clothing. In fact, Bitch Magazine even wrote a Top Ten Things to Hate About Jane feature a while back.

Still, I think the closing of this magazine is unfortunate (although again, I am not exactly the voice of authority on this subject). Jane may not have been perfect publication for progressive young women, but it certainly seems preferable to a magazine like Cosmopolitan or Glamour. At least in between the fashion advertisements and makeup tips they tried to inject a little content.

Conde Nast (which published Jane) says the magazine is closing because of "depressed advertising". While I would love to believe that advertisers were reluctant to buy space in Jane because it wasn't feminist or progressive enough, my feminist sensibility tells me that the opposite is true. After all, Conde Nast also publishes Vogue, and it is not hurting for advertisements. It seems that the world of magazine publishing is (sadly) not ready for even a pseduo-feminist agenda. Which is too bad, because I for one certainly am.

We could have a swingin' time...

2007-07-07T12:59:00.000-07:00

Happy Weekend, Feminists! I am currently reading the book Skipping Towards Gomorrah by Dan Savage. I know the book came out a few years ago, so perhaps many of you have already read it. For those of you who haven't, it is a case made by Savage in defense of the sinners of America against the "virtuecrats", who want to silence anyone who has ever smoked pot or kissed someone who owns a matching set of genitals. So far I am enjoying it, and Dan Savage makes a lot of good points about the rampant hypo criticism that seems to be ever-thriving in our great nation.

In his chapter on Lust (the book is organized into seven chapters, based on the seven deadly sins) Savage delves into the secret world of swingers by visiting a swingers' convention in Las Vegas, and interviewing a husband and wife who have been swinging in secret for more than a decade.

In this swinging chapter, Savage points out that many people believe the swinging scene to be one of America's only true matriarchies. This is because in the world of swingers, women are treated with the utmost respect (gasp!) and are allowed to say yes or no to sex with the men who proposition them without fear of repercussion (double gasp!). The swinging men realize that their lifestyle hinges on the willing participation of women, so they do whatever they can to make the women in their lives happy.

As with most important issues, I am conflicted when it comes to swinging. On the one hand, I am for any group that respects women, values women's opinions, and gives women complete sexual freedom. On the other hand, the reason these women are treated with such reverence is still patriarchal: the men want to get laid. So, do the ends justify the means?

My first instinct is to say no, that patriarchy is wrong and that we should squash it out wherever we see its ugly little head. That being said, can I really be opposed to a matriarchal society, even if there are patriarchs pulling the strings in the background? Being a feminist is tiring work. What do you think?

Here is a picture of a happy-go-lucky swingin' bowler to entertain you while you ponder this complex issue.

The Starter Wife

2007-07-05T19:20:00.000-07:00

Ahh, feminists. Last night I was able to catch a few moments of the USA series The Starter Wife, starring Debra Messing. The premise of the show is that a woman (Messing) gets a divorce from her rich, philanderous husband and has to pull herself up by her bootstraps, all while being shunned by her former friends because she is no longer a member of the Beverly Hills elite. Pretty well-worn territory, I know.

My problem with this show does not, however, stem from the predictable premise. After all, this show is billed as being potentially empowering for women, and the initial plot allows it the chance to be just that. We have a single woman in her 40s who is going to make new friends, start a new career, become a better mother, and find her true self in the process. My problem with the show, then, stems from the definition of "empowered" that is being sent to audience members. Take this example: within the first half of the first "empowering" episode, Messing's character had already found two potential male suitors. So much for making it on her own!

I am frustrated by this for many reasons. First of all, it's just plain boring. How many shows must go down this "wacky romance when you least expect it" path before we finally see something else? Also, this plotline is harmful to men and women alike. It reinforces the notion that the only way for a woman to be truly happy is by finding a heterosexual romantic relationship. The Starter Wife's creators could have shown their audience members a strong female character who was making it without a man in her life, but instead they chose to regurgitate a bunch of Hollywood bullshit that just makes everyone think that a woman can't survive without a big, strong man (or two) motivating her every decision.

Another thing, the show's website is out of control. Everything is in pink, and you can play online games like "Whack an Ex" (where you literally hit photographs of past lovers in the head with a hammer) and "Malibuland" (an interactive board game that allows you to do things like attend movie premieres to get free stuff, and "pelt the bitches [your former friends]" with litter outside of a Beverly Hills coffee shop). Also, the website includes merchandise (you can buy a pink tank top that reads "wife goes on") and a pink carpet event titled "40s and Fabulous!".

Honestly, is it really 2007? What does this say about society's perceptions of an empowered woman? That she has the right to throw coffee cups at the heads of her former neighbors while wearing a skimpy pink outfit and making booty calls? The worst thing is that this website (and the show itself) seems to be completely serious. There is no tongue-in-cheek irony here, just the message that a truly empowered woman needs at least one man in her life, an outrageous surplus of material goods, and lots of other women to be her enemies. Well, I had better get started on all of that right away, and maybe you should too. We wouldn't want to miss out on being empowered now, would we?

Dicks vs. Chicks

2007-07-03T15:20:00.000-07:00

A few of my friends and I have been talking lately about this summer's blockbuster movies. I don't know how actively any of you have been movie-viewing lately, but in addition to the summer's usual offering of action and horror movies, a new genre is semi-emerging: the dick flick. Some examples include "Knocked Up", "Eagle vs. Shark", the upcoming "SuperBad", and even "Ocean's 13", to name a few.

The name "dick flick" is derived, of course, from that most aggravating of terms, "chick flick". A chick flick is a movie that puts a woman trying to get a man's attention at the forefront of the plot. She may have some tough life lessons to learn along the way, but the heterosexual romantic relationship is what drives the movie, and she usually gets the man in the end (probably due to her extreme attractiveness). Although logic would dictate that the dick flick, then, should be the male version of the chick flick, we feminists know that logic is not something we can rely on when it comes to women and pop culture. Let's break this down, shall we? In the hopes of better understanding both chicks and dicks.

Main Characters
Chick Flicks: Usually a beautiful woman, her less attractive but funnier best friend, the handsome jerk she is trying to date, and the adorable guy she ends up dating at the end of the movie. See Sleepless in Seattle, Bridget Jones' Diary, How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days, et al.

Dick Flicks: Usually an everyman type of guy (he may or may not be emotionally sensitive), his group of equally attractive friends (if he is ugly they are ugly, if he is cute they are cute) and, if any female characters appear at all, a woman much more attractive than he who ends up inexplicably falling for him. See Knocked Up, Garden State, Old School, et al.

Plot
Chick Flicks: The plot in chick flicks always revolves around romantic relationships. The main character is trying to get a man, keep a man, or get over a man. At the end of the film, she will undoubtedly end up with a man, happily. Anything else in the film (her career, her friendships, some sort of casino heist plot) is secondary to the romance. Obviously this is because romantic relationships are all women care about. See Someone Like You, The Object of My Affection, Maid in Manhattan, Catch and Release, et al.

Dick Flicks: This is where we start to see some real differences in the two genres. In dick flicks, romance often doesn't even play a part in the film. If it does, the romantic relationship is secondary to the plot, which involves charismatic men doing some sort of exciting/funny/dramatic thing. See Wayne's World, Wedding Crashers, Ocean's 11-13, et al.

There are more differences/similarities between the two genres, of course (the role of friendships being an important one) but I am hoping that this is enough to get a discourse started for now. It is frustrating to see that the film industry perpetuates the idea that all women care about is romantic relationships, but does not do the same when it comes to movies made for men. With whom should these heterosexual women be having their romantic relationships, if men have better things to do?

