Other than the opportunity to overeat at BBQs and getting a paid day off from work, I am not into celebrating the 4th of July. What about independence from Britain changed the way that women (and non-white people) were treated? (I trace a good portion of our nation's problems to the Three-Fifths Compromise, which made the United States possible, but in a way that ensured that super conservative views held extra influence and sway over national politics.) So when I was offered a review copy of The Quotable Abigail Adams edited by John P. Kaminski (available in Fall 2009), I thought, "Hmmmm, perfect for my 4th of July post."
With her (unmet) demand for women's rights in the new Constitution that her husband had a hand in (see quote above), Abigail Adams is heralded as one of the first American feminists. At the same time, she is a woman whose commitment to her religion and raising children makes her a hero to those who espouse "traditional" values.
Last year, Sarah Walston investigated the feminist roots of Adams and concluded:
I shall now refer to myself as Sarah, the Proud Feminist who wants to follow in the footsteps of women such as Abigail Adams! Which means the anti-feminists don’t even have a clue about the very women they esteem as the archetypes of “godly womanhood” !!!!
Apparently, not everyone takes Adams's as seriously as Sarah and I do. In a response to David Mccollough's biography of John Adams, KeshKesh7 at the Feministing community wrote:
Mccullough quickly says that Abigail Adams didn't really mean that she wanted rights for women -- he says that she was joking.
Actually, I've found several websites saying that she was joking. Was she? I don't believe she was... After all, she was a strong, intelligent woman who was literally running a household and a farm at the same time while her husband was away, a husband she wasn't just a wife to, but an equal to in terms of mind?
Abby wasn't joking... By saying she was joking, one can dismiss her intelligence and ferocity, and somehow make her more "feminine" or docile. By saying she was joking, you can undermine how political women were then. By saying she was joking, one gives the upperhand to John Adams in that marriage, when so much evidence points to them considering each other their equal.
I really don't understand why Abigail Adams would mention in so many letters, both to her husband and other people, that women should get a slice of the independance pie. She wasn't a comedian. She wasn't spreading a good joke. She was expressing her (practical) opinions.
As for that equal partnership: Like many smart women today, Abigail's husband had issues with her ability with money, even though he relied upon it. Jennifer 8. Lee wrote about Adams's investment activities at The City Room Blog:
When her husband, John Adams, wanted to buy a neighboring farm, she argued that buying depreciated government bonds was a better investment. She was right. Although all of Abigail’s property legally belonged to John under New England’s coverture laws, she set aside “pin money” to buy the bonds, often through an uncle who acted as a trustee for her.
Adams’s financial acumen — among her other savvy attributes — propelled her husband’s career. However her investment activities were one of the few sore points in the highly documented partnership.
Where I really feel Abigail Adams, though, is in her description of patriotism (p365 in The Quotable Abigail Adams):
Patriotism in the female Sex is the most disinterested of all virtues. Excluded from honours and from offices, we cannot attach ourselves to the State or Government from having a place of Eminence. Even in the freest countrys our property is subject to the control and disposals of our partners, to whom the Laws have given a soveriegn Authority. Deprived of a voice in Legislation, obliged to submit to those Laws which are imposed upon us, is it not sufficient to make us indifferent to the publick Welfare? Yet all History and every age exhibit Instances of patriotick virtue in the female Sex; which considering our situation equals the most Heroick of yours."
My heart stops when I read her words. Yes, I'll celebrate American independence when it is true that all people have the rights prescribed in the Declaration of Independence. Until then, I'll just eat a lot of cheeseburgers.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, celebrates the wonderful, unusual places and people that make New York City a great place.
]]>It fascinated me that most of what I learned from the first three sources tended to be a bit different from the fourth. Roxanna, Nafisi, and Satrapi represented a long history of strong, intelligent women from the middle- and upper-class who, until the 1979 Revolution, had as much freedom as women in the US. (Which is a fair comparison because as we know, women from middle- and upper-class families in the US have much more freedom than women who struggle to overcome poverty. And just like in Iran, the available roles for women vary geographically.) As the recent election in Iran unfolded, my heart soared at all the headlines about the role women were playing, and the demand for more rights.
On June 19th, CNN ran a story about a demonstration staged by women for more rights:
"Women have become primary agents of change in Iran," said Nayereh Tohidi, chairwoman of the Gender and Women's Studies Department at California State University, Northridge.
The remarkable images show women with uncovered heads who are unafraid to speak their minds and crowds that are not segregated -- both the opposite of the norm in Iran, Tohidi said.
... Some women in Iran looked to Moussavi to carry their banner, perhaps because they were inspired by his wife, Zahra Rahnavard, a much-admired academic who told CNN's Amanpour that Iran's 34 million women want civil laws and family laws revised.
Author and journalist Azadeh Moaveni, who spent several years working in Iran, said Ahmadinejad's fundamentalism has pushed Iranian women to the edge.
"He has been a catastrophe for women," said Moaveni, who wrote "Lipstick Jihad" and co-authored "Iran Awakening" with Nobel laureate Ebadi.
The weight of discrimination against women is felt most profoundly through Iran's legal system, but Moaveni said Ahmadinejad added to the hardship by clamping down on women's lifestyles. He mandated the way women dress and even censored Web sites that dealt with women's health, Moaveni said. A woman would be hard-pressed to conduct a Google search for something as simple as breast cancer.
Subsequently, one of those brave women who went out was killed while watching demonstrations. Gwen and Tonni at Girl with Pen explains:
On June 20th a young woman and her father took to the streets demanding to be heard, not knowing that hers would echo across the globe. When they named their daughter, her parents probably could not fathom how well her name suited her; Neda in Farsi means the voice or the call. Neda and thousands of women are taking to the streets and demanding equal rights... Feminist politics are not new to Iran... although the Iranian women’s movement has a robust and long history, “at no time has the political influence of women and women’s issues been so profoundly visible as at present.” Prior to the election and women’s visible presence in the post-election demonstrations, women’s organizations came together to demand change from presidential candidates.
