Super Jive's blog

Superheroes and Women: How About Some More Women Superheroes, Already?

2008-07-04T16:27:51-05:00

Summer brings a slew of superhero movies. This summer we have Hancock, The Dark Knight, and brought to you by the letter "I": Iron Man, Incredible Hulk Part Two, Electric Smasharoo and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, among others, such as Mans Doing Serious Man Things and Man vs. Creepier Mans with some Hot Twenty-five Year Old Actresses Thrown In. Do you enjoy seeing superhero movies? I will admit that I love action and used to love them until I started becoming critical of the imbalance of strong female characters. Now I watch fewer of them, and cringe my way through.

Recently, the Alliance of Women Film Journalists had a discussion of

...the current crop of superheroes and their movies, their appeal to and
treatment of women, and the root of the genre’s importance in
contemporary culture. We look at how women play in superhero movies and
whether their roles have changed in this summer’s crop.

The results were pretty interesting, if a little unsurprising. They asked the respondents which women they would like to see directing a superhero movie, but not about which character should feature in one (if they should feature at all), which I think is a more relevant question, since the presence of and the way female characters are portrayed on screen will probably have more of an impact on an audience than who is directing the film. As far as I know, there are no female superhero movies slated for this year. The AWFJ asked their respondents why recent female superhero movies (Elektra (2005) and Catwoman (2004)) have failed, here is a sampling of the responses from the same article:

“They were bad because they had poor scripts and not very good actresses,“ says [Laura] Emerick. And, “they were made by people who don’t understand women, comics or movies,” comments [Nell] Minow. And, “they played to centerfold fantasies rather than female empowerment,” according to [Carrie] Rickey.

Okay, fair enough. This made me wonder: what do women want in superhero movies? Do we really want a female lead? Would we really have more naked guy action and less technobabble? I like the idea of more women as superheroes, and less as a tacked-on, bosom-heaving plot point, staked to the nuclear warhead and rescued moments before it goes off. "Oh creepy masked hero with apparent psychological issues! Now that you have saved me my panties are just flinging themselves off!"

As for the opposite of panty-flinging, what about platonic relationships in the superhero genre? It seems like we've got beloved mom or babe. Or evil babe.

Kalinara over at Pretty, Fizzy Paradise calls for a She-Hulk movie, which sounds like it would ROCK.

Jen's a great heroine. She's got a simple, easy to follow origin:
(timid lawyer, shot trying to help her cousin, got blood transfusion,
becomes giant, green and awesome), she's charming, smart and funny. And
she makes a fascinating contrast to the Hulk, because for her, the
transformation is a source of strength rather than an out of control
curse. It allows her to free herself from her own fear and anxiety and
embrace her confidence and inner power.

How great is that? A movie that could feature smashing and strong female empowerment? I confess up until now I thought that She-Hulk, much like Ms. Pac-Man, was just "Hulk with a Bow" so to speak (sorry, Ms. Pac-Man fans).

A Wonder Woman movie has been in pre-production since 2001, apparently. Even Joss Whedon tried to write it, and walked away. I loved Lynda Carter as Wonder Woman when I was little, and would love to see a movie featuring her. Ragnell says that many call her a "cipher" and therefore hard to write, but counters with

Hell if I know who she is, but I know who she isn't and I know she knows who she is.

It's
not the usual characterization for a woman. According to what I've seen
of women in fiction, we're unsure of ourselves. We're uncomfortable
with ourselves. We're uncomfortable with our bodies. We're
uncomfortable with our sexuality. We don't know what we're capable of.
We second-guess ourselves. We surprise ourselves. We hate ourselves. We hurt ourselves and the people around us. Society seems designed
to make us that way and that's what I see in most female characters.
Every woman's story in fiction seems to be a coming into herself.
Learning those traits.

Wonder Woman is not supposed to be like that. Wonder Woman is supposed to already be the woman other women in fiction learn to be. She's at the point where you are done working on your inside and ready to work on the outside world.

Using this interpretation of her character, could Wonder Woman be a good model for young women? A self-actualized, grown-assed women who can fight baddies using her wits, strength, and experience? Hell yes. Perhaps it's easier to write a character, like Batman, in some kind of psychic torment, or a woman as a crude stereotype, such as overly-sexualized or helpless. But I would like to see the Wonder Woman movie come to fruition.

So, please, Hollywood, give us some more starring roles for superwomen. And I don't mean like Super Ex-Girlfriend, which should be called Super Unhinged Stalker, and no more squealing helpless babes. I see strong women in my everyday life, and I try to be a strong model for my daughters. So why is it so hard to find in the superhero movies?

SJ also wishes she had her own rubber catsuit over at I, Asshole.

To Edit or Not to Edit: How Do You Read Older Literature to Children?

2008-06-27T20:39:54-05:00

I think it started with Junie B. Jones, the star of a book series by Barbara Park. A person (who shall remain nameless to protect the guilty) gave my then four-year-old daughter a copy of Junie B. Jones and a Little Monkey Business, a story about a girl who was my daughter's age who was about to gain a new sibling, just as my child was at the time. Junie B. is brash and unstoppable, and is far from perfect, which I thought was a good thing for my daughter to see. My daughter greatly enjoyed the series, but after a few of the books, I began to absolutely HATE Junie B.

For those who haven't experienced her, Junie B. is quite the controversial character in children's literature. Some people adore her, for the reasons I mentioned. Others go crazy about her poor grammar and tendency to flout the rules in the face of her parents' or teachers' authority, which is the point I got to myself. I couldn't take any more of her screaming in ALL CAPS or calling people stupid. I give my kids a lot of credit. I think they are absolutely intelligent enough to realize that Junie B. is not a model for good behavior, and it does provide opportunities to talk about the right way to handle a situation. I began to suspect the author was on a one-woman mission to murder my love of the English language and children's literature. Much like a consistently bratty kid, though, I did not want Junie B. around our house.

Having given Junie B. the boot, I decided to see what my old friend Ramona Quimby was up to. After being bludgeoned with Barbara Park's boring prose and overdosing on her bratagonist, Beverly Cleary was like waking up to spring after six months of dreary grey slush. Ramona made mistakes, sometimes terrible ones, but she seemed to actually learn from them. She realized that there were other people in the world, and they had problems, too. She seemed like a live person, rather than the cardboard cutout that was Junie B. Jones.

My kid got to be VERY enthusiastic about Ramona. We didn't devour them all at once, but instead would pick them up every couple months or so. Finally, we ran out of Ramona books, but I was enjoying revisiting Cleary so much, we branched out when I noticed a copy of Henry and Beezus at a used bookstore. My daughter was enthusiastic about seeing Klickitat Street from another angle--the perspective of a boy, Henry Huggins. I had not been inspired to read his stories when I was younger, because in the Ramona books he is portrayed as a dutiful dullard, crabbing at Ramona in his role as a crossing guard. Surely a whole book dedicated to him would be more interesting?

Well, it was, but not in the way I expected. The relationship between Ramona and her sister made something niggle around in my brain. Beazus was so orderly, virtuous, girlish. Ramona was often criticized by her sister or portrayed as the bad or difficult one because she acted in ways that are stereotypically attributed to boys. I didn't feel like it was a big enough of a deal to bring it up with her while reading Ramona, but the sexism in Henry and Beezus hit me like a brickbat.