We will be discussing more on this topic in future posts, as it is an issue about which I feel quite strongly. Please let me know your thoughts!

Game Over?

2007-06-29T22:42:00.000-07:00

Hello Fun Feminists!

I know it's been a long time since I picked up the feminist blog torch, lots of stuff has been happening here in grad school land. However, I am now back in action. Let the feminist criticism recommence!

I was at Target today and I saw this T-shirt in the young men's section:

"Excellent!" I thought, "finally there is a shirt available that teaches young men everything they need to know about marriage!" Namely that: a) marriage makes women happy and b) marriage makes men unhappy. The "Game Over" wording implies that life (the game in this metaphor) for a man ends when marriage begins.

It is exactly this type of merchandise that is perpetuating the stereotype that all women want to be married and that all men must be tricked into marriage. This idea is so frustrating. First of all, there are plenty of women who don't want to get married. Secondly, sociological studies consistently prove that married men are happier than single men, and that most men want to be married, so why must we continue to tell young men that they shouldn't want to get married? And that women want to trick men into marriage? It makes me crazy! Fucking stereotypes.

Wow. I take a week off, and THIS happens...

2007-05-17T13:05:00.000-07:00

Sorry that I have been slow to post/participate on Fun with Feminism this past week. The term is ramping up, I have a bunch of stuff to do at work, blah blah... There is no excuse for ignoring feminist issues out of laziness! So, onward and upward.

Marcia just sent me this photograph of the new Mary Jane "comiquette" (let's not even delve into that term) action figure:

Well. It certainly is nice to see that the supposed love of Spiderman's life is so thoroughly enjoying washing out his spidey suit. And she didn't make the mistake so commonly made by other women of covering her thong underwear up while she does the laundry. Or wearing shoes.

I don't even think I need to insult all of you by pointing out what is wrong with this statue. If I were going to insult you in that way though, I would point out some of the following:
* The way Marvel comics is choosing represent Mary Jane, a supposed strong female character, is by portraying her washing her boyfriend's sweaty laundry, suggesting she has nothing else going for her.
* Her breasts and thong are exposed, in a manner atypical of traditional laundry-doing, reinforcing and normalizing the idea of the male gaze (that women are always being watched and objectified by men)
* Mary Jane appears to be enjoying the laundry immensely, in an almost orgasmic way. This perpetuates the notion that women love (and are even turned on by?) to serve their men.

Not only is this "comiquette" disturbing, it is also ugly and weird. Why on earth was this thing mass-produced? Who is the audience who will purchase it? If you have any ideas on that topic, or know anyone who has purchased this item, I would love to hear all about it.

This post brought to you via Devil Doll.

The Onion just keeps it coming...

2007-05-10T15:24:00.000-07:00

Marla just emailed me an article from The Onion entitled "How Can I Use Feminism to My Advantage"? It is written in the voice of a college student who decided to embrace feminism because she wanted to get more attention at school. Here is an excerpt (because it is a pretty long article):

"I'm dating Dylan, a woman who volunteers at the Coalition For Gay, Lesbian And Bi Rights For The Homeless. Sure, I'm not really a lesbian, but showing up at Take Back The Night with Dylan captured a lot of attention. When I was in the bathroom stall the other day, I heard two girls I didn't even know talking about me. See, this feminism stuff works."

Why do we feminists have the bad reputation of taking ourselves too seriously? We can laugh at ourselves, no problem. In fact, if you want to laugh at yourself, you can read the whole article by clicking here.

Baby Makers

2007-05-08T23:08:00.000-07:00

Leona just came over and gave me a clipping from the most recent issue of Sports Illustrated. This is what it says:

Sign of the Apocalypse
Nebraska-Kearney women's basketball
coach Carol Russell was on the bench for a
Division II NCAA tournament game five
hours after giving birth.

What? Five hours after giving birth? That poor woman. I obviously don't know her personally, but to me what this clip implies is that she felt so much pressure not to let having a baby affect her performance in the workplace that she didn't even allow herself 24 hours off of work after having a child. I am sure the fact that Carol Russell is in the traditionally male-dominated world of sports didn't help to put her at ease, either.

This situation is so unfortunate. Because a man (or a woman who chose not to have children) would not have had to miss work to give birth, Russell also feels pressure not to miss work TO GIVE BIRTH. Have we really come to this, where childbearing is so looked down upon that a woman has to leave her hospital bed and go right back to work in order to feel confident in her job?

This brings up another issue for me as well, and it is the fact that while women have gained much equality in the workplace (a traditionally male sphere) the traditionally female sphere of the home and family has been devalued. I certainly do not believe that women should be expected to stay home and raise children and take care of the house. On the other hand, I do not think that women who choose to raise children should be discriminated against in any way (although this is an issue I am struggling with currently). If a woman wishes to stay at home and raise her children, or even just to stay in the hospital overnight after giving birth to them, she should be able to without feeling societal pressure to do otherwise.

See? A Woman with her child isn't so bad. We should accept them!

No girls allowed?

2007-05-07T11:40:00.000-07:00

Thursday night's episode of The Colbert Report featured an interview with Conn Iggulden, author of "The Dangerous Book for Boys". The book is full of adventure stories and instructions on how to make things like secret spy messages, and was inspired by the idea that boys these days spend too much time indoors playing video games and not enough time playing outside.

I think the book sounds great, but why is it just for boys? The author briefly addresses the book's gender specificity by saying that boys' brains work differently. This may be the case, but it doesn't mean that girls wouldn't also like to play secret agent and read adventure stories. It is assumptions like that that socialize females into believing that their realm is in the house and that the outdoors is just for boys.

I don't want to trash Iggulden's book. Boys should spend more time outside, and they should read adventure stories that feature characters they can look up to and emulate. I just think girls should do the same.

Here is Colbert's interview with Conn Iggulden:

Dried up old spinster...

2007-05-04T22:08:00.000-07:00

I was watching the latest episode of Grey's Anatomy this afternoon, and feeling conflicted (as usual). For those of you who did not see the episode, one of the main female characters, Addison Montgomery, decides she'd like to have a child even though she is unmarried. She goes to a fertility clinic and finds out she is no longer able to conceive, she has waited to long to try to get pregnant (she is 38).

Although Addison is certainly a successful woman working as a surgeon, I couldn't help but pick up on some anti-feminist sentiment during the episode. Upon learning she is infertile, Addison cries that she "waited too long" and that she should never have prioritized her career above having children. She confides in a friend who has a child that she is jealous of her, and goes on and on about how she is a barren woman who has nothing to look forward to in life.

Now, if this were a real life situation I would have no problem with any of it. However, this is a plotline of a television show (one of the most popular television shows in the country) and obvioulsy the creators of the show chose to put Addison's character in this position. I couldn't help but feel like the episode was meant to be a warning to women who choose to have careers and put off childbearing that one day they will regret their decision.

It is subtle messaging like this that contributes to discrimination against women, both in and out of the workplace. The show is telling us that without children, Addison is not a real woman, even though she is a surgeon who saves lives on a routine basis. This is not a message that would ever be sent about a man who chose not to have children, just as a male television character would not be punished for waiting until he was 38 (gasp!) to have children.

Did anyone else see the episode and have any thoughts on this?

Here is a photo of the dried up old spinster herself. I guess she never should have chosen her career over having a baby, now she is paying the price.