Babak Rahimi explained the symbolic meaning of Neda's death on Room for Debate:
“She [Neda] is now me; she is us; all of the Iranian women who have been living this death-like existence in this country,” an older woman describes. In many ways, she argues, we [Iranian women] are all martyrs like her, in spite the fact that we continue to live our ordinary lives under this system.
Neda has rapidly become the rallying cry for many anti-government protesters, who battle the Basij forces in the streets of Tehran and other major cities. According to Shia Islamic tradition, the 40th day after the death of a loved one marks a significant day of grief, and yet a moment to reflect on the inevitability of death.
However, it is important to remember as we support the push for women's rights in Iran not to exploit Neda's death. Fatemah at Muslimah Media Watch wrote:
Several news outlets have reported on her death, and several opinion-makers have heralded her tragic end as a martyrdom for Iran’s opposition movement. In Iran, this may be true: Neda’s death may garner more support and energy for the opposition movement that has been somewhat floundering for the last few days. While I understand that every movement needs its martyr (this is Shi’a Iran we’re talking about–Time explains it for those of you not familiar with the importance of martyrdom in the Shi’a sect), I don’t understand the necessity for the image of her last moments to be splashed across Western news outlets. Why reprint the image of her corpse, instead of the picture above right?
...Neda is not the first person to die in this. She’s not the first person whose death has been captured on video camera, either. But she was young, slender, and pretty, and so Western media images are obsessed with watching her die over and over... The cruelty and horror of Neda’s death may be a call to action, but her death mask shouldn’t.
I don't know what will ultimately happen from the demonstrations in Iran. I'll end with a thought from Jill at Writes Like She Talks:
Although none of the 42 women who sought to be certified to run for Iran’s president received approval, in another four years, who might be Iran’s Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin?
For all the Nedas and Shirin Ebadis in the world, I hope that change comes now.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, is about unusual things to see and do in NYC.
]]>On Thursday, June 19 the Women's Media Center's Majority Post blogged about a Bacardi Breezer ad campaign in Israel that exhorted women to become "the most desirable piece of meat around the grill" by adopting a fat or ugly - or best of all, fat and ugly - woman to be your BFF (do you hear that, Paris Hilton?). Margaret at Jezebel explained that "Israeli ad agency McCann Digital launched the 'Get An Ugly Girlfriend!' site in Hebrew and English along with a Hebrew-only facebook group to promote the fruit-flavored alcoholic beverages."
On Sunday, June 21, our buddies at Bacardi left the following comment on the Majority Post (as well as on other feminist blogs that blasted the ad campaign):
Thank you for taking the time to post your story regarding Bacardi Breezer.
The campaign you are referring to ran in 2008 for two months in Israel. Even though Bacardi Breezer is not sold or distributed in the United States, we immediately notified the appropriate Bacardi affiliate and had this website shut down.
Bacardi proudly celebrates diversity and we do not endorse the views of this site. We sincerely apologize to anyone who was offended by this site and thank you for bringing it to our attention.
Now let's pull out our Nancy Drew magnifying glasses, because the plot thickens! Michelle at Shameless Blog wrote:
McCann Digital is an Internet exclusive ad agency known for its disgustingly offensive campaigns. McCann recently listed the ad campaign on Best TV Now, dating it as being from this month and listing the client that commissioned it as Tempo. Possibly, and this is entirely my speculation, it was going to be submitted to the Cannes Lions International Advertising Festival.
Regardless of whether the "Ugly Girlfriend" ads were from last year and ran for "only" two months without the extremely conscientious Bacardi corporation aware of how their priceless corporate logo and image were being dragged through the mud or whether it is a temporary ad campaign, the minisite is now down. But all is not lost! Fearless feminists have preserved the images, so if you would like to see for yourself how much Bacardi celebrates diversity, The F-Word Blog has pictures of the campaign. I'll wait while you check them out and shout angry swear words. (This won't open in a new window, so don't forget to come back to me! I'd hate to be abandoned in favor of an ugly ad campaign that will make you look better at the BBQ...)
(To entertain myself while you peruse the ads, I am singing the Coasters's version of the excellent song, "Get an Ugly Girl to Marry You," which, in case you are not familiar with it, goes like this:
Chorus:
If you wanna be happy for the rest of your life,
Never make a pretty woman your wife.
So from my personal point of view,
Get an ugly girl to marry you.Chorus
A pretty woman makes her husband look small,
And very often causes his downfall.
As soon as he marries her, then she starts,
To do the things that will break his heart.But if you make an ugly woman your wife,
You'll be happy for the rest of your life.
An ugly woman cooks meals all the time,
She'll always give you peace of mind.Chorus
Don't let your friends say you have no taste,
Go ahead and marry anyway.
Her face is ugly, her eyes don't match.
Take it from me, she's a better catch.Chorus
Say, man?
Hey baby!
I saw your wife the other day.
Yeah?
Yeah, and she's sure is ugly. Ha!
Yeah, she's ugly, but she sure can cook, baby!
Yeah, alright.
Unfortunately, she has acne.
That's a shame, baby.
Yeah, baby.Chorus x3
Seriously, I love the spoken verse just before the third rambunctious chorus! Of course, I realize that the song, as performed also by Harry Belafonte, negates the point of the Bacardi Breezers ads because hanging around with the ugly chick will actually cost you the ring on your finger as men throw you onto the barbie to get at those thighs that rub together. But maybe that's only if she can cook? Life is so confusing!)