Repeatedly, Henry complains about Beezus on their adventures together. I was reading out loud when I came across this phrase:

Until they reached the Glenwood shopping district, Henry almost thought that girls were good for something after all.

Later, Beezus bids on a bike for Henry at an auction and wins. Henry is displeased because the bike she wins for him turns out to be a girl's bike. He concludes:

What could you expect when you went to an auction with a girl?

What should I do with this? Should we stop reading it? Should I edit it, as I had done with books in the past? My daughter is seven now, and is beginning to see the world as a grey place, instead of a black-and-white one.

I decided to read the phrases out loud, with sufficient space around them so she could jump in, and she often does with questions or comments. "What is he talking about?" she said. "There is nothing wrong with girls." Whew. Score a point for gender equality, there. This book opened many conversations on sexism and equality. We discussed the fact that Cleary, a woman, was writing this propaganda about girls. By the end we had decided that Henry was a chump and we wanted to throw the book across the room.

A few days later, we picked up Misty of Chincoteague, written by Marguerite Henry in 1947. Here was the same question again after the main female character in the book was depicted as weepy and emotional simply because she was a girl. To read or to edit? I chose to edit these sentences out this time, since they added nothing to the story and were small asides.

The Henry Huggins experience was a positive one, but it made me think: do other parents edit books? Of course they do. Deborah of In a Strange Land writes, on reading Prince Caspian to her girls:

I did a fair bit of editing as I read the books to the girls, changing
words and phrases so that I didn’t end up reading misogyny out loud to
my lovely daughters.

Was this a good policy, I wondered, to Bowdlerize the books I was reading to my kids unless I was ready to have a thirty-minute discussion? Karen Knows Best reflects on looking back at the Sweet Valley High series and is shocked at what she finds: racism, sexism, and encouraging anorexia? So maybe editing was the answer? Another option that I missed until recently was the fact that Judy Blume had recently edited her own books to keep up with modern times.

What do you think, people who read to children? Do you change things on the fly, or avoid those books all together? Is it right to edit, or do we take the opportunity to talk about complicated issues? What would Henry Huggins say? Probably that I was being a royal pain about this, just like a girl.

Twitter Tweaker to Twitter Quitter: Confessions of a Former Twitter Addict

2008-06-20T14:15:41-05:00

For about six months, I used the popular social networking bloglet service, Twitter. I started Twittering as an experiment, because it looked like fun and like another way to make connections online. In the end, though, it almost ruined my (blog) life.

To take a step back in case you haven't followed it, Twitter is a networking service in which you can enter your thoughts, opinions, or ideas, up to 140 characters. It has evolved to allow the user to drop in links as well, which are automatically tinyurled for your clicking pleasure. People use it to stay in touch with little updates, or to make new friends. It can be embedded your website so others can read your micro-thoughts, or you can read or make updates via email, instant message, or phone.

By this point many of us tech-happy people probably have either used Twitter ourselves, or we know Twerps (yes, I know the preferred term is "Tweeps," a word that implies that your friends are your "Twitter peeps") who make updates, or "Tweets." When I decided to jump in, I jumped in all the way. I updated three to ten times a day with haikus, links to weird sites I'd found, replies to other friends, replies to replies, and my up-to-the-minute thoughts on wombats or Carrot Top.

I had some really good experiences with Twitter. I got little glimpses into my meatspace friends' lives that I wouldn't have otherwise, especially friends who live far away. A friend in Wyoming would talk about trivialities that she would never discuss with me on the phone, because to do so might seem tedious or boring when talk time is precious and more about a true exchange of ideas and opinions. But I liked to read that she had had Thai food for dinner for the third night in a row. A friend in Scotland linked to local events or wrote about things that she would never mention on her blog, which made me feel like I had a better idea of her daily life, over the edited-for-laughs events on her blog. I was connected differently to local friends as well. Spontaneous lunches were hatched because someone mentioned they had a craving for sushi around 10:30 or so, completely avoiding the email volley of "let's make a date soon."

Other people on Twitter who I followed but did not know in real life could be funny or interesting. It was a source of entertaining snacklets that I could dip in and out of at will. I had a stable of about 100 people all looking to upstage, entertain, or connect with each other, and it was fun watching the comments fly past. I was pulled into some blogs and other pieces of writing I never would have accessed otherwise.

There was also the feeling of being part of a big hive of people. You are part of a community that is constantly moving, buzzing, and changing, and that can be a very seductive feeling. However, if I walked away for twelve hours or so, I would feel overwhelmed on returning, which was the beginning of my realization that Twitter was not for me. "Justmylife" has a similar experience with her Twittering:

Now, I Twitter too....not as much. But I am following 96 people over there and 120 follow me....Wait where did all these people come from? I didn’t know I didn’t follow everyone who is following me. *Note to self.... find out who these people are.* But with Twitter, it is hard to follow all the comments. I have gone back pages looking for the original message. But I still can’t seem to give it up.

(As an aside, Justmylife also talks about jumping ship to Plurk--on to the next big thing. I haven't tried it yet, and probably won't, but points against for using the word "emo-ness" on the main page. Sorry, guys.)

This is a common theme in the discussion about electronic communication tools: their addictiveness. What is everyone doing right now? Don't you want to know what I am doing? Ooh, who friended me today? I have nothing to Twitter. I have Twitter block. Should I Twitter that I have Twitterblock? If I keep posting links to Super Mario Brothers porn will everyone unfriend me? These questions kept me up at night, and kept me clicking. I got an anxious feeling when the error screen came up telling me that Twitter was down. OMG, Twitter is down! I wish I could Twitter about how inconvenient that was. Youtubebutante LisaNova made a video about Twitter addiction that struck an uncomfortable chord with me.

I think in some spheres, there is also a lot of divergence about what Twitter is good for, and what you want your feed page to look like. Some people who I friended used Twitter to spam their twerps with blog updates or as some other self-promotion tool. I understand that this is a legitimate use of social networking devices, but really, if I want to read your blog, I probably have the URL memorized. Or at least you are in my blog feed.

Speaking of blogs, my site, which I have been hammering away at for almost eight years now (eep) was suffering in the shadow of Twitter. If a good, well-thought out blog post is a night making sweet, sweet love to Al Green, then Twittering was thirty seconds in the art supply closet huffing glue. Quick, dirty, and when you tumble out of there you can't remember jack and you have a sharp headache.

With blogging, I could sift through my archives like a diary and see where I was and what I was doing with meaningful context and reflection. Much like a diary, I could see patterns of my successes and failures. I could cringe at awkward phrasing, and laugh at something that I had forgotten I'd written three years before. Since I post pictures, I could also see cute haircuts and fashion disasters, or be horrified that I had posted myself eating bacon cake. What the Hell was I thinking?

I started losing some of these snapshots of my life because the energy needed to create them was being funneled into the Twittersuck. I was blogging much less, and I missed it. I think I realized I was getting to the breaking point with it sometime in February at about two in the morning. I am often sleepless here in Seattle in January and February because of the low levels of light (something, interestingly, I discovered about myself through blogging for several years about cleaning or writing papers at three a.m. in the winter months.) I was having a tweetversaion with this guy in New York who I only knew through Twitter. We were batting one-liners back and forth because he was up very early, I was up very late, and no one else was around. What was the point of all this? Around the same time, I had read about Ariel Meadow Stallings' challenge to spend 52 nights "unplugged," which made me think about doing some unplugging of my own.