Barbie Girls

2007-05-02T23:17:00.000-07:00

In one of my classes we have been talking and reading a lot about Barbie. Like so many other things, I thought I had a strong opinion about Barbie (I was adamantly against her) and now it seems that the more information I collect, the more conflicted I become.

On the one hand, Barbie presents an unrealistic ideal of female beauty to young women (and men). She is outrageously tall, thin, and usually blonde. She has large breasts and very long and thin legs. A woman in the film Barbie Nation describes her battle with bulemia and anorexia and says that her experiences with Barbies growing up are what inspired her to want to be so thin. Barbie also reinforces stereotypes about femininity and masculinity. She adores pink, feminine clothing, and dressing up to please her masculine boyfriend.

Conversely, Barbie was also the first "grown up" doll available to young people. Before Barbies, young girls (and some boys) played with baby dolls, pretending to be mommies and daddies. With Barbies, young children can imagine themselves as independent adults. They can play at having their own places to live, their own social lives, and their own careers.

I had never thought of Barbie in any sort of positive light, but if she is inspiring young women (and men) to think about their dreams for the future, then she can't be all bad. Does anyone have opinions on this, or any good stories about playing with Barbies as a kid?

Because even feminists like jokes sometimes...

2007-04-28T18:16:00.000-07:00

Female Boss Walking Around Like She Owns The Place

SACRAMENTO, CA—Lydia Bernoldini, the CEO of financial services firm Bernoldini & Co., consistently uses her personal carriage and manner of verbal address to establish a commanding presence in the workplace, her staff reported.

"I don't know where Lydia gets off acting like the big cheese all the damn time," said James Halterfeyer of his boss, whom he described as "bossy." "She acts like what she says goes, even if I don't agree with it entirely."

Roughly 65 percent of Bernoldini employees echoed Halterfeyer's sentiments, specifically mentioning her refusal to be addressed as "Lydia" and the fact that female employment had swelled to 35 percent of the company since Bernoldini took over from her father in 2002.

This story is courtesy of The Onion

She works hard for less money

2007-04-26T14:40:00.000-07:00

It turns out that women are still being paid significantly less than men upon graduating from college. A recent study by the US Department of Education, entitled "Behind the Pay Gap", tracked more than 9,000 college graduates over the past decade. What did the study discover? That not only did the women earn less than the men to start out with (even men and women in the same fields), but that discrepancy in pay increased throughout the decade.

Women earn about 80% of what men earn upon graduating from college, and that number falls to only 69% after ten years. And some people still want to believe that the US has achieved gender equality!?

Another fact that struck me in this article was that ten years after graduating from college, 20% of women with children were out of the work force and another 17% were working part-time, while only 2% of men with children were out of the work force or working part-time.

While I am sure that a large part of the reason that more women stay home with children has to do with gender norms, I would bet that some of the reason is also that men are being paid more in the workforce and are therefore less able to leave their jobs. It is unfortunate that men and women do not receive equal pay, because then we would have equal opportunities to either work or stay home with family.

This is such a huge problem, it is difficult to think of any solutions. And the worst part is, we are so used to the idea of women being paid less than men for their work that this study is hardly news. Can you imagine if the results showed that men were paid less? I bet that story would be on the front page of every newspaper and magazine in the country.

Domestic Violence? Hilarious!

2007-04-25T11:17:00.000-07:00

I like to have my friends write posts for this blog. It furthers the feminist discourse, and it's interesting and fun. Today's insightful post comes from my friend Lyndsay, in San Diego. Here is Lyndsay's take on the new, award-nominated music video by Toby Keith:

"I have always been disgusted by Toby Keith. I don't listen to country music on purpose, but I hear it now and then, and with songs titles like: "Who's Your Daddy?", "A Little Less Talk and a Lot More Action", I knew he was a disgusting pig.
While flipping channels a few days ago, I saw that the Country Music Awards had nominated one of his videos for best video, "A Little Too Late". The clip I saw was of a woman who appeared to be tied to a chair, while Toby intimidated her. I looked up the video on YouTube, and it is SHOCKING.

The basic idea is that he ties his girlfriend to a chair and locks her in the basement. He comes down, and gets in her face, gives the impression that he is going to hit her with a shovel, drown her, or bury her in cement. Then we find out that, no, he is actually going to build a brick wall around her so she is trapped. All the while she is acting afraid of him. Then at the end of the video, we realize that silly Toby actually built the wall around himself, and he is the one who is stuck. Isn't that just hilarious? Doesn't that redeem his terrible message? NO. And, to top it off, once the girlfriend realizes this and escapes, he yells things to her like, "You know I didn't mean to hurt you," "You know my temper."

It is NOT funny to make a joke out of violence against women, which is exactly what he was doing. One website called it, "an imaginative video by award winning director." If by imaginative they mean violent, misogynistic, and wildly disrespectful to women and survivors of domestic abuse. The fact that the CMT awards actually nominated him for best video is the most disturbing fact of all. I am SO disgusted."

Well said, Lyndsay. Domestic violence is never funny, and Toby Keith should absolutely not be rewarded for his misogynistic video. And one of the worst things is, if you look at the YouTube comments practically all 48 of them are about how funny they think this video is! And, the CMT award for which Keith is nominated was voted on by his fans! If you would like to post a message on the CMT Awards web site telling them that this video should not be recognized by the CMT Network, click here. Oh, and here is the offending video:

Supreme Court says: "No late term abortions for you!"

2007-04-24T15:30:00.000-07:00

Sorry about the recent lack of posting, I have been out of town. I'm back now though, and all sorts of things are happening in the wonderful world of feminism! I am hoping to get caught up in the next few days, but if any of you have stuff you want to post, you can always email it to me.

I'm sure most of you savvy feminists out there know this already, but last week the Supreme Court upheld the ban on late term abortions. The vote was 5-4, and the ban will be upheld.

Obviously this decision by the court is unfortunate, for many reasons. Says Eve Gartner of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America: "This ruling flies in the face of 30 years of Supreme Court precedent and the best interest of women's health and safety. … This ruling tells women that politicians, not doctors, will make their health care decisions for them."

Total bullshit.

Thank you, Senate!

2007-04-18T12:11:00.000-07:00

Many of you may have heard (although I failed to post on it, I often get sidetracked by things like rape dolls and neglect current events) that a bill was passed last month by the South Carolina House of Representatives that would require each woman seeking an abortion to view an ultrasound of her uterus before the procedure was performed. That's right, the bill would REQUIRE her to view the ultrasound.

While advocates say that the bill would give the woman (the legislation refers to her as "the mother" but I will not do that here) one last chance to change her mind, critics (myself included) think that forcing a woman to view an ultrasound of her uterus prior to an abortion is outrageous, and just one more intimidation tactic being used to keep women from having abortions.

Luckily, the state senate amended the bill on Thursday. Now viewing the ultrasound is an option for all women, but not a requirement. At least a few politicians in South Carolina have some respect for women's rights.

Ahh, South Carolina. Thank you for not forcing women to view ultrasounds.

Just when you thought rape couldn't get any more playful...

2007-04-16T10:24:00.000-07:00

So, it looks like Quentin Tarantino has been turned into a doll marketing his new film, Grindhouse. The kicker? The doll is a miniature version of his character in the movie, Rapist Number One. Oh, and the doll will be for sale at Toys R Us, the children's toy store.

A rapist doll being sold at a toy store? You have got to be kidding me.

Your trunk is so bursting!

2007-04-15T10:37:00.000-07:00

When a woman wears pants that are a bit too tight (and perhaps high-waisted) and therefore show off the outline of her genitalia, she is said to have a camel toe. But what is it called when a man is wearing pants that are too tight?