Welcome back to the "Ugly Girlfriend" discussion! I hope that you enjoyed the mockery of Lucy, Daisy, and Sally (and sing along) as much as I did. Anyway, my friend SJ, a fellow BlogHer CE who also blogs at I, Asshole, told me that there are rumors that Sally, Lucy, and whoever else modeled for this campaign are - gasp! - Photoshopped to make them more unattractive.
Damn! We should have known. If Photoshop can be deployed to make women look thinner with flawless skin and teeth so white that some ads have nearly blinded me with their glare, of course it can be used against us, too. No tactic is too juvenile to deploy in the effort to sell products by turning women against one another and making us feel bad about ourselves. I can't wait to see what wonderful, creative women-hating tactics advertisers use next!
*Yes, I realize that rabbits are vegetarians and thus not likely to eat my face off after I die, but whatever.
Suzanne also blogs at Camapign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, explores unusual things to see and do in NYC.
]]>First, no liberals or feminists are expressing joy or relief or thanking God that Pvt. Long is dead. This is unlike the extremist groups that encouraged violence against Dr. Tiller for, oh, like two decades. Isira at Melange acknowledged that most people on both sides of the abortion debate expressed horror, but listed a string of Tweets cheering at Dr. Tiller's death. (And both of the two comments left on her post said that Tiller deserved to die.) Just google Dr. Tiller, and numerous blog posts come up that are gleeful about his assassination. (Remember, he had it coming and deserved what he got, since he's been legally murdering innocent babies for years.) Even the posts and tweets that aren't outright dancing on Dr. Tiller's grave say things like, "Murder is wrong, but I'm not sad that his clinic is closed," or "Murder is wrong, but God decided to let this happen." (In which case, of course, I could argue that God decided to let Dr. Tiller perform abortions, but I guess only a certain group of people are allowed to decide what God's intentions are, and unfortunately, I'm not part of that group.) On the other hand, I looked very hard for blog posts and Tweets that treated Pvt. Long the same way, and I found links to reports about the murder, interest in awarding Pvt. Long the Purple Star, and bitter complaints that there was less media coverage of his death than Tiller's. No one jumped up and down with happiness that Pvt. Long was dead.
Which reminds me of another difference: was Pvt. Long stalked and harassed before he was killed? Did he have to hire security guards because of the repeated threats against his life or the vandalism of his office, which happened repeatedly for almost 20 years? No? Does it then surprise anyone that the media might devote more coverage to Dr. Tiller? Not only have people tried to kill him and harm his staff before (almost a year before his murder, Cara at The Curvature wrote about the latest round of legal harassment that Dr. Tiller faced), but we also have zillions of lunatics expressing their delight that Dr. Tiller finally got the "justice" he deserved. If there was more media coverage of Dr. Tiller, it is in no small part because the same people now bitching about the coverage created a much juicier news story.
There are leftist lunatics who label soldiers as murders and baby killers, just like there are crazed anti-legal abortion advocates who refer to us as baby killers. A recent controversey that arose from this line of thinking is the Facebook group "Soldiers are Not Heroes." A petition was circulated to have this group removed, and Colleen at YuBlog explained that:
I quickly read the synopsis which is opposed to this separate group, “heroes,” whose basic belief is that we are too big into hero worshipping our soldiers and in opposition to the current wars that are going on.
I went to click on the link to confirm my membership, but something inside me hesitated. I’m sitting there with my mouse over the “Confirm Membership,” button and I start thinking, isn’t this censorship at its basic level? Just because we may not agree with something, does that give us the right to have it removed? Do we have the right to pressure Facebook to remove it just because a larger majority feels that this group is inappropriate?
I think that this is an interesting example because the group calls for "MASS peaceful protest," not blocking soldiers from entering barracks, not screaming at their children, not "saving" them from the decisions that they made to enlist. (And I'm not saying that I agree with this group, as I think that there are so many complicated class issues as to why people enlist, and the Facebook group's slogans are offensive to me. Plus, the way the US government treats our enlisted members and veterans disgusts me. Whether or not I support the war, these people put their lives on the line and even if they weren't physically harmed, the financial and/or emotional ruin that befell many families while their soldier was off to war is a national disgrace. But I am digressing.) Certainly there is no call to go out and kill military recruiters - even from the fringes - the way that there is among anti-legal abortion zealots.
No one could have predicted that Pvt. Long would be killed. His death is horrible. But it is not part of a long term harassment campaign. Unlike the way supporters of abortion rights are treated by those who oppose us, there is pretty much no support among feminist organizations for violent actions against people we disagree with. We do not threaten to kill their children because we think that their actions are morally wrong. We do not bomb their offices. We do not give veiled condemnations of murderous actions that really celebrate those actions.
That is why I paid more attention to Dr. Tiller than Pvt. Long. (Then again, I don't know why I expect people who equate a fetus to a person who is born, breathing, and feeling to be able to distinguish these types of nuances, but that's another story altogether.)
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants
]]>I tuned in halfway through the episode, where Paris tested the girls by inviting them to a bachelor party. The goal was to be fun, but not too fun. Hence, women were encouraged to dress in revealing outfits and be flirty, but not "slutty." The ladies were also given copious quantities of alcohol, but not expected to be too drunk. As one woman gave the bachelor a lap dance, the camera cut to various other contestants' confessionals about what a slut she was. Paris chimed in that the display of flesh made her "throw up" in her mouth a little. Another intoxicated woman was goaded into making out with the bachelor, then condemned for doing so. (Did anyone think that the bachelor was wrong to ask for one last kiss that he would not regret? No! That would be ridiculous! Why should he have any responsibility for cheating on his fiance?) The next day, Paris demanded that the other girls glare at her as she took a walk of shame. The kisser was then banished from the show, as was the lap dancer.