I told myself that if I pulled the plug I would lose these new connections I had made to people who were previously unknown, or who I didn't know as well. This was real. I was in the thick of the shiny new world! But I asked myself, what could I say in 140 words that was so REAL? "I ate a peanut butter sandwich." Really? Who cares? I didn't even care. Is this a special memory I would reflect on in a year's time, if I went back through the archives? Would I even go through my archives? I wasn't sure.

I deleted my account a few days later, and after the twitching (Twitchering?) had died down, I went back to having more in-depth, meaningful conversations with people. I got back into writing longer essays, instead of puking out microthoughts. I read longer pieces that people had written, instead of seeing them say good morning and good night to me. It works for me, and I won't go back.

What do you think? Still love Twitter? Did you quit it? Never start? Dashing on to Plurk? Let's hear it.

SJ also writes in depth at I, Asshole.

Father Knows Best: Images of Fathers in Popular Culture

2008-06-13T20:18:02-05:00

Images of fathers surround us on television, in the movies, and through celebrity photography. Portrayals of good dads, bad dads, absent dads, well-meaning-but-feckless dads are everywhere. For Father's Day, I thought it would be fun to look at some of the iconic fathers who appear in popular culture.

First, I have to say that taking a closer look at fathers in our culture immediately makes two things apparent. The first was that there are a lot of fictional intact families that follow an unbreakable pattern apparently set out by the Big Book of Giving TV Audiences What We Think They Want. Mom is hard-working, patient, and wise. (This is great!) She often plays the straight character to dad, who is lazy, perplexed by his children, and schlubby, the latter of which is often called sharply into focus by the fact that mom is often attractive, fit, and better-dressed. (This is not-so-great.)

The second obvious theme that emerges is that if a father is competent, it is because the mother has died or is otherwise absent. What message does this send? That mothers are actually unnecessary, though they may be missed? That fathers can only assume responsibility if no one else is available?

That said, there are some fathers who do fall outside the normal expectations set forth by the media, which makes them memorable icons in my book.

1. Family Man Cliff Huxtable, portrayed by Bill Cosby on The Cosby Show, 1984-1992.

Despite some of the controversies that surround Cosby in recent years, his character Heathcliff Huxtable is still a breath of fresh air compared to other cliched sitcom dads. Cliff had a passionate and loving relationship with the mother of his children and took a hands-on approach to raising his kids by talking with them and taking care of them. Cliff was a doctor with a private practice out of the family home, and a few scenes of his interactions with his children were set in his office, showing that he was sometimes available to his kids even during his workday.

Cliff encourages his youngest daughter to eat her broccoli.

2. Regular Guy Dan Conner, portrayed by John Goodman on Roseanne, 1988-1997.

While the show focussed around its star, Roseanne Barr, her character's husband was a significant and strong part of the show. Barr's character is outspoken, feminist, and appears in most matters to be the head of the household, but Dan Conner makes himself heard on matters that are important to him, ceding to his wife at other times. Dan handles what could be tense confrontations with humor and agility. Dan is another TV dad who is involved with his children, and is especially close to his tomboyish daughter. His character was written to be imperfect, but still as a good model of a husband and father.

Dan gives Roseanne a special Mothers' Day Present.

3. Gil Buckman, portrayed by Steve Martin in Parenthood, 1989.

Gil Buckman is under a lot of pressure. His wife is newly and surprisingly pregnant with their fourth child, his son is diagnosed with emotional problems, and his extended family is experiencing turmoil as well. Gil is torn between wanting to have a successful career and not becoming a workaholic. In the end, Gil manages to create some balance in his life and achieve peace for the moment. Martin's character is likable, caring, and concerned about repeating the mistakes of his family's past, something that many people struggle with.

4. Brad Pitt, appearing as himself.

I know very little about Brad Pitt, except the fact he seems to have an interest in architecture and children. I can't speak to whether he is missing a "sensitivity chip" or not, but I do know what the celebrity photos show: Brad Pitt holding, carrying, talking to, and playing with, his children. His time and attention have got to mean a lot to them, as it does to any child. I think it's always nice to see fathers parenting.

5. Jack Arnold, portrayed by Dan Lauria on The Wonder Years, 1988-1993.

Anyone who's seen The Wonder Years knows that this is a sharp left turn on an otherwise cheerful list. Jack Arnold was often serious, gruff, and would reply to his son Kevin's questions about life with one-word answers. He was not a goofy dad, or the family boob. However, again and again I have met people who say that that this one fictional father seems real to them because he reminds them of their own fathers, realistic and with rough edges. Kevin asks Jack if he's "ever thought about his life" and Jack turns from the TV and replies, "Huh?" Occasionally he would surprise his son, by reminding him that he had been through some of the same things, like in the following clip.

Jack talks to Kevin about breakups.

6. Penguins. As in, penguins.

Over the past few of years, Hollywood has been seized by a penguin zeitgeist--a pengeist? Starting with March of the Penguins, and followed by Happy Feet and Surf's Up. Penguins are often mentioned as one of the few animals where the male of the species cares for the young as much as the female, by tending the egg and watching the chicks. This is portrayed in Happy Feet sweetly as the father penguins are shown dutifully, happily, and uncomplainingly caring for their offspring. Even if they are cartoons and a different species than us, penguins in popular culture are another example of outstanding fathers.

Penguin chicks noodle around.

Photo credits: 1:2:3:4:5:6.

SJ writes at I, Asshole and will be feeding the father in her life special omelettes and too much bacon on Sunday.

Working In the Shadow of the Magic Kingdom: The Experience of Disney Employees and Interns

2008-06-06T18:13:41-05:00

Recently, television actor Brandon Hillock told his story about portraying feisty pirate Jack Sparrow at Disneyland. (As an aside, after reading the article and doing some quick sleuthing, I was pleased to discover that Hillock played "Deputy Sacks," one of my favorite characters on cancelled cult television show Veronica Mars.) I found his story fascinating, since I have always wondered what the deal is with "those people" who are in the fuzzy suits or under the makeup.

Hillock did not disappoint. He dished on the expectations of a Disney characters, as well as the restrictions. Female park visitors threw themselves at him. Characters are not supposed to interdate, but Hillock hooked up with a hot Ariel. He was dinged for hanging out with a Pluto in-costume, as characters from different "lands" are not to intermingle. Eventually, Hillock was fired, but he concedes he crossed the line at points:

I'll be honest: I didn’t follow all the Disney rules. I played Jack like he was real, and if a woman flirted, I would flirt back. Women loved it. But there were also women who would have too many beers at California Adventure or smuggle in alcohol you could smell on their breath, women who were clearly sloshed.

Hillock was a "regular" employee, but many employees are part of the College Program, a paid internship program for college students that seeks to teach transferable real-life skills, offers educational courses, and provides networking opportunities. Critics of the program say that the college program participants (CPers for short) are little better than indentured servants who take the place of unionized workers who make a fairer wage:

But aside from giving interns valuable experience, the program is a relatively cheap source of labor for Disney and sometimes worries the unionized workers, although union officials approved the program when it began almost 25 years ago.