I was at a party last weekend where some of the men were taking the skinny jeans trend to the extreme. A few of them were wearing pants so tight you could see the outline of their penis and both testicles! I tried to describe the offending bulge to my friend David, and realized there wasn't a popular phrase associated with male pattern pant tightness. He said that he has always referred to the male bulge phenomenon as a bursting trunk.

I like this phrase, and if no one has a better idea I think we should start using it. After all, I see bursting trunks often enough that I need something to call them.
A classic bursting trunk to brighten your day.

Faux Pas?

2007-04-12T14:58:00.000-07:00

Recently I have been having some very interesting discussions with people on the subject of fake orgasms. Who fakes orgasms? Why do they do it? Is it just women, or are there men out there who are faking it as well? What about lesbians?

A male friend told me that all women fake orgasms at one point or another. I do not believe that this is true, but even supposing that it is, what is the motivation behind the faking? Let's say that all women really do fake it sometimes. What for? To convince their lover that they are satisfied when in fact they are far from it? To spare his/her feelings? Why?

I have a few theories on this, and I would like to share them with you and get your feedback. I am thinking of writing a term paper on this subject, so I would LOVE to hear from you, even if you are embarrassed and choose to respond anonymously. These theories are operating under the assumptions that there are some women out there who do fake orgasms, and that men do not. I realize these could be false assumptions, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Theory 1: Women don't want to hurt their partner's feelings
If the sex is consensual and not being paid for, we can assume that both partners want to please each other (at least somewhat). Although many women cannot orgasm, or need outside help to orgasm, they may think that admitting this will hurt their partner's feelings and make him/her feel like an inadequate lover. To avoid dealing this possible self-esteem blow, women fake orgasms, therefore sending the message to their partner that they are an excellent lover (even if they aren't).

Theory 2: Women are afraid that they will disappoint their partner
I think many people (men and women alike) are operating under the assumption that sex is all about the big O. While I am sure many women individually do not feel this way, they assume that their partner does and are afraid they will disappoint him/her if they admit that they do not really care about achieving orgasm all of the time. For many women, sex can be just as enjoyable without an orgasm, but they think their partner won't understand so they fake it to let him/her know they are enjoying the sex.

Theory 3: Women are frigid and just want to get the whole thing over with
A lot of the discussions I have had on this topic so far come back to this theory, that women just want to get the sex over with as soon as possible, and faking an orgasm is the best way to do it. Of course, this assumes that the women doing the faking do not enjoy sex for some reason, and do not feel comfortable admitting that to their partner.

Theory 4: Women have a hard time orgasming and still want their partner to know they appreciate his/her efforts
If a woman's partner has been trying to turn her on all night and she wants to let him/her know that she appreciates it, she might fake an orgasm instead of just saying it's not going to happen.

So what's the harm? A woman doesn't want to hurt her partner's feelings or let him/her know what's really going on, so she fakes an orgasm. No big deal, right? Or is it a big deal? Why do some women feel they have to pretend? Is it because women need to please men at all costs, but not the other way around?

I have a lot more thoughts about this phenomenon, and as I said, I would really appreciate feedback from people in any capacity. Have you faked an orgasm or been with someone whom you suspect was faking? Why do you think that was? If you have never faked one, is there a situation in which you think you might fake it? What types of people do you think fake orgasms? How many people do you think fake it? I want to hear from you!

Words of the wise

2007-04-10T12:16:00.000-07:00

A quote to stimulate your feminist minds:

"No one is more arrogant toward women, more aggressive or scornful, than the man who is anxious about his virility." - Simone de Beauvoir

Just 'cause she dances go-go...

2007-04-09T11:09:00.000-07:00

On Saturday, a male friend and I went to Mary's Club, Portland's oldest strip club. Since the strip club experience, I have been feeling conflicted about strippers from a feminist perspective. Is stripping an empowering thing for feminists, or is it disempowering?

Before I went to Mary's Club, I definitely would have said disempowering. The few strippers I had seen before made me feel that stripping in general was degrading. After all, a strip club situation is the ultimate subject/object dichotomy; the subject (audience member) pays money to stare at the the object (stripper) while (s)he dances nude for the sole purpose of the audience member's sexual arousal. I realize that many strippers claim to love their work and says it makes them feel very powerful and in control, but when you boil it down the purpose of stripping is to please the audience, not the performer.

My visit to Mary's Club was a much more positive experience. The women at the club seemed to be very much in charge of the situation. They chose their own music and outfits, and all of the staff members at the club were female except for one security guard. The women performers were also very supportive of one another (something I didn't expect to see). They complimented each other's music selections and dancing, and they brought each other snacks and drinks while the other was onstage. They even shared jokes between sets. Mary's Club is rumored to be an excellent place to work, where the women are paid well and even receive health benefits.

The performances themselves were also more inspiring than I had expected them to be. The dancers exhibited a supreme confidence and an enviable level of comfort and control over their bodies. Sure, they were dancing for the crowd, but on their own terms (at least as much as a performance like that can be on a stripper's own terms). The music and dance moves were much sexier and less crude than I had expected.

Overall, I feel very conflicted about sex work. On the one hand, it gives a woman an opportunity to make a good living and possibly feel sexy and confident. On the other hand, it reinforces the notion that women are sex objects who exist mainly to please men. I know there is a lot of literature out there about the strip club industry, but regrettably I am not very familiar with it. If anyone has any suggestions for readings or thoughts to add, I'd love to hear them.

The Female Brain

2007-04-05T16:55:00.000-07:00

Joy sent me a link earlier to this Bioephemera page. Apparently, the British softcover edition of Louann Brizendine's book The Female Brain has a different cover than the American hardcover edition. Here are the two covers:

As we can see, the US edition shows a woman's brain as a tangled phone cord, presumably to suggest that the female brain excels in communication skills (which, as I understand from Bioephemera and NPR is the main point of the book), and a tangled phone cord looks kind of like a brain, so all in all the image makes sense to me.

The British version of the book, on the other hand, shows the female brain as a purse full of cosmetics. We see lipstick, a compact, oh - and a bride and groom figurine. Because what the female brain does best is look pretty and think about marriage. The purse doesn't even really look like a brain, and it suggests that females are disorganized and superficial.

The real question I am left with is, why the change in cover image? The US version is sophisticated and respectful. It gives you the impression that, while the female brain may be different from the male brain, it is still valuable. (I haven't read this book, so I am only going on cover image here) The British version makes the female brain seem trivial, inconsequential, and basically useless. Did the publishing company not think that Britain could handle the US cover?

Assuming that the content is the same in both books, I am surprised that the cover image can convey such different messages. Perhaps the British cover more accurately reflects the book's contents, maybe the book hypothesizes that the female brain really is only good for make-up tips. Or maybe British people just devalue women even more than we do here in the US, and they would be too intimidated to purchase a book whose cover suggested that females had brains and not purses. Either way, I think the new cover is unfortunate.

On a related note, I am not sure how I feel about this book in general. According to reviews, it is a fairly scientific piece of work that does reveal some differences between male and female brains. However, my problem with it is that the non-scientific community seems to have grabbed a hold of it and is using it to make sweeping generalizations, e.g. "women are good multitaskers, but men are able to focus better, which is why men make better engineers". Even on one of my favorite NPR shows Wait Wait, Don't Tell Me they used the book as a springboard to jokes about women talking too much.