Just like there are diverging views on what constitutes sexy versus slutty (and whether one should be punished for crossing that super fine line), there are those who can find the positive aspects of Hilton's behavior. Shallon Lester at Glamour's Smitten blog points out that Paris herself is about not being embarassed (getting called a slut on TV isn't a big deal compared to what Hilton has gone through with the homemade sex tape), having high self-esteem, demanding that men treat you well, valuing family, and having the courage to dump a guy if a relationship isn't working. Although it requires a bit of parsing to suss these positives out, I do admit through gritted teeth that these are good things, indeed.
In fact, according to two gossip blogs, Paris considers herself a feminist. In January, Celebrity Drop wrote:
Paris also claimed she was a feminist icon. "I’m a strong woman who doesn’t depend on a man for anything," she said.
Even better, she's only slept with "a couple" of men. (I guess this is why it is OK to shame other women for their desires; she's purer than practically everyone else on this earth except me!) Then, in June, Tirdad Derakhshani reported in The Philadelphia Inquirer that:
Paris Hilton says her unreality show, My New BFF, is, like, a truly super-feminist statement. "This season I made it like a sorority. It's about sisterhood."
This is the point where, seriously, I move into a cave because I can't take it any more...
bellesbits at Om'bak also got sucked into Hilton's reality show, despite her misgivings:
Since childhood I have despised the kind of person Paris represents and the women who follow her, as well as the make up/fashion/fitness etc industries that are propped up by the pursuit of their ridiculous dreams. But I am fascinated. When she walks in and sits on that throne, huskily drawls a “hey girls,” and then decides who will get to be in the next episode, I think of being told I wasn’t allowed to play certain game in preschool by other kids, or having to advise a girl at age 13 that she’s “wasn’t allowed to be in our group anymore.”
Sisterhood, indeed! I think Grace at High Fashion Girl best sums up the disconnect:
Paris Hilton has come to represent all that is wrong with America’s obsession with celebrity culture, but it’s only in stopping the hate that we can begin to reverse the damage. So, I apologize, Paris. I’m sorry that I have made fun of you so much. I’m sorry I’ve made fun of your friends and your feuds and your fake tan and your fuzzy night-vision porno. I’m sorry that I Googled “Paris Hilton idiot” to find others who commiserated with my loathing of you. As a feminist, I want to urge you to better yourself for your own sake. I know people have told you to do so in a thousand different condemning ways, but how much are you really going to learn when people are telling you to learn it. If you’re stubborn, like me, you probably won’t learn much.
Don’t misread my mea culpa.
I still don’t want to be your best friend.
Once I stop cackling, I wouldn't mind being bellebit's or Grace's best friend, though. These women are smart, funny, seem to have a good understanding of the meaning of sisterhood, and sound like a lot of fun to hang around with. I wonder why they don't have their own reality shows, but then again, I think we all know the many answers to that.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, is about unusual things to see and do in NYC. She'll totally, like, be your best friend if you buy a copy...
]]>The first paragraph quotes our esteemed first female Supreme Court Justice, Sandra Day O'Connor, opining that "a wise female judge will come to the same conclusion as a wise male judge." Hmmmm... this leads to "the question of how female judges may see and decide some cases differently" which "is again being weighed." Yes, here are the things I forgot: 1. if a woman sees and decides something differently, it is wrong because male perspective is the default, and hence the representation of justice and all that is good in the world; 2. all men think alike, and all women think alike; and 3. shenanigans in boys' locker rooms are totally hilarious.
The interesting news, actually, is that I am not the only one whose sensitive feathers were ruffled by the underlying assumption in the article. Several letters to the editor articulately pointed out the folly of this type of thinking:
Your article seems to assume that the gold standard of judicial decisions is those made by men. The issue is not whether women may bring a particular bias to the bench. It is that all individuals, male or female, bring their own experiences and worldview to bear as they consider how to interpret the law in a manner that results in a just and reasonable outcome... This is not to say that men are incapable of considering a woman’s point of view or vice versa, but it does make sense to have a diversified court, with a balance of men and women and a good racial and ethnic mix. The gold standard comes when all points of view have been heard.
Jean Southard
Mansfield, Mass., June 4, 2009...When Justice Stephen G. Breyer brings his youthful locker-room recollections into discussion of a case about strip-searching a young woman, who among his male colleagues (or those men who confirmed him) is disturbed that he is calling upon a gender-based experience?...
Vicki W. Kramer
Philadelphia, June 5, 2009
Of course, these two letters were written by women, so what do they know? Except that there were also letters - raising the same points, but in different ways - from men:
...If the law were a matter of mathematical logic, all justices would reach the same conclusion. That they do not do so renders debate over whether personal experience influences judgments silly...
Robert C. Madden
Tarrytown, N.Y., June 4, 2009You write that “the question of how female judges may see and decide some cases differently is again being weighed.” This implies that female judges are, and should be, subjected to greater scrutiny than male judges to determine if emotion or personal experience are improperly influencing their decisions.
But while personal experiences undoubtedly color some judicial decisions, there is no reason to think that female judges are more (or more improperly) influenced by personal experiences or emotions than male judges.
Would you have titled a news article “Debate on Whether Male Judges Decide Differently Arises Anew”?
Tom Litwack
New York, June 4, 2009The writer is a professor of psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Manhattan.
Yeah, guys, you tell it to them! Because, according to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, that is the only way anyone is going to hear it. The original article reported that "as a woman [Ginsburg] had sometimes found her comments ignored in the justices’ private conferences until someone else made the same point. She said the experience recalled her early years as a female lawyer whose comments in group discussions were not properly valued." Hmmmm... Sounds like some people don't think that women have anything useful to add unless their views are the same, and hence "male."