“None of them are paid properly,” Ed Chambers, president of United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 1625, said of the college interns. “They’re like indentured slaves ... They live on Disney property. They eat Disney food. They take Disney transportation.”

Most of the college interns earn $6.25 an hour, well below the more than $11 an hour pay for a veteran employee performing the same tasks. Interns also don’t receive any pension or health care benefits like regular workers.

Since California minimum wage is currently eight dollars an hour, and about one-seventh of Disney employees are CPers, it seems there may be some truth to this claim. Further, some CPers claim they were stuck with less-than-desirable jobs such as burger flipping that they believed would not further their careers:

Common student jobs — or “roles,” as Disney calls them — include working in quick-service food and beverage; full-service food and beverage; merchandise; operations, which includes attractions, park greeters and parking; custodial; lifeguarding and hospitality. The pay is $6 an hour.

There is no set minimum wage in Florida, but $6 an hour is less than the minimum wage in eight states, according to U.S. Department of Labor statistics.

[Emilie] Norvell worked in quick-service food and beverage at Disney-MGM Studios during Spring 2001.
“I worked selling ice cream at `The Dip Cart,´ also known as `Hell on Earth,´” she said. “They made it sound so glamorous, but it was not what it seemed.”

Still, others are very happy with their Disney experiences. Shannon, a Duke alum, characterized her experience as:

...[A]wesome, definetely one of those life experiences that if you have the opportunity to do you have to do it. I met some great people, made some wonderful friends out of it, and hey I'm staying at Disney so it can't be all that bad!!

As of 2003, she was a management intern for Disney.

Other students have had very positive experiences as well, and recount their internships positively, such as Allan, who chronicled his six-month stint in "Working for the Mouse," and Vanessa ("My WDW College Experience!!!"), who came from Puerto Rico to do a three-month internship.

I saw positive stories and negative ones, with very little in between. Maybe people who have had mediocre experiences just aren't motivated to write about it? Perhaps this quote from a former intern explains the varying attitudes best:

I think there are three kinds of people that do the WDW College Program: Disney-lovers who jump at the chance to work in the Parks and maybe start a Disney career; students who think the idea of getting college credit for a semester in the Florida sun at the "Happiest Place on Earth" sounds like a lot more fun than regular class at their school, even though they don't feel especially drawn to Disney; students who have heard "through the grape-vine" that Vista Way is an intense place to party and "get laid" and they don't care about Disney at all.

Brandon Hillock's Jack Sparrow exposé offered a fascinating glimpse into a reality most of us can only speculate about, and surely that's just the tip of the iceberg. As a curious onlooker, I hope this will encourage more people to come forward and offer a glimpse of what punching the clock as pirate or a princess is like.

Related Items:

Jyl and Angelica are two students who are entering the college program this month. They are separately blogging their experiences at "Jyl's Walt Disney World College Program Experience" and "So There's This Bench...."

Six Disney Secrets You'll Wish You Never Read

********

SJ also writes at I, Asshole, and will not admit that she shoplifted from the a Disney giftshop when she was forced to go there with her parents when she was fifteen.

Black Velvet Art for the Sexy Home

2008-05-23T13:04:06-05:00

Ah, black velvet art. I remember when I saw my first velvet painting in real life at my dusty local Goodwill about fifteen years ago. I was enchanted. The room seemed to grow dim. A disco ball came from out of nowhere and I could hear the sound of castanets. I had to have this bullfighter with glitter accents. A disgruntled woman whose nametag reading Delores said, "Quit leaning on the jewelry counter glass, honey." But I would not be deterred!

And ten dollars! What a deal!

That got me off and running. Since then, I have added about one piece a year to my collection. I could actively seek them out, but I prefer to let serendipity take its course. I stumble on them at weekend markets, thrift stores, and the occasional vintage store. I had a velvet art spree last year when I was in Laramie, Wyoming at a giant flea market.

Before there was velvet art, there was just plain old velvet. Many people love luxury and things that feel good to touch, so it's no real surprise that someone invented velvet. Apparently, the first records of velvet appear in Kashmir in the fourteenth century. What did surprise me is that the history of velvet painting goes so far back. As a North American, I think of Mexico when I think of velvet paintings, but velvet art may have started in China and was spread to Europe by Portuguese traders in the sixteenth century. The Portuguese brought tempura to the Japanese, and brought home velvet art. What a great trade!

Many of the velvets that are available in North America today originate from the 1970s explosion that came out of Mexico. Most of these paintings I have seen have the "piecemeal" factory look that reflects the fact that the paintings were mass-produced, with one person in the line painting the red parts, another person trained to paint the flowers, and so forth. I suspect my bullfighter painting above is an example of this approach, since it has sort of a "choppy" paint-by-number look to it. The factory supervisor would add his signature at the end, creating a personal look that belied the method.

Edgar Leeteg, known as the "American Gauguin," fled to Tahiti during the American Depression in the 1930s and soon started painting Tahitian scenes on velvet. After establishing a patron in the States, Leeteg worked producing hundreds of velvet paintings which have a higher-quality look than factory Mexican velvets. Indeed, his work does hark to Gauguin, who approached his subjects as an outsider with an eye for idealized exoticism. At one point in the 1960s, Leeteg's art was going for twenty grand, but it seems people have wised up since then and the bottom has fallen out of the velvet market. Here in Seattle they seem to range from ten to two hundred dollars.

This, of course, doesn't mean people aren't still interested. I didn't know until recently that there is a black velvet art museum in Portland, Oregon, called the Velveteria that I plan on visiting next time I'm down there. I cannot yet recommend their book, Black Velvet Masterpieces: Highlights from the Collection of the Velveteria Museum, but I will be checking it out when I'm there next. The curators of the Velveteria were just covered on NPR, as well, which is a fun read.

Collecting black velvet art is a fun hobby, but I suppose it's not for everyone. When people walk into your home and see that you have velvet art on the walls, it speaks for you. Velvet art says, "I have love to give you, baby, and that love can probably be treated with a round of penicillin." I think I am too old to outgrow this now, so I will probably always find a place for velvet art in my home.

Many facts in this article were taken from the wikipedia article on velvet, and the book Black Velvet: The Art We Love to Hate, by Jennifer Heath, which I do own and can recommend. List of the Day just did a fun list on velvet art.

SJ frequently kitsches it up at I, Asshole, you can view part of her personal collection here, and is especially excited about her newish parrots on RED velvet.

Obamarama! Obama Fever Sweeps the Interweebs

2008-05-09T19:47:33-05:00

Obama Fever? Do you have it? Or should I say, in proper lolcat, Obama fever, do you has? The answer to that is, Yes, We Can Has.

It's official. Gawker has even declared Obama "a living meme." Obama stuff is all over the internet. And in my very informal survey of what's out there, a whole lot of it seems positive. This is notable itself in an election year.

In 2004, it seemed that all the internet memes and viruses had a real political focus. Now some of the websites that feature Obama seem more about celebrating his celebrity. His...Obamaness. Issues are not mentioned. The uninformed observer may not even be able to discern what political party he belongs to.