I certainly applaud research that sheds light on gender issues. The more we know (hopefully) the more we can dispel untruths about males and females. A book like this, though, seems to further drive a wedge between the sexes. It is not the fault of the authors (assuming the book is factual and respectful) but rather those who take the book and use it to put down females or males. I would prefer that we highlight similiarities between the genders, but since there are real differences as well, I just wish people could reflect on them without making generalizations. In a perfect world, I guess.

Yourspace or Myspace?

2007-04-04T17:09:00.000-07:00

That's right, Fun with Feminism is the proud parent of a brand new bouncing baby myspace page! It seems that many of you are too shy to participate in a discussion here in the blogosphere (which I totally understand, I myself rarely comment on blogs) so I thought that adding a myspace page might spice things up a bit.

Add Fun with Feminism to your myspace friends ASAP!

The Feminine Mistake

2007-04-02T20:41:00.000-07:00

The Feminine Mistake is a new book by Leslie Bennetts. It tackles the tough issue of whether or not women should choose to leave their careers if they have a family.

This is a difficult issue for many women, but according to Bennetts, staying home with the kids can turn out to be a real mistake (hence the book's title). Although the number of women who are staying home with their children has increased by 1.2 million in the last decade (no statistics were given for men), it is only more difficult for women to rejoin the workforce.

The women interviewed in Bennett's article have valid reasons for wanting to stay home with their children, to be sure. But what will those women do if their husbands and (sole providers) are suddenly unable to bring home the bacon? When a woman has been out of the workforce for years, she is unlikely to be rehired. If she is lucky enough to get employment at all, she will most certainly have to work for less money than she was before she left the workplace.

It is unfortunate that women are forced to make these kinds of choices. In a perfect world (or in Sweden) a woman would not be punished for choosing to take time off of work to raise a famliy. Of course, in a perfect world men and women would trade off child-rearing responsibilities, and women would not feel as much pressure to stay at home.

Bennetts says " think it’s time to tell women, especially young ones, the truth: The feminine mistake—building a grown-up life around the notion that someone will take care of you—is an outdated idea that could jeopardize your future. Wouldn’t you rather protect yourself against adversity and enjoy the rewards of work, money and success in addition to family life? Why should you settle for less?"

I have to say I agree. Any thoughts?

Balls to the Wall

2007-03-31T20:06:00.000-07:00

When a person does something to take charge of a situation, we say that person "has balls". When a person does something daring or exciting, we say he or she "has balls". Huevos, cojones, stones, nuts, gonads, you name it - if it can mean the word balls, someone will use it as a compliment.

So why balls? Why can't we say that someone has guts, or moxy, or gumption without sounding like a grandpa? And why must the only culturally acceptable phrase (balls) be so exclusive? Every time someone uses one of those phrases, they are excluding women and reinforcing the idea that men and male genitalia are superior to women.

I'm sure there are those of you out there who think that telling someone he (or she) has balls is no big deal. But think about it the other way around. Would you tell a man that he had ovaries, or breasts? My feminist instincts tell me that a man might be offended by that, and therefore it should be no different for women and balls.

The real problem here, of course, is that there doesn't seem to be an acceptable, gender neutral alternative compliment you can give someone when they do something bold and daring. So I propose we try to think of one and then sneak it into our everyday vernacular. Any suggestions?

You're an Asshole, Dennis Miller.

2007-03-28T11:33:00.000-07:00

Dear Dennis Miller,

I saw you last night on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart talking about the Duke rape case. I'm sure you thought you were being cute and funny, with your jokes about rape and all, but you were really being horribly offensive (and not at all funny, by the way). In case you don't remember exactly what it is you said last night, here are some quotes to refresh your memory:

"That woman [Crystal Gail Mangum, the accuser] is like the Louvre of DNA, everyone's been in there"

"She's like Barry Scheck's idea of Six Flags Amusement Park. You just get in there with a recorder and take the walking tour."

I'm sorry Mr. Miller, maybe I missed something. Since when does a woman's sexual history determine whether or not she has been raped? It seems to me that it shouldn't matter how many men she's had consensual sex with, she does not deserve to be raped by anyone. Let me repeat myself: SHE DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE RAPED BY ANYONE.

I am sick and tired of this fucking bullshit. People like you, Dennis Miller, are actively perpetuating the fallacy that sexually active women cannot be raped. Just because you consent to something with one person does not mean that you have consented to doing it with any and everyone who might have an erection at that moment. A woman (or a man) should be able to have sex with whomever she chooses and not have to worry that it might hurt her case if she gets raped later.

Please, Dennis Miller (and the rest of America): STOP BLAMING WOMEN FOR THEIR RAPES. It is not a woman's fault if she is raped, NO MATTER WHAT. It doesn't matter what she's wearing, or who she's had sex, or what her age or nationality is; she did not bring the rape on herself.

So cut the bullshit Dennis Miller. Rape isn't something to laugh at, and making tasteless jokes about a rape victim's sexual history is not only inappropriate and harmful, it is also juvenile and not at all funny. Instead of making offensive jokes that make it easier for assholes like you to rape women, why don't you go fuck yourself?

Yours Truly,

Fun with Feminism

We think you're cool... but we don't want anyone to know

2007-03-23T17:24:00.000-07:00

So I guess Beth Ditto is cool enough to top the NME "Cool List", but she's too fat and dykey to make it onto the cover. (This may be old news to some of you, but an internet search led me to believe that it wasn't discussed much - big surprise.)

NME (the British rock magazine) puts out a list every year of the top 25 coolest people. Ditto, the lead singer of the band The Gossip is the first female to ever top the list. She's also a lesbian, and she's overweight. This should all be good news, right? That a fat lesbian was named the coolest person in the music business by a traditionally male-centric magazine?

Well, it is good news. But it would be better news if the magazine hadn't backed out of putting Ditto on the cover because of her looks (I think she's hot, by the way). In a BUST magazine interview, popstar Lily Allen (also on the Cool List this year) said that "at the last minute, they ditched the photo [with Ditto] and put Muse on the cover... because they didn't think a fat lesbian from America on the cover would sell any copies". Wouldn't sell any copies? Look at how cool she is!

What won't sell any copies is NME's misogynistic bullshit. I bet that if an overweight man was named the coolest they would put his fat ass on the cover. I think this is outrageous, and completely hypocritical. If you are willing to put Beth Ditto on your list as number one, NME, you should put her on the fucking cover where she belongs.

Adrienne Rich

2007-03-21T16:16:00.000-07:00

Hello!

Thank you to everyone who has given me blog feedback so far. I've said it once and I'll say it again, I want to hear your opinions and make this blog something that all of us can enjoy. One suggestion that I received from my dear friend Kendall is that I include more quotes from influential feminists, to inspire us throughout the day. I think this is a great idea, and would like to kick it off with a quote given to me by Kendall herself:

"When a woman tells the truth she is creating the possibility for more truth around her." - Adrienne Rich

Adrienne Rich is a feminist poet who has done all kinds of inspirational things! I was just reading up on her a little bit (so as not to seem like an idiot for posting a quote by her and not having knowledge to back it up) and I found another quote by her about art: "[Art] means nothing if it simply decorates the dinner table of the power which holds it hostage."

From the little knowledge I have of her, she seems like a woman who makes her own rules and doesn't let society define her. She has refused awards and invitations by both President Clinton and President Bush because she disagrees with their politics and says that "the very meaning of art, as I understand it, is incompatible with the cynical politics of this administration."

How inspiring! It sounds like Rich is a woman who we can all admire as a fierce feminist who makes her own rules and tells the truth at all costs. Something to aspire to, if you ask me.