I think the letter writers did an excellent job pointing out that it is ridiculous to assume that all male judges will reach the same conclusion, so I'll move on to the idea that locker room pranks are universally hilarious. See, in deciding that a school did not overreact when they strip searched a 13 year old girl - asking her to pull out her bra and underpants for them to peer into - because she was suspected of having ibuprofen without permission, Justice Steven Breyer said he thought the search was cool because it reminded him of the good ol' days in the boys locker room. It seems that "people did stick things in [his] underwear," which was no biggie. Justice Thomas - no surprise here - chuckled over the apparantly shared memory. Except that this is actually a very good example of how personal experience shades everyone's views. I am willing to bet good money that there are a lot of men out there who would think back on those days, when people stuck things in their underwear or gave them wedgies, and cringe.
What do other bloggers think? Ms. JD links to three reports on gender and judging; Peggy Drexler wrote The Supreme Court: Why Women Matter at the Huffington Post; and Women's Law Project Blog thirds the idea that hey, it is a good thing to consider a lot of different perspectives when evaluating laws that affect a lot of different people. It is a little funky to think that laws are completely neutral and unbiased when clearly the people who write them are not, so it's even stranger to think that there is only one way to interpret them.
I'm sure that there are people out there who disagree with this idea that men's interpretations of laws are not automatically correct. These are possibly the same people who found it hilarious when random objects were jammed in their underwear in the locker room.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, offers her take on the best unusual things to see and do in New York City.
]]>According to the article:
“Guys don’t like playing her at all,” said a teammate, Quinton Vega. “Players always complain, especially when they lose.”
That’s what happened when Beacon faced Benjamin N. Cardozo High School of Queens in the public school championship match two weeks ago. Ms. Berner coasted through to help Beacon to its third city title in four years. Her opponent shattered his racket in anger.
Cardozo Coach Howie Arons complained afterward that Ms. Berner gave Beacon an unfair advantage in the match, in part because her presence was unnerving to the boys. “It’s a lose-lose situation,” he said. “If he wins, he’s supposed to win. If he loses, he lost to a girl.”
Like, OMG! Can you imagine losing to a girl?!?!? That's, like, the worst.thing.ever. for a guy. We all know that, like, girls can't be as good as guys at sports. (Or math or science, but that's another story.) Like, playing against a girl in tennis in no way, shape, or form relates to real life challenges because men never compete on the same level as women for jobs or elections or whatever. We should stay totally separate in sports because it helps boys save face, rather than acknowledge that girls have skills that equal or surpass their own. Seriously!
Katie, a classmate of Berner's, wrote at Women's Glib (a blog by "a community of nerdy, foul-mouthed youth" who "spread the feministy love" - yes, I ADORE this!!):
His reaction after losing in the final is disgraceful, setting a terrible example for all the boys playing on the team. While I agree that my school is in need of a girls’ team this is not the appropriate way to go about it. Sometimes I forget that there really are people like this, who even think it is acceptable to say such misogynistic and sexist things, especially as a high school tennis coach.
The Love Goddess (who probably does have "the best advice in the universe," if this comment is a representative sample) said:
One angry boy, losing to her the other day, broke his racket in a rage. Huh? This is permissible? Surely not. But what did his coach say: That he should wake up and realize that some girls are even as physically powerful as boys these days–and isn’t that specatacular? That he has the good luck to be playing against a girl who is, like any other opponent, worthy of his greatest respect?...
Certainly it’s a win-win situation for teenagers everywhere who see how talented a girl can be (a girl, by the way, who didn’t have the option of playing on a girls team because there isn’t one), a girl playing with and against a mass of testosterone and muscle and height and weight who hasn’t once mentioned “being unnerved” by it.
On the flip side, the Times reports:
Chris Lacopo, who coaches the Horace Mann team, which lost to Beacon in the semifinals, offered a different assessment. “It’s great for a boy to deal with a really good girl player,” Mr. Lacopo said. “In order to play her, you just have to say she’s just a tennis player. She’s not a girl, just an opponent who’s going to be hitting the ball back.”
Huh. Who wouldda thunk it?
Anyway, the article was riddled with interesting thoughts about competitiveness and gender. Berner has a great attitude about it, saying that while she needed to prove herself against the guys, they also "have to prove they can play with" her. (Yay self-esteem! More girls should be like this!) But she also admits that she prefers playing on the boys' team because she feels that playing against girls would offer a "lower level of competition," and explained, "I have an unconventional game for a girl. I try to go on the court and play like a guy."
OK, I have literally zero knowledge of tennis, but that statement made me rather sad because it brings up that whole idea of "playing like a girl" is bad because only boys are aggressive players who want to win. (Someone please tell the Williams sisters that they are doing it all wrong!) Or that some girls are so exceptional that they should be allowed to compete with boys (the default mode, apparantly, for high standards) while the rest of us silly young ladies flounder around the courts worrying about breaking a nail.
I don't mean to be negative. (I agree with Girl Chat that Berner is "inspirational.") I just hope that as we support girls achieving their dreams - even if it means deflating the egos of boys who expect to win by default or are embarrassed that a girl is better than he is - we also need to remember that there is also nothing wrong with being a girl. Berner is an exceptional tennis player and deserves all the kudos and accolades she garners. But those of us who "play like girls" deserve respect, too. Let's support a variety of styles in sports and life because life actually demands a variety of skills and tactics.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, is about unusual things to see and do in NYC. She swears like a sailor, but still sleeps with her teddy bear.
]]>Do not exist.