Of course you have your Obama swag. There's all the prerequisite tee-shirts and hats, but how about you surprise your Republican date with the Obama thong? Surprise, Democrat! Let's watch how fast the evening goes downhill after that. I don't remember there being Kerry thongs. I guess Obama just has that "sexee factor" that can get him slapped onto the butt floss. And don't get me started on the wrongness of the Hillary thong.

And here's what I mean about the adulation of Obama as a celebrity: many of us have seen Barack Obama is Your New Bicycle, because it's been Twittered and blogged like mad. There is not even real political subtext here, and the giant text on the page screams at you like pop art. You may have clicked on it for a minute, gone "hur hur" and then clicked away. But can you live without the book, Barack Obama is Your New Bicycle? Yes? Well, I'm sure someone will want it. Kind of dicey, releasing it in August, though. But who knows, maybe the primary will still be going on then!

Killing time at work? Then you can play with Obama. Try the Race for the Whitehouse game, a copycat of Snood, the latter of which has better sound effects and cuter graphics. Your call on that one. (As an aside, I will say that I am dismayed to see that the Snood people have piggybacked on a trend and created "Snoodoku" based on my nemesis "Suckdoku." Math is evil and will kill you in your sleep.) Ooooor, Dress up Barack! Is there something really wrong with this, or what? Well, if dressing Obama in Crocs, a polo shirt, and a Strong Bad mask is wrong, I don't want to be right.

Obama Fever! reaches its apex with Barackula, the Musical. Obviously, the title is a shout out to the old "blaxploitation" movie "Blacula", and other cultural references are embedded as well. Set in 1990 during his tenure at Harvard, in the short movie Obama fights off the vampire society that wishes to induct him into their ranks, singing to them about his dream for improving society as the President of Harvard Law as a non-vamp.

A selection of the lyrical stylings of Barackula:

Honolulu, Indonesia, never Transylvania/
Chicago, L.A., Africa, I could never be Barackula

There doesn't seem to be any deeper subtext than that. Obama will unite the mortals and the immortals, so they can work together. Maybe the message is that you should vote for someone who can talk vampires out of biting him?

That said, I find Barackula mostly rad, because like most of the web, it's about Barack the Entity, rather than anything of political substance, which makes it massively entertaining. Plus, it has pretty good singing and West Side Story-style vampire jamming.

Enjoy the Obamageist!

SJ also applies Obama to her mama at I, Asshole.

The Abe Vigoda Sex Tape Will be a Sign of the Apocalypse

2008-05-02T14:21:54-05:00

Lately, we have some very sexy celebrities on our hands. And not just the normal type, posing for magazine covers and falling out of their tops at wall-to-wall flashbulb events. We have bonafide old-tymey dead ones, now with sex tapes!

The first one to make a splash last month was Marilyn Monroe. Of course, she is known as an iconic Hollywood sex symbol, and nude pictures of her appeared in the first issue of Playboy in 1953 (she was on the cover, of course), so I am not sure why this was surprising to people or called an "ugly claim" by some.

I know you can't assume that because someone is a bombshell who posed nude they would allow themselves to be filmed during sex, but it sounds less far-fetched than, say, Phyllis Schlafly Sex Party, Now On DVD, doesn't it?

Of course, anytime anything happens in the news, especially the celebrity world, people start immediately screaming "hoax!" "Leading expert" on Marilyn, Mark Bellinghaus, whose credentials seem to be that he has...a lot of Marilyn Monroe stuff, lays out a detailed rebuttal at Defamer and elsewhere about why this tape is a hoax. The funny part is that in all the media/blog bruhaha, no one has seen the tape, except for the seller, and so are making guesses based on what the seller has said.

It's kind of all a fun read, though. It gets really weird when you hear the FBI was involved. Serious investigations into Monroe's alleged sex tapes? Yeah, that's not national security, that's nosiness. I understand, believe me.

Following close on the heels of the alleged Marilyn tape was the Jimi Hendrix (sex) Experience. Clips from the fifteen-minute video are circulating around the internet. Except instead of this tape being under lock and key with bonus FBI scrutiny, it is being sold by Vivid Video, the world's largest adult film producer. Interesting contrast, isn't it, how no one is squawking about Hendrix's legacy and reputation?

The experts in the case for are Cynthia Plaster Caster, Penis-Copier of the Stars and Pamela Des Barres, author of I'm With the Band, at least one of whom has seen Mr. Hendrix naked. Others, such as former lovers and historians, claim it's not Hendrix in the tape.

It's funny that in this era of Pamela Anderson and Paris Hilton and even Screech from Saved by the Bell sex tapes, we now have "recently unearthed" sex tapes of the celebrities of yesterday. We should all be nervous now, though, that Barbara Walters has announced her affair with former Senator Edward Brooke from thirty-odd years ago. If her memoir doesn't sell well, can a sex tape be far behind?

SJ loves Abe Vigoda from afar on I, Asshole.

Nose-to-Tail Eating: Will It Stick to Your Ribs, or is It Just Another Offal Trend?

2008-04-25T09:46:12-05:00

I eat everything, including lots of things I shouldn't. I gleefully eat things that are colored a toxic shade of blue or orange, stuff I find at the bottom of my purse, and once on a bet when I was working retail I ate a security tag to see if it would go off when I went through the door. It didn't. (Protip: want to boost that knife set? Open wide.) Once I even ate half of a fortune cookie that I dropped onto the grubbiest, sketchiest street here in Seattle. It's like the pavement-equivalent of the Victorian-era Thames River, and like Ye Olde Thames, is also probably one step away from being on fire. I blame pregnancy on the cookie incident, but I probably would have done it on a non-pregnant day as well.

So, as an avid home cook and unrepentant omnivore, I was excited when my friend put Fergus Henderson's offal bible, The Whole Beast: Nose to Tail Eating in my hands a few months ago. Though it was first published in 1999, the book seems to only really be catching on here in the U.S. as of late. Chef Fergus Henderson is now infamous for reintroducing things that we don't usually eat anymore at his London restaurant, today in the time of prepacked boneless, skinless chicken cutlets (now with more vitamin C and MPGs). In case you haven't had the pleasure of flipping through it, it's full of recipes for animal parts I don't even know how to get, and the recipes have titles like "Blood Cake and Fried Eggs." That sounds kind of like a euphemism for something you'd find in a men's' bathroom after a Saturday night in a sketchy bar, doesn't it?

"Oh, sweet, " I thought. Now I'll have something to do with all those trotters that are stacking up in the freezer." Except...not. Despite my love of trying new and weird things (which in this case is weird and old things, as humans have been eating "odd" animal bits for thousands of years), could I do what this book outlined? Did I even have a pot big enough to hold a sheep's head? No, I did not.

I began to have a suspicion at this point. This fellow, that Hell's Kitchen guy, Batali, they're all part of that studly modern chefery thing. I don't know if mere mortals without a professional kitchen and a bead on the funky bits market are supposed to even try these recipes. I know people who cook in various ways with organ meats, but I don't know anyone who was raised on fried pig's tails or potato-stuffed trotter and is going "Oh NOM, just like grandma used to make." Henderson includes a recipe for lamb's brains, and notes they are, of course, still illegal in the UK where he is based. Are these recipes or museum pieces?