PS- if anyone else has quotes from feminists they admire, send them over to me and I will post them tout de suite!

YOU Make the Call!

2007-03-20T11:14:00.000-07:00

Hello readers! (I feel comfortable saying readers because my blog tracker tells me that even on slow days there is more than just one of you - hooray!)

Fun with Feminism has been up and running for two months now, and I would like to know how you think things are going. I intended this site to be a forum for ideas about what it means to be a self-identified feminist in today's post-everything society, and that means getting your input. If you have a minute over the next few days, I'd really appreciate your feedback about what you like so far in the blog and what you think could be improved upon. Please leave a comment on this post, or send me an email if you are too shy to let the internet see that you want an in-depth report done on butt plugs (which I'd be happy to do, by the way).

Here are some questions to get you started (I know this might seem like a hassle, but any feedback I can get would be great since I'm not doing this just for myself, I want everyone to get something out of it):

- Do you like the format of the blog (i.e. a post in the first person asking for comments)? If not, what would you like to see?

- Are there any topics relevant to modern feminists that you feel are being ignored?

- What posts have you enjoyed the most so far? The least?

- Do you click on the links in the blogroll? Do you think more should be added?

- How do you feel about the pictures? More? Less?

- If there were more interactive features on the blog, would you participate?

Obviously those are just prompts to get you started, feel free to tell me whatever you want about the blog. Like I said, I really want to make this a forum for all of us, which means I need your input. Thank you so much!

A Different Kind of March Madness

2007-03-19T12:13:00.000-07:00

Well, March is Women's History Month. I know we haven't done a lot here at Fun with Feminism to promote this month, primarily because creating a separate month for women's history separates women from the rest of the country (read: men). Also, Women's History Month implies that it is only important to celebrate women one month out of the year, and that men's accomplishments outnumber ours eleven to one. Why have one month set aside to celebrate women? To further marginalize us, that's why. Also, to alleviate some of the guilt felt by whoever the men (I'm assuming they are men) are who usually leave the accomplishments of women on the sidelines when they discuss U.S. history. It's okay, they can save any of that women's stuff for March. Never mind that we comprise more than half of the population in this country. Isn't it infuriating that patriarchy exists even when it is devaluing the majority? It drives me crazy.

Another reason that Women's History Month has been overlooked by this blog (until now, of course) is that even as a feminist, I don't know all that much about women's history. I never learned about it in school, and in my own readings it just hasn't been something I have focused on enough. I am supremely ashamed of this fact, but it is true. I don't know if I could name ten important historical figures that are women who were born before 1925. Sure, there isn't a lot recorded about them, but even if there was more information I probably wouldn't have read it.

I thought about profiling an important woman of history today, and my mind immediately went to Susan B. Anthony, since she is the most famous American historical female. After all, she is one of only two women (the other being Sacajewea) to have her likeness engraved on a coin (albeit an unpopular one). Then I realized that, beyond some of her achievements in the Women's Suffrage Movement, I didn't know a lot about our foremother Susan B. So I did a little (stress little) bit of research, and here is what I found out, in bullet point form for maximum ease:

* The B in Susan B. Anthony's name stands for Brownell
* Anthony was born on February 15, 1820, to a Quaker family
* She began her civil rights work in 1849, working with the temperance movement (helping abused women and children)
* Susan B. Anthony founded several organizations. Among them are the Woman's State Tempernce Society of New York, the
National Women's Suffrage Association, and the International Council of Women
* She published a journal called "The Revolution" with Elizabeth Cady Stanton that called for equal pay for women. It's motto
was "men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights and nothing less"
* After her arrest at the polls in Rochester, NY in 1872 (for fighting for women's right to vote) she was arrested and while
awaiting trial she began lecturing on women's suffrage
* Anthony died in 1906, before the passage of the 19th Amendment (women's right to vote) in 1920

What an awesome life. It really makes me think that I should be doing more with myself. If only, as young girls (and boys) we were exposed to more amazing women in the history books to inspire us all. Here is a quote from Anthony for extra inspiration, "I know of nothing but women and their disenfranchised".

Talkin' Bout My Sex Education...

2007-03-16T02:32:00.000-07:00

So tonight I had the great pleasure of seeing Dan Savage live and in person. It was fantastic! Although the show was put on in response to local uproar about the Savage Love sex column, it was really refreshing to see/hear Dan in person while he gave frank, funny advice about real sex. Hooray!

One of the topics that came up a few times during the evening was sex education. As Dan says, the schools are not providing it, and abstinence education only makes people dumber when it comes to sexual issues. How can you be smart about something that everyone tells you you should just avoid? The whole idea of abstinence education is fucked up to me. Who needs education about how to be abstinent? Kids have been abstaining from sex since birth, they need to know how to have sex instead. Here is a graphic that might help (okay not really, but it is amusing):

Anyway, the crowd wanted to know Dan's sage advice about we should do about the dismal state of sex ed in our country. His suggestion was that people point youngsters in the direction of helpful internet sites that will give them real answers about sex (and other things too, although they are probably mostly thinking about sex). He mentioned this site, Teen Wire, which is sponsored by Planned Parenthood. It looks pretty good to me, so if there are any teens out there surfing the web (or any older folks who have sex questions) check it out! Your parents don't even have to know.

Also, FYI teens and others, I am more than happy to research any questions any of you might have about sexual or feminist issues (they go hand in hand, after all). If our schools won't educate you, I will! So if you have a question that you want answered by a willing fun feminist with lots of internet time on her hands, hit me up!

You'll never get a date with all that labia!

2007-03-14T21:31:00.000-07:00

I was reading an article the other day that mentioned vaginoplasty, and I became curious. Vaginoplasty (from what I can tell) is cosmetic surgery performed on female genitalia. The word encompasses labia surgery, clitoral surgery, vagina surgery, etc. Sometimes the word labiaplasty is used as well. Now of course, some women have this surgery performed for legitimate, medical reasons, and I wholeheartedly support that.

However, many vaginoplasties are for cosmetic reasons. According to this plastic surgery web site, women choose vaginoplasty for two main reasons: they feel their vagina is too loose, or they don't like the look of their labia. Now I know it's hard for me to sit here and say that every woman should be happy with the genitals she has and that she shouldn't look to plastic surgery for answers. After all, I don't know what some of these women are going through.

I do know what the photos on the site look like, though, and to me these do not seem like women who need cosmetic surgery. Observe:

Who is telling these women that their labia are too long? Since when did labia become a problem that women even have to worry about? As if breasts and butts and hair and eyes and every other visible part of us weren't enough, now we have to make sure that our labia are even! Are you kidding me? It sounds like a joke. Here is what I imagine a labiaplasty surgery conversation would be like:

Crystal: "So Anya, how did your date go with Sam the other night?"

Anya: "It was okay, but I was so self conscious about my labia. The whole night I was worried that he was going to ask me about them, or that we might end up in bed together and he would see them. I couldn't relax."

Crystal: "What's wrong with your labia?"

Anya: "Well,one of them seems about a centimeter longer than the other one. I know, disgusting, right?"

Crystal: "Oh my God Anya, one of your labia is a centimeter longer than the other!? You need costly cosmetic surgery to feel better about your genitals!"

Anya: "You are so right. I am going to go to the plastic surgeon right away. My next date with Sam will be a whole lot better, now that I can feel confident in my labia!"

Where did these labia standards come from? My own hypothesis is that there aren't many places for young people out there to see real female genitals, and everyone is super uptight talking about them, so people get an unrealistic idea in their heads about what they're supposed to look like. I'm sure that the genitals shown in most pornography don't really help either. But labiaplasty? Vaginoplasty? It's just too much.