Yes, not existing is pretty much the only thing someone can do to 100% guarantee that she or he will never be raped. Because the truth is that rape can happen to anyone. Old and young. "Attractive" and "ugly." Prostitutes and nuns. Women and men. Heterosexuals and homosexuals. European, North American, South American, Australian, African, Asian. Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Zoroastrian, Shinto, Sikh, Baha'i, Jain, Wiccan, Pagan, Atheist, Agnostic. Awake, passed out, comatose/vegetative, dead. Married, separated, single, divorced. Etc., etc. Anyone who has some sort of physical presence on this planet can at some point be raped.
Many well-intentioned people have put together lists advising women on ways to avoid being raped. Robin Sax, Stacy Dittrich, Susan Murphy Milano at Justice Interrupted provide a comprehensive one. In an attempt to be helpful and assist women, they list everything from not wearing a ponytail (which rapists can grab easily, and note that women like me with short hair are much less likely to be targeted by rapists looking for easier marks since there's nothing to hold onto, so the logical conclusion is to rush out and get your hair cut now to reduce your chance of being raped!) to not sitting in a car in a grocery store parking lot, just in case a rapist with a gun gets in on the passenger side. They put together their list through very careful research and interviews, and obviously mean it to help women.
Granted, some of this information is useful, but lists like this lead to several things: a general increase in fear in women (if a large number of rapes happen in grocery store parking lots, how are women - who are very likely to shop for food - supposed to avoid this?), and the idea that it is your fault that you were raped because you didn't take every precaution you could against it. It's bad enough that society blames rape victims by judging women's clothes and attitudes, but the last thing we need is more encouragement to blame ourselves (i.e. - not only did you don a ponytail, but you also went to the grocery store at night. If only you had cut your hair short...)
Two years ago, Hoyden About Town pointed out that:
Because victims can’t prevent crimes, so “prevention” strategies targeting potential victims are selling a crock. Crime prevention programs only work insofar as they persuade offenders not to commit crimes, which is a whole other story (one that is hardly ever discussed regarding rape because the media makes rapists “disappear” from case reports through the way rapes are reported using the passive voice).
The post then discusses a program which teaches women to resist rape. However, I think Katt at The Fates of Moira is right on when she ties the idea of preparing women to "prevent" rape with the concept that men should be taught to not rape:
If I could have it my way, I would make it mandatory to teach rape prevention in all high schools and universities. Statistics show that most rapes are date rapes in which the victim knows their rapist. Having rape prevention policies that only teach women to “never walk alone/at night” is incredibly lacking. Teaching men (the most common commiters of rape) what rape is and how to keep the men around them from committing rape is a much more effective policy. I also know many men that, once they learn the official definition of what constitutes rape, admit to having raped in the past. Most rapists don’t even know that they’ve committed it.
Mickey Schultz at California NOW's blog put up a list of rape myths that she's seen on the internet that drive her insane. Myth #4 is that men can't get raped. I think that is an important one. Yes, more women are raped than men. But while women's rights advocates have made progress in the way that female rape survivors are treated and in removing some of the stigma from the victim, men who are raped often find themselves alone. As the National Center for Victims of Crime explains:
...experts believe that current male rape statistics vastly under-represent the actual number of males age 12 and over who are raped each year. Rape crisis counselors estimate that while only one in 50 raped women report the crime to the police, the rates of under-reporting among men are even higher (Brochman, 1991). Until the mid-1980s, most literature discussed this violent crime in the context of women only. The lack of tracking of sexual crimes against men and the lack of research about the effects of male rape are indicative of the attitude held by society at large -- that while male rape occurs, it is not an acceptable topic for discussion.
No one deserves to be raped. The idea that we can "prevent" rape by being more aware of our surroundings, etc., while not untrue, ignores the underlying problem that the best way to "prevent" rape is to make it very clear that rape is not acceptable. Of course, this will not stop rape completely any more than the death penalty prevents murders. It's how we subsequently treat anyone who has been raped is far more important than teaching people how to "prevent" it from happening to them.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, , is about unusual things to see and do in New York City, and encourages people to get out and explore.
]]>Of course, many women are engaged in a fight at the Bikini Line year-round. For example, Christina at explained how she prepares for her yearly gynecological exam:
The night before I always engage in the shaving ritual. It's the underarms, legs, thighs, areas of the thighs that are normally unattainable, tiny little hairs on the toes, any random hairs that seem to have sprouted on my post-baby pooch belly, and the bikini area, of course. It's quite an undertaking. Just on the off chance he'll look anywhere other than my vajayjay I want it to be smooth. Plus, I refuse to be that girl with the wild and untamed bush that couldn't take 10 minutes and hack up the underbrush before flashing the doctor her goodies! It doesn't take a bush hog, people!
Incidentally, I am that girl with "the wild and untamed bush," and I'm fairly certain that my doctors didn't make fun of me later, nor did they appear to find me repulsive in any way. Harumph. I used to get really, really incensed at the idea that the worst thing a woman could do is go without trimming (or removing) her pubic hair, but now I take deep breaths and think about how much I can get done in the supposed ten minutes that it would take me to "hack up" anything near my cooter. If it was really that easy or good for me, there probably wouldn't be a need for all the blog posts about how to avoid or fix rashes and razor burns, like the article written by Veronica Yanco on Twirlit. But whatever: no judgments is my new motto.
In ye olden days, it also drove me nuts how razor companies targeted women in advertising designed to make us hate our natural bodies. A prime example of this is the "hilarious" Wilkinson Sword's (aka Schick in the US) "Mow the Lawn" ad. In this fine piece of comedy, forwarded to me by my friend Flo, a woman is depicted petting her kitty, while a song about how she cheers herself up by "mowing the lawn" unfolds. Then we are outside with three ethnically diverse women running around in short skirts with pink lawnmowers, hedge clippers (oddly, not pink) and scissors. The African-American woman is particularly excitable, waving a pair of hedge clippers around her lovely, large head of hair while smiling and condemning bushes. (No, I am not making this up. I only report what I see. I wish I could make shit like this up, trust me.) We then see our fearless ladies standing behind triangle-, vertical rectangle-, and heart-shaped topiaries at crotch level. This all takes place in the first 24 seconds of the minute, eight second ad. Wow! It is for the Quattro Bikini Razor, I learned at the end, just before my eyes figuratively started bleeding and I mentally ran out of the room screaming. (Sabine at Confabulous somehow maintained the presence of mind to watch the UK and Us versions of the ads, embed them on her blog, and analyze the differences.)