So I had an epiphany. Hey, this is the internet. If anyone is experimenting with this book, I'll bet they're bragging about it to their friends. I took a look around and discovered that loads of people have the book, and make vows to "try some things in it in the next few months, maybe." I did find a few brave souls who were experimenting. Some people looked like they were having fun, but in other cases it look like that studly modern, er, oven-mitt waving.

It looks like I somehow missed National Pig Day this year, March 1, which has ties to and embraces the offal movement. Many celebrated that day by partaking in the "nose-to-tail" eating philosophy, such as being involved in pig roasts. One author toasted her pig throughout the day, the culinary equivalent of pouring a fotie out to your homie, except I don't suppose you can call what happens to farm animals "drive-bys."

Others, like redsquirrel, went smaller scale by starting out with one of the egg recipes, which is a good compromise. Recently, the author of cook eat fret had a chef-guest who made her a sizzling, delicious-looking plate of pork belly, and you bet she mentions he is a fan of Henderson. A couple of days later she follows up with roasted bone marrow.

My curiosity was satisfied. There were some people out there in the real world having fun with some "unusual" foods that our grandparents of 150-200 years ago would probably find totally normal. (It's too bad we can't do some kind of cultural time-travel exchange program where they make us rolled pig's spleen and we freak them out my shaking Cheetos at them.) But just when I thought people were keeping it kind of low-key, I found the ultimate blog post: Pig's Head Party. Appropriately, the post leading up to it is titled "Mr. Henderson Made Me Do It." Way to go, fellows! And I had set out wondering if only restaurants were doing this sort of thing, now that even Seattle boasts a couple of restaurants where they will give you a pile of hot bones on a plate.

Finally, I have to confess that I was seduced by the Ferg and had to try something in his book. I didn't want to do something "wussy" like make a salad (see, even I am susceptible to the oven-mitt waving) and I didn't want to take on pig's head like the fellows I mentioned above. I settled on "Soft Roe on Toast." It sounded easy and delicious enough. I like every part of a fish I've ever tried. I happened to be walking past the Pike Place Market one night and asked about it.

"Do you have soft roe?" I shouted over the din of the market and traffic to the nearest fishmonger dude.

"Soft roe? You mean like...?"

"Yes, yes," I said.

"Hey Al! This lady wants to know if we can sell her just the jizz!" Al shook his head. "Sorry, lady, you gotta buy the whole herring."

I had no idea what to do with the whole herring. Did I even like herring? I thanked him anyway, and went back to my Cheetos.

SJ eats random things out of her pockets at I, Asshole almost daily.

Kneel to the Grammar Fascists, Puny Mortal

2008-04-11T13:22:47-05:00

There are two types of people in this world: people who notice typo's, and people who make them.

It used to be that typo- and bad grammar-spotting was a relatively solo hobby you could pursue on road trips or with another friend. In the past couple of years, along with the rise of other blogs that have a singular purpose such as "I Can Has Cheezburger" (lolcats) and "Passive-Aggressive Notes," there has been an explosion of fun blogs dedicated to spotting bad grammar and poor punctuation.

So now you can not only see typos in other parts of your region or country, you can gawk at typos from all over the world. And there are ones dedicated to specific kinds of grammar trainwrecks. Who knew there was so much quotation abuse? Here is a short look into to the fun world of grammar blogs.

1. The "Blog" of "Unnecessary" Quotation Marks

Bethany, the woman who started the site, keeps the tone very light and is often downright terse with her commentary. This is great, because a lot of the pictures speak for themselves.

I like her stance from her FAQ page:

My real intellectual position is more of a descriptivist. I understand that language is constructed socially and therefore naturally evolves and changes and is not subject to absolutes. I conceive this blog as a kind of language play a la Derrida that also demonstrates the limits of such permissiveness, which becomes unclear writing. I'm trying to have fun with language, not protect it or enforce a "right" way to write or speak.

In the title of the blog, "unnecessary" is in quotes, I see. Very clever. So are they unnecessary or not? No one knows! I'm going to "say" yes. Be careful, this sort of thing is "addictive."

2. Becky of Apostrophe Catastrophes (which is fun to say) is another blogger who tempers her outrage with humor and pictures of the offending apostrophes. She has just started but is already up and running. She mentioned that she was worried she wouldn't be able to find enough material to sustain a blog like this, "but I found five punctuation mistakes during a 15-minute walk from South Station to Park Street yesterday. I then found four or five more in and around Fenway Park."

3. The Grammar Vandal, Kate McCulley, is more inclusive in pointing out errors, and sees it as her duty to correct them. As she says on her front page, "I carry a sheet of comma stickers and a Sharpie with me at all times, ready to fix each mistake. If an error glares at me, I'm there to destroy it." She also posts corrections made by other people.

4. Some people are so up in arms now, they are hitting the road in the name of their cause. Have you heard about The Typo Eradication Advancement League? Known as TEAL, their team is setting off on a grammar-correcting spree that will take them across much of the U.S.

They have set up a TEAL blog to document their experiences. In the most recent entry, written from San Francisco, they declare that they scraped an apostrophe off a word that read "armoire's," when it was clear that the owner meant they had multiple armoires. I feel a little conflicted about this sort of behavior. Clearly, it's vandalism to damage property like this. And I sort of appreciate it when bad grammar is left to stand as it is. I am not immune to making typos or botching grammar, but I do take it has some kind of telling sign when someone is terrible with grammar. I wouldn't want to walk into a business that had been "sanitized" of its bad grammar. I WANT the warning. Yes, I am a Grammar Judgypants.

5. Another blog I've been enjoying lately is Hanzi Smatter. The author focuses on "the misuse of Chinese characters in Western culture," particularly as it applies to tattoos.The most recent entry features a man who intentionally wanted to be tattooed with the characters meaning "sweet and sour pork" to poke fun at the stereotype of Westerners getting incorrect tattoos. The author's repsonse? Sorry, you blew the joke. Tian is a tough customer, and the comments often have lively discussion about the nuances of meaning in the characters, which I find fascinating.

6. Finally, I want to point out a blog, Rahoi, that I recently read the entire archives of. I love when that happens, and you cannot stop. The author is not updating as much as he used to in the beginning, but his archives are a fun look at "Manglish," which I believe on his blog refers to the mutilation of English by Mandarin-speakers. Jon Rahoi weaves the story of his life and travels into the entries that are on "Manglish," which makes the site more engaging and in some cases his commentary becomes touching instead of just snarky.

"Enjoy" these blog's!

SJ probably has 27 typos on the front page of her other blog, I, Asshole.

When Corporations Grab It, You Know Being Green Has Gotten "Cool"

2008-04-04T13:22:49-05:00

Hey, it's Earth Month, have you heard? Thank goodness we only have to think about the little rock we cling to that sustains our lives for one month out of the year. In May we can move on to my favorite, Asteroid Belt Month.

Corporations have gone nuts with this. Whenever a study comes out, a product is sure to follow. Polar bears are in trouble? Buy a bear water wings!