TampON it!

2007-03-12T12:10:00.000-07:00

Here is the text of an e-mail I just received:

"Women's shelters in the U.S. go through thousands of tampons and pads monthly. Assistance agencies generally help with expenses of "everyday" necessities such as toilet paper, diapers, and clothing, but one of the most BASIC needs is overlooked -feminine hygiene products.

Seventh Generation, a green paper products and cleaning products company, has a do-good attitude and will donate a box of sanitary products to a women's shelter in your chosen state - just for clicking the link. Talk about easy (and, yes, it is legitimate)!"

I know that if I am ever in the position to need to go to a women's shelter, feminine products are probably the last thing I'm going to want to worry about. Click here to donate tampons and pads in your state. It only takes a minute, and it can really help some people out! F+ (the highest fun feminist grade) to Seventh Generation for donating all of these necessities.

Hey! Lesbians!

2007-03-08T22:22:00.000-08:00

Sorry I have been slow to post these past few days. Believe it or not, I am actually busy with school! That should all slow down by next week though. In the meantime, here is a great quote brought to you by my good friend Marla:

"What does a woman have to do to get called a lesbian? Almost anything, sometimes nothing at all, but certainly anything that threatens the status quo, anything that steps out of role, anything that asserts the rights of women, anything that doesn't indicate submission and subordination. Assertiveness, standing up for oneself, asking for more pay, better working conditions, training for and accepting non-traditional (you mean a man's?) job, enjoying the company of women, being financially independent, being in control of one's life, depending first and foremost upon oneself, thinking that one can do whatever needs to be done, but above all, working for the rights and equality of women." Suzanne Pharr

In my experience, the above quote is true. Even the open-minded of us, if we are honest with ourselves, have probably equated some of the qualities mentioned above with lesbians. Why is this, I wonder? Let's break it down: we fun feminists work to support ourselves and our fellow women, so we must be lesbians. Hmmm... it sounds to me like the people saying that might be just a teensy bit threatened. Perhaps this awesome graphic will set them at ease:

So why is calling a woman a lesbian such an attack? Obviously there is nothing wrong with lesbians. I don't have a clear answer to this, but my guess is that the name-callers associate lesbians with the idea of being un-feminine (something I'm sure I don't have to tell you is a fallacy). For whatever reason, attacking a person's masculinity/femininity is still so taboo in our culture that it is one of the most cutting insults you can dish out. Does anyone have any ideas on why this is? My hunch is that it goes beyond simple homophobia and gets at something deeper. I'd love to hear everyone's opinions.

Doncha?

2007-03-06T12:16:00.000-08:00

So, there is going to be a new television show on the CW tonight called "The Pussycat Dolls Present: The Search for the Next Doll". Everyone's favorite pre-fabricated-girl-group-who-doesn't-write-their-own-music-or-lyrics-and-are-only-famous-for-being-sex-objects, The Pussycat Dolls, are looking for a new girl! Now, I know what you are thinking, Isn't there something a tad bit disgusting and disheartening about this glorified stripper troupe getting their own show wherein they can convert another female into a doll?

Well, according to the show's producers, you just don't know anything about female empowerment! The show's producers told The New York Times on Monday that "'Pussycat Dolls Present' is all about female empowerment". To illustrate, here is a photo of female empowerment:

Yay! I feel more powerful already! I'm so glad we've been fighting patriarchy for hundreds of years to achieve this type of power!

Seriously though, the idea that women are so empowered that they express it through revealing clothing, sexual objectification, big hair and slutty clothing is really frustrating. That is not empowerment! Putting yourself on display for men to ogle is not empowering! Pussycat Dolls, are you listening to me?!

Oh, and here is a choice quote from McG, one of the show's producers, about the Dolls' song "Doncha":
"Dismiss immediately whatever pornographic inferences such a performance might bring to mind, said McG, the music producer and film director who is an executive producer of “Pussycat Dolls Present.” The Dolls, McG said, are simply making a heartfelt inquiry: “It’s just like saying, ‘Don’t you wish your girlfriend could be free and comfortable in her own skin and do her own thing, like me?’"

Give me a break. "Doncha wish your girlfriend was hot/a freak/raw like me doesn't sound like a sassy gal who's comfortable in her own skin and doing her own thing to me. That girl would probably not try to steal another girl's boyfriend in the first place. Aagh! Pussycat Dolls! You are driving me crazy! Let's all close our eyes and wish for a group that represented real female empowerment to achieve this type of celebrity. You know, a group where the ladies play their own instruments, write their own songs, and don't answer to any bullshit horny male producers about how much T&A to show while they are humping a phallic muscle car. Doncha wish your girl groups were more like that?

Fuck you, Carl's Jr.

2007-03-01T23:24:00.000-08:00

Dear Carl's Jr.,

Your new advertising campaign for your Buffalo chicken sandwich is horrible and offensive. Not only do you have women being objectified in short skirts and tight shirts, but you are promoting the idea that all men will cheat on their girlfriends if given the chance. Also, that men would prefer to eat Buffalo wings and ogle at young women than spend time with their girlfriends. You are trying to make women feel like they are not attractive enough to hold their boyfriends' attention (and that looks are all that matters), not even when the competition is a plate of greasy bar food. You are trying to make men feel like they should be seeking out a girlfriend who looks like a centerfold, otherwise they are settling for the ugly girl who doesn't like Buffalo wings. In case you need your memory jogged, click here to view the ad to which I am referring.

This message is not only offensive, it's also a little played out in my opinion. How many times do you have to drill the message into our heads that our boyfriends want to leave us for a more attractive woman? We've heard that shit before, in just about every sitcom and misogynistic advertisement on television. If this is the message you advertisers feel you have to use to sell your products (because no one would buy them based on their nonexistent merits) then why can't we at least occasionally see a woman in the power seat? Are you so threatened by women in real life that you must continually subordinate us in your advertising?

I'm tired of your bullshit ads that seek to dichotomize men and women for the sake of a fatty, disgusting sandwich. Your Paris Hilton carwash ad, and your whole campaign of men ignoring their girlfriends/wives because they were pigging out on your food too loudly to hear what other people were saying, and every other ad you've put out in recent memory are doing more damage to America than was done when your restaurant gave people e-coli. Your ads are offensive, they are disgusting, and they are making people fat and unhappy.

Don't drink and drive, pee on me!

2007-02-27T15:04:00.000-08:00

Hello Fun Feminists!

To reduce drunk driving accidents in New Mexico, advertisers have introduced a new product: talking urinal cakes. That's right, the urinal cakes talk to men (who, according to this article on the subject commit three times as many drunk driving infractions as women) and tell them they have had too much to drink.

All of this is well and good I suppose, although a little weird. After all, no one likes drunk drivers, and if a talking pee receptacle makes drunk men stop and think, then more power to them. Here is the rub, though: the urinal cakes speak in a sexy female voice. They say things like "hey there, big guy. Having a few drinks?"

I am assuming that the advertisers who came up with this idea thought that a sexy female voice would get the attention of the pissing offenders. After all, what's sexier than a talking urinal? But am I wrong to have a problem with this whole thing? The intoxicated men are PEEING on the female voice! That's so degrading! The advertisers are using urinals as a way to turn women into sex objects. Urinals, for God's sake! Is nothing safe?