Back to my point, though. For years I was bitter at razor company executives because they didn't attempt to double their market by creating a need for men to shave their bushes. I pictured a cabal of old white men plotting around a mahogany board room table, cackling at the profits they denied shareholders by refusing to make men into neurotic groomers. "Ah, women are such suckers! Why anyone would put a sharp metal blade near his or her private parts is beyond me," the one with a giant white beard sneered.
But, this too shall pass. My friend Mara sent me a link to a Gillette video on YouTube. In How to Shave Your Groin, the narrator explains that there are many advantages to shaving one's pubes. "You might say when there's no underbrush, a tree looks taller," the cheerfully informative narrator explains. Men are also advised to "think about the unique topographical features under your hood" before you "go ahead. Be adventurous and have some fun." (There are also videos on how to shave one's back, chest, and armpits. Armpits! Can you believe that? Where is this world heading when men are encouraged to shave their pits?!?! Next thing you know, there will be a blog called My Pubic Hair that includes suggestions for men...)
The nice part about this ad is that it plays on men's size insecurities rather than implying that their genitals smell bad or are gross in their natural form. It is, like, so cool how gender marketing really zones in on stereotypes and fears to sell us things that we really don't need, isn't it?
The debate about male pubic hair shaving rages on over at Tres Sugar. Comments range from, "If they expect us to groom, they should return the favor," to "Call me crazy, but I like it natural." As for female pubic hair removal, Jill at Feministe reports that New Jersey considered banning Brazilian waxes entirely, which she found to be extreme:
But banning a bare beaver? There are surely problematic aspects to waxing — including the usual feminist and gender issues, which we’ve all spent more than enough time navel-gazing (vulva-gazing?) about — but are Brazilians really so physically and socially problematic that we need to ban them? ...Seems to me that, regardless of the pubic hair trend du jour or my own feminist views on waxing,* health departments should be regulating public health and safety, not pube design. Certainly the great state of New Jersey could find something better to do with its bureaucratic spare time.
In my little conspiracy theory-riddled mind, I am convinced that New Jersey only considered this now that the men folk are engaging in such practices, but that's just my paranoia. How will anyone survive on the Jersey shore this summer without this critical hair removal option? I only hope that it is broached on The Real Housewives of New Jersey!
At any rate, whatever genitals you possess and how you decide to deal with the hair that surrounds them, have a great summer. I know that if I wind up in some situation that requires me to don a bathing suit, I will be wearing my board shorts with pride.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, is about unusual things to see and do in New York City.
]]>Then, Roberts' wrote a book, A-Rod: The Many Lives of Alex Rodriguez, and fickle sports fans turned their anger on Roberts. According to WowOWow: Women on the Web, "Selena Roberts' new book further humiliates A-Rod" by covering:
...A-Rod’s steroid scandal, divorce from Cynthia, poker habit, relationship with Madonna and other aspects of the baseball player’s tabloid-ready life.
A-Rod also suggests that the baseball player took human growth hormones while playing for the Yankees and may have even taken steroids when he was a teenager in high school, reports the New York Daily News. Rodriguez’s physical appearance was so startling to fellow Bronx Bombers, teammates nicknamed the third baseman "Bitch Tits" in 2005 for his unusually large chest. The book also says that Rodriguez showed other obvious side effects of alleged steroid use.
Juicy stuff, right? A-Rod certainly created his own situation; Roberts didn't influence his adulterous, poker playing ways, but god forbid that a female journalist go after one of America's (fallen) sports icons. The backlash is nasty.
Will Leitch at York Magazine noted that "Kansas City Star columnist Jason Whitlock is calling her a 'hard-core feminist' and saying, 'I don’t think she understands men that well.'"
On that note, Nancy at Yes, I'm a Yankees Fan wrote:
Last Friday I had outpatient surgery; before, during, and after surgery my IV included Mefoxin. Mexofin is a very potent antibiotic that basically wipes out any GI bacteria. It left with an irritable, gassy and colicky bowel. I would rather endure that pain again then read Selena Roberts’ book on Alex Rodriquez... She has played second fiddle in the New York Sports community, and lacking a real TV job as a color commenter with a New York or New Jersey team, she has chosen the fast route to fame, writing a book....A-Rod has made his life a shambles. Ms. Roberts’ book is just another cheap shot at him. A-Rod does not need cheap shots, he can, as he has proven many times; make a big mess of his life all by his self. He doesn’t need a second rate liberal feminist sports reporter doing it for him.
Of course, as a Mets fan, I don't expect much more from Yankees fans, but ouch! At least Nancy doesn't blame Roberts for A-Rod's troubles, just being a feminist sports reporter going in for the kill. This is why I'm far more in line with Kia at The Sea Green House, who wants:
...to thank Jason Whitlock for the following statement: "We're being asked to trust someone who is hardcore feminist. [T]o me she's almost no different than Al Sharpton." in reference to Selena Roberts tell all A-Rod Book.
I had long written him off as irrelevant. Now I can avoid him with a vengeance reserved for misogynists.