Another ploy we are pelted with is Our Enviromental Footprint. "Buy a Prius, you cretin. Don't you care about your environmental footprint?" Well, giving up a perfectly good car that could run for ten years or more in favor of a new car leaves a footprint, I'd say. Also, when you drive your Prius ten miles an hour slower than eveyone on the freeway, I can think of some new places I want to leave my footprint.

I think they should get it over with and invent a car called "The Smug Bastard." It has a hitch with a cultivator attachment that plants trees in its wake, but it runs on baby seals. BUMMER! Well, there's always a trade off, but there's plenty of cup holders for your shade-grown coffee!

Speaking of tree planting, you may have heard that Hollywod decided to go "carbon neutral" a few years ago.

I like the idea of offsetting explosions and other carbon emissions produced by the film industry. But how many trees will it take to make up for the travesty that is Run, Fat Boy, Run? I don't think there is enough open land space left. And Schwimmer better have planted those trees himself. New rule: Schwimmer needs to plant a certain number of trees before he is allowed to participate in anything Hollywood related, and that number should be HIGH.

As an aside, I think Schwimmer sounds like an advanced wedgie. Wedgie 201. First you drop in an egg, then you pull the undies. Dude, you got Schwimmered! Lulz.

Nowadays, we are constanly bombarded by paid messages about how we should be green. We MUST be green. I, for one, am really pleased to see that giant multi-national corporations have stepped up to the plate to advise the puny consumer on how to make the world a better place.You know things are getting koo-koo pants when Nike "steps in" (see what I did there?) and makes a "green" sneaker.

TriplePundit comments on the new sneaker:

This (process) includes making the upper from leather and synthetic leather waste from the factory floor that's stitched together to make a visually distinct look. The midsole uses ground up foam, also from factory production.

I can just see the ad people sitting around, trying to hatch this one.

Ad Exec 1: Okay, so we need to get on this "green" thing.

Ad Exec 2: We could make the swoosh green, and write some facts about the environment on the box.

Ad Exec 1: Nah, look what that did to the color pink.

Ad Exec 2: I've got it! We'll make a shoe out of the crap that gets left on the floor, and no one will notice that we had to ship the shoes thousands of miles using a ton of petroleum to get them to the consumer.

Ad Exec 1: I smell a winner! Let's get tacos.

I am not saying that it's a bad thing to use scraps and seconds, rather than throwing them all away. I am just saying that if you look at it from a certain angle, it's just another ploy.

So, I am a cynical jerk, and saving the world ain't easy, but I hope that when this "green mania" dies down there will be some good habits left over, and not just a pile of out-of-style Nikes tossed in the backseat of my rusty Smug Bastard. If I am driving too slowly, feel free to Schwimmer me.

SJ recycles lame jokes almost daily at I, Asshole.

(Photo credit from imgppl.com.)

You Can't Have Easter without Marshmallow Peeps

2008-03-21T19:43:02-05:00

Peeps!

What is Easter without marshmallow Peep candy? Less disgusting, you say? Oh, now, don't be a joykill. Peeps are a major touchstone of kitschy pop culture in the U.S. If you have never consumed a peep, all you need to know is that they are freaky little blobs of marshmallow-like substance coated with brightly colored sugar. Many people prefer them stale.

Just Born, the company that spawns Peeps, has a surprisingly long history. Before the 1950s, they were produced by hand, and took twenty-seven hours from start to finish! After 1953, they were mass-produced, all the better for peep world domination. I was also interested to discover that the founder of the Just Born company was named Sam Born. I always thought it had more to do with the fact that they produced "just born" chicks and bunnies.

Just Born is trying to expand them into other holidays, like Halloween and Christmas. But really, who wants a Peep Christmas tree? I didn't think so.

So I provide you now with a celebration of all things Peep!

There are Peep sports, such as Peep-eating contests and Peep jousting, which requires a microwave. (Hat tip to the Billings Gazette for that one.) I am guessing the clean up is worth it.

You may also enjoy Peeps as an art form. My local paper runs a Peep art contest every year. This year's theme was "Peeps in the News." I especially enjoyed Amy Winepeep and Barack Opeepa. Related to Peep art is Peep film. Yesbutnobutyes, a site I am loving more all the time, presents a Peep Film Festival. If visuals are not inspiring you, you may consider Peep Haiku. Don't forget to mention something about the season.

Something that absolutely amazed me was homemade peeps! I wonder if it took them twenty-seven hours as well? NinaBeth made cute little Easter shapes that look tasty and cute, because they are a little wonky and therefore have that adorable homemade cachet. Sarah Meyer Walsh made some also, brightly colored and in cute shapes.

Of course, there are also a ton of Peep crafts and recipes out there. You can make an edible Peep nests or sacrifice Peeps to the chocolate gods with Peep fondue.

If all this is making your teeth hurt, you could try sugar-free Peeps. Tricia of Reston Mom has thoughtfully provided us with a review of the be-Splenda'ed little Peepers. Not too shabby, she says.

If you celebrate it, have a good Easter weekend. We will be dying eggs, but not buying bunnies or chicks, unless they are the marshmallow kind!

Pic from I Can Has Cheezburger.

Final Harry Potter Movie, The Deathly Hallows, Split Into Two Parts

2008-03-14T16:18:58-05:00

Blogworld and message boards are abuzz with the news that the last Harry Potter movie, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, is being split into two parts. Immediately I am suspicious of the motives behind this, as there are already more Harry Potter books in circulation than people on Earth. (Yes, I just made that fact up. But it sounds true, doesn't it?) They couldn't possibly be trying to shake more money out of their rapt muggle audience, could they? No, I'm sure it's in service of the final book's integrity.

(I'm going to get a little spoilery here, so heads up.)

This places the release date of the very last movie out in 2011, at which point Daniel Radcliffe will presumably have grandkids. Perhaps one will look like him enough to play Baby Harry!

However, before you feel thoroughly snookered and squeezed, the screenwriter for the last few films, Steve Kloves, claims that there was talk of splitting Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire into two parts as well. This abandoned idea makes sense to me, as there was a huge tournament at the center of the book, and well, more plot. More actual stuff happened in that book, than in say, The Order of the Phoenix (which took up a lot of time with the psychological/torture subplot involving Harry and Delores Umbridge).

The producer of the film, David Hayman, claims that "The story is too long and complicated to be adapted into a single film." Perhaps they are going to devote some time to exploring Dumbledore's newly-revealed homosexuality? Doubtful, since it's not really in the book anyway. Will it feature Harry tramping around the woods and fighting with Ronnie the Bear? Oh, please, let's not devote a whole hour to that.

Or does this have something to do with the fact that it is the very last film and they have fans over a barrel? If you care about the series, you can't possibly see one without the other. The timing of the last two movie's releases also coincides nicely with the impending opening of The Wizarding World of Harry Potter in Orlando, Florida. (I have to say I am loving the notion of a Harry Potter world set among palm trees and such. Another castle will not be out of place there, I suppose.)

So, I am casting a skepticus balonious spell over here, but other bloggers seem to have more positive reactions.

ConnieTalk is down with the spilt:

In spite of the fact that they ruthlessly cut the preceding books to conform to the cinematic norm they've decided that the only way to resolve all of the plot points and story arcs is to cover the entire last book which is fine by me.