To me this whole thing seems like it's encouraging men to pee on sexy women's faces. Would the voice have to be sexy? Does it have to come directly out of the bowl of the urinal, where the pee goes? The more I think about it, the more upsetting it is to me. Objectifying women (or men) is not funny, and it shouldn't be an advertising tactic, even if it does get men to stop drinking and driving.

"Hey there, big guy. Want to degrade me by peeing on my face?"

What becomes of the broken hearted?

2007-02-26T21:23:00.000-08:00

Why is it that, no matter how feminist we become, nothing hurts worse than a break up? I have always thought that an important part of being a feminist was independence, that the love of a man (or woman) shouldn't be the end-all be-all of a feminist's existence. Shouldn't we care more about our careers, our education, our beliefs, our selves?

I took an impromptu poll of some strong women in my life, and nearly all of them cited a break up as their worst life experience. These are women who have been through family crises, health crises, identity crises, and any other number of crises you can think of. So why does the break up experience trump them all? Is it the lack of control? The feeling of failure? The insecurity? Or is it because, no matter how far we progress in other areas, we still need the love of a man to feel like a successful woman? These are not rhetorical questions, I would really like to hear your opinions on this.

So why do break ups hurt so much, and why can't feminism stop the pain? Would a true feminist just move on, because she didn't wrap her identity up in her romantic life? Can we be feminists and have romantic relationships?

I'm thinkin' triple X

2007-02-21T11:53:00.000-08:00

Who's ready for some PORN?!

That's right. I said it. Porn. I know this is a controversial issue for us feminists, and it should be. There is a lot of porn out there that subordinates and even abuses women. On the other hand, there is porn out there that values women and is even made for women (What? Porn for women? That's crazy talk! We just like to lie there while he gets turned on by cumming on our faces... right?).

The problem is, how do you, as a classy feminist, sift through the offensive smut and find something sexy? Ms. Naughty's Porn Blog for Women, that's how! Ms. Naughty reviews porn, articles, sex advice columns, and sex toys and sorts through the garbage to give women what they want. There is erotic fiction, photos, politics, and even celebrity gossip. What more could you ask for?

For the girl who could ask for more, there is For the Girls, an erotic web site for women (also by the woman who writes Ms. Naughty). This site picks up where Ms. Naughty leaves off, with videos, photos, erotica, and more. For the Girls is a subscription web site, but you can take a tour of some of the videos for free. I am not a subscriber, but I did scope the free stuff, and it seems like the porn really does cater to women. I didn't see any disgusting cum shots, or any women pretending to be super-aroused after getting jackhammered from behind for 30 seconds. Also, they have a section of male stripteases, and a masturbation video section (featuring the biggest dick I have ever seen!)

In my opinion, being open and honest about sexual desires is one of the most difficult challenges a feminist faces. I am blushing a little bit just writing this post. But the more I talk to other sassy ladies (and men) like myself, the more I realize that we're all in the same boat. We have sexual desires, but we've been made to feel embarrassed about them. We're curious about porn, but we are afraid to admit it half the time, and we're turned off by the way most porn is made for men. That's why I think it's important that we keep talking about all of this, even if it makes us feel a little self-conscious. It's okay to watch porn! It's okay to masturbate! It's okay to visit a sex blog! Say it loud! We're sexual and proud!

Vagina Straightjacket, pt. 2

2007-02-19T19:09:00.000-08:00

I was at the bar the other night, and I was incensed after reading this chastity belt article (see below for my feelings on this article, and add yours!)

Anyway, the topic of conversation quickly turned to chastity belts. Who uses chastity belts? What are they made of? How do they work? How do you clean them? I vowed to get to the bottom of this tricky issue.

According to our good friend wikipedia, "a chastity belt is a locking item of clothing designed to prevent sexual intercourse and possibly masturbation. The purpose may also be to protect the wearer from rape or temptation".

Modern chastity belts are most often one of these two types:
-The Cage: a metal or plastic sheath that encloses the male genitals and prevents stimulation and erection. These chastity belts appear to be for men only, and fasten with a padlock. Handily enough, cage chastity belts come in metal-detector safe models, so they can be worn while travelling. Here is a photo of a cage:

-The Florentine: this style is a belt worn around the hips with a shield running between the legs to cover the genitals. The article doesn't specify, but I would assume this model is made for women, because it would be difficult for a man to have his penis pinned flat against his body. The florentine belt must allow for urination and defecation, so there is usually a slot in the front and back, large enough for bodily waste, but not for any type of penetration. These belts are usually made out of metal, leather, or a combination of the two, and secure with a padlock. Some "security" (read: forced) models have a recessed lock so they cannot be removed with bolt cutters. Here is a photo of a florentine chastity belt:

The wikipedia article says that long-term chastity belts should be removed every so often to be cleaned of bodily fluids and skin. I am assuming that if the chastity belt is forced on someone, the person with the ability to remove the belt would be the one to clean it (and probably wouldn't).

Although many people purchase chastity belts for sex play (such as consensual BDSM or erotic sexual denial) there are people all over the world who are forced to wear chastity belts to prevent rape, infidelity, or premarital sex.

You can read more about chastity belts (including history, trivia, and how to buy them) by clicking here.

Vagina Straightjacket, pt. 1

2007-02-19T18:50:00.000-08:00

Happy Presidents' Day!

My good friend Marla e-mailed me this article the other day. Because it's short, I am going to paste the full text for you:

"Women should wear chastity belts to prevent sex crimes" (from the Khaleej Times)
(AP)

16 February 2007

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia - Women should wear chastity belts to prevent rape, incest and other sex crimes, a prominent Islamic cleric in northern Malaysia was quoted as saying Friday.

Abu Hassan Din Al Hafiz, speaking in the northern state of Terengganu, said chastity belts could protect women from a growing number of sex crimes in Malaysia, The Star newspaper reported.

The best way to avert sex perpetrators is to wear protection,’ Abu Hassan told a crowd of followers. My intention is not to offend women but to safeguard them from sex maniacs.’

The cleric said sex crimes had increased in the region of late. We have even come across a number of unusual sex cases where even senior citizens and children are not spared,’ he said.

Figures on sexual assaults in the northern state were not immediately available.

Religious leaders in Malaysia’s conservative north have in the past blamed sexual attacks on women wearing provocative clothing and make up. Local Islamic women’s groups and other organizations have routinely criticized those views.

Abu Hassan was not immediately reachable for comment.

Muslims make up about 60 percent of Malaysia’s population. The remaining 40 percent are Buddhists, Hindus, Christians and a small minority of indigenous people who practice animism.

What??? Chastity belts for rape victims? Because it is obviously the woman's responsibility to prevent men from raping her, and not the man's responsibility to NOT COMMIT RAPE. This cleric wants to punish women by forcing them to wear what is basically a vagina straightjacket. One which I am assuming the woman would not be able to remove, as it sounds as if the chastity belt would be required. What if she wants to have consensual sex? What if she just doesn't want to wear the f-ing chastity belt?

The ongoing fallacy that rape is a woman's problem and a woman's responsibility is outrageous. Any woman anywhere in the world should be able to wear whatever she wants and not have to feel responsible for preventing her rape. Men commit 99% of reported rapes (according to M.A.R.S.- Men Against Rape and Sexism) yet the responsibility in many eyes still falls to the woman when it comes to prevention. Worse still, many women who are raped are told they deserved it, or that it was their fault they were raped and not the fault of the men who raped them.

Sorry to not use a more creative term, but this is fucked up. Blaming women for being rape victims is horrible and offensive, and no woman should be forced into a genital prison just because the men in her community can't keep it in their pants.