Because, yes, the whole attack-Selena-Roberts-for-being-mean-to-poor-victim-of-his-own-desires-Alex-Rodriguez is exactly that: misogyny. It's about being angry at women for expressing views, for invading sports journalism, for wanting to - gasp! - make money. When salacious tell-all books about women are written by men, no one attacks those authors as people who do not understand women or as evil for wanting to cash in on gossip. (Although to be fair, I do sometimes see attacks on journalism that relies heavily on anonymous sources, as Roberts does.)
Sacred cows hate being ground into burgers. I happen to like mine with a slice of cheddar cheese, but then again, I'm a hardcore feminist who doesn't excuse men when they behave badly, so what do you expect?
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, is about unusual things to see and do in New York City.
]]>How silly I was! First, British authorities foiled my plan for nonstop chocolate consumption by removing the candy vending machines from the tube platforms. (Seriously! When I heard about that, I was so relieved that the move was canceled!) Then, the plan for the new office fell through, so I remained in New York. Finally, a few weeks ago Mars introduced its latest tempting product for the ladies: the Fling.
How does the Fling ruin my love affair with British candy bars? NPR explains:
Wrapped in a shiny pink and sliver package, this delicate "chocolate finger" is intended for women. The word "finger" is an industry term for a long, slim confection, Mars spokesman Ryan Bowling says, but with ads that invite you to "Pleasure yourself" in pink lettering, consumers might come to other conclusions.
What the fuck? I have yet to forgive Nestle, the makers of the super delicious Yorkie, for their evil slogan ("It's Not for Girls!"). Every time I see that damn wrapper with the circle and bar over a female cartoon silhouette, I want to find the responsible parties and poke their eyes out with a chocolate appendage. Several years ago, Gena Haskett at Out on the Stoop took Yorkie down a notch:
...The original concept was to market this as a man's chocolate bar, due to its size and volume. The tag line in the ad was "men don't have much to claim for themselves anymore" and the candy is "too big for a woman to handle."
Puleeze - I ate the original Chunky as a kid. That, my friend, was a hunk of chocolate. I can't speak for the modern version but back in the day there were actual raisins and peanuts surrounded by chocolate worthy of clamping down on full force. With real sugar too! I take off the U.S. nutrition label.
Setting aside Yorkie's concern that "men don't have much to claim for themselves anymore," the idea that only men can handle a big, long, thick hunk o' chocolate is hilariously homoerotic. I love it! It actually makes me want to eat Yorkie (which is pretty tasty) far more than that nasty 80 calorie "finger" treat. As Julia at Trysting points out:
...rather than giving us a subtle reminder of how sensually delicious chocolate is, they've decided to shove it down our throats with a marketing campaign written by someone who has read one too many Danielle Steel novels. I'm surprised it doesn't vibrate.
Also, it has no nuts. What kind of a candy bar is that?
Exactly! What hetero woman finds pleasure in a partner who has no nuts? (Heh heh. Oh, Mars - you make it too easy for me.) Sarah Gilbert at WalletPop also takes issue with the Fling:
And do you know what? That packaging looks to me like a feminine hygiene product... This product's marketing is wrong, all wrong, and whoever developed it should be sent back to the 10th grade. We may love chocolate but we don't make love with chocolate. Honestly.
What? Women don't make love with chocolate? Perhaps this is why the official website says it is only available for now in California. (You know how those weird Californians are...) Or, as Kjerstin Johnson at Bitch reminds us, "If it's anything like other pleasuring devices, I will not be seeing [the Fling] anytime soon in AL, GA, KS, LA, MS, TX or VA." (Johnson also dissects how the chocolate incorporates mica to get a shimmery appearance in three different colors. Women like variety in our pleasure sessions, you know.)
Mmmmm.... shimmery fingers. All of this research is making my "mouth" "water." Sorry, Fling. You may be the first new candy bar offered by Mars in 20 years, but I'll stick with the experienced when it comes to quelling my cravings. It may be true that it's not the size of the boat, but the motion of the ocean (to mix metaphors), but it takes Mr. Big* to really satisfy my "hunger." Oh yeah - cue the Barry White as I wrap my lips around this one.
*Explains Cadbury: "Mr. Big is the original big bar made to satisfy your hunger in an exciting way, without weighing you down. Mr. Big Original is a delicious vanilla wafer covered in fresh roasted peanuts and rice crisps, all smothered in a chocolatey coating. Mr. Big is a big bar packed with lots of different ingredients that has a bold, unapologetic personality."
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, is about unusual things to see and do in New York City.
]]>Mara subsequently moved to London, where she is continuing to help women access safe, legal abortions. Currently, she is working with author Ann Rossiter to bring attention to her new book, Ireland’s Hidden Diaspora: the ‘abortion trail’ and the making of a London-Irish underground, 1980-2000. Now I'm going to cheat and use Mara's words to explain:
Every year, more than 6,000 women from Ireland travel to have an abortion in a British clinic. They come and go in secret, bearing the double burden of shame from two societies in denial. Ireland’s Hidden Diaspora: the ‘abortion trail’ and the making of a London-Irish underground, 1980-2000 tells the story of a courage and solidarity displayed by a group of London-Irish activists who operated a support network in London for women seeking terminations from Northern Ireland and the Republic. These volunteers provided help to Irish abortion seekers before, during and after their lonely and often frightening journey – opening their homes, raising funds to help cover costs, even providing door to door service from airports and railway stations to clinics to private homes and back again.
“I wrote this book to help break the silence surrounding the issue of abortion in Ireland, to challenge the taboo that permeates the subject of Irish abortion, and to show that criminalising abortion does not decrease the number of women who need terminations but only adds to their predicament”, said author Ann Rossiter. “I also wanted to expose the fact that access to abortion for women in Ireland is a class issue – women with money can afford to travel to access the procedure while women without money are placed in a position of having to appeal to unscrupulous loan sharks or