Lindsay York Levack at Urban Fantasy Land could have used more movies:

I rather wish they’d done this for the 5th movie, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, which felt so rushed. There was no time to enjoy the fun of Harry’s world.

Kenna McHugh at Screenhead agrees:

http://www.screenhead.com/reviews/finally-harry-potter-book-two-films/
I wish the Harry Potter franchise had done this with the fifth Harry Potter book; so much was left out in the film. But, the final book will be in two movies. And, this is an awesome move by the franchise.

Even ol' Harry thinks it's a good idea. In an interview Daniel Radcliffe says, "There's barely any subplot...and I don't think there's anything you can really cut."

What do you think? Sneaky fanbase-squeezing, or super exciting?

Super Jive confundos herself almost daily at I, Asshole.

March 8 Is International Women's Day: Who or What Inspires You?

2008-03-07T14:46:51-06:00

International Women's Day, which will celebrate its official centenary in 2011, was born out of women's growing desire for equal rights and better working conditions in the industrial era in the U.S.

March 8th is close in date to the infamous New York Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire on March 25, 1911, when 148 women died due to conditions that made it impossible to escape from the burning factory. Immigrant women had already been agitating for better pay, safer environments, and even regular bathroom breaks as servants and factory workers, but the Triangle fire became a symbol of the poor conditions dealt with while women attempted to make a living.

Today , many countries celebrate International Women's Day as an official holiday. In the U.S., the day is part of National Women's History Month. In some countries, women are given gifts and honored, and have special women-only dinners.

Blogger Kate Carruthers of Aide-Memoire, reflecting on women's history, says "to think that only just over 100 years ago all my earnings would have legally belonged to my husband no matter what I thought!" She also provides an interesting list of British legal milestones for women in this entry. Weetabix at Elastic Waist says that she finds the characters from the television series The Golden Girls inspiring, as they remind us "amazing sex doesn't stop at 40."

I am inspired by the women's histories given in a book I finished a few days ago called Bachelor Girl: The Secret History of Single Women in the Twentieth Century by Betsy Israel. Bachelor Girl focuses on the lives of single women and their struggle for equality and to gain ground in the workforce, especially at the turn of the last century. Israel shows us the lives of these (mostly) young women who crammed themselves into boarding houses and were judged by society and their employers by their appearance and their morals just as much as the quality of their work, all in the name of independence and supporting families in the home country.

In fact, one of the parts I found most gripping was about the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire, which of course is one of the major touchstones for International Women's Day. Israel writes:

Ignoring management, girls ran secret contests and lotteries and held parties on their breaks for almost any occasion. The last survivor of the horrific Triangle Shirtwaist fire in 1911 recalled recently that when the fire broke out on floor six, the girls there had just lit the candles on a cake--a coworker was getting engaged! Quickly they scattered; the survivor, who'd somehow made her way to a staircase, looked around for her engaged friend and saw her standing by a window. When she looked away and then back, the girl was gone; like hundreds of others, she had jumped.

What got me about this is that despite the conditions of the factory, of these women's lives, the fact that they may be escaping from the horrors of their jobs to being boxed up in a marriage where they would become chattel, was that these women still had hope. Hope for a better future and a will to survive. I am inspired by the women who came before me and pushed to make their lives better. It is a needed reminder that I can't sit on my ass and do nothing, because women all over the world still have so far to go.

Which women and what part of women's history inspires you? If you are blogging about this, please leave a link to your writing in the comments.

My Free Implants Gives Women "Free" Breasts and New Friends to Boot

2008-02-29T13:41:24-06:00

A friend in Canada sent me a link to a news story about Calgary resident Candace Leadley, who successfully "earned" enough money on a website called My Free Implants to have breast augmentation surgery. Ms. Leadley is the first Canadian "Hall of Famer" to reach this goal, and the article notes that the money came from American donors. I had to know more about My Free Implants, and what I discovered was surprising.

For those who don't know, My Free Implants works like this: if you are female and want breast augmentation surgery for free, you can sign up and create a profile similar to ones on other social networking sites to interact with your "benefactors." Benefactors, who are assumed to be male, can sign up and can donate money to the woman or women of their choice to reach a goal of around $4500-$9000 USD. The money earned goes straight from the site owners to the surgeons who are partnered with the site.

The homepage looks pretty benign, if a little funny. There is the "ladies" side where it promises to help a woman "get free breast implants" and the "gents" side where the text reads "help girls get free boobs." Interesting choice of words there, eh?

I had to know how I could help "girls" get free boobs. I signed up for an account as a benefactor to get a look around inside the site.

The first thing I saw was categories, such as "top earners" and "closest to goal." The women all look different. Some were wearing makeup, and were dressed only in bras or panties, and some women were fully dressed and more casual-looking. Other pictures were just shots of body parts, such as butts or cleavage.

Clicking through to profiles showed me how women were earning their new breasts. One profile read in part, "I have gotten to know a few of you incredible men that I hope the friendships last after MFI [My Free Implants]. I'm a little shy at first but once I warm up my naughty side starts to show, who wants to cum be naughty with me?" Another member, a top earner, claimed that she was "almost their [sic]!!!!" Others offered videos and candid pictures, which would be exchanged for the cost of a donation.

From this, it appears that the site works competitively. If you are popular, and can tease the money out of your benefactors, then you will probably reach your goal faster. Comments on an entry on the blog yesbutnobutyes.com about My Free Implants seemed to indicate that people have had mixed success with the site.

Some commenters say that they had success with the site but that it wasn't easy to earn them, others were locked out of the site and lost their money, others say that they were accused of posting false photos, and other comments, like Ashes's, read:

I Joined the Site and Raised my $250 dollars i 2 weeks.however it is hard to find people willing to pay for photos that arent nude, which i wasn't willing to do. it is somthing u have to spend a lot of time doing, and with my job and boyfriend i just can't give up that much of my time.

I was curious about how a site like this makes money, as well. It is unclear how much gets skimmed off the top of the women's earnings before the balance is handed off to the surgeon. There are member upgrades for the men, where $9.95 earns you private chats and exclusive videos from the female members. There are also message credits to purchase, which allow men to send messages to the ladies directly.

I feel conflicted about My Free Implants. I usually attempt to present oddities in pop culture neutrally, or at least present both sides of the story. But this is hard for me to understand this on a few levels. If you are asking for money online, then I assume you are short funds to pay for it yourself. If you can't afford elective surgery, then I hope that you are not cutting corners in the rest of your life by pursuing this goal. Also, and I know this is deeply personal, but I couldn't see having strangers pay for permanent alterations like elective surgery or tattoos, for example. For others I assume it's just a means to an end.

My knee-jerk reaction is that this site slots into pornography in that there's money being exchanged for more intimate access to the girls. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, it just is what it is. It looks like you can run a "clean" account, but that you may not have success meeting your goal.

I would love to hear more about the other side. If you are a member of My Free Implants, and have comments to make about your experience, I would be happy to publish your comments in this post, or you are welcome to comment below. You may email me at sj at iasshole.org.

If you are not a member, I would also love to hear your take on this phenomenon. What do you think? Would you do this? Would you accept donations from strangers to have elective surgery? Is this porn, or something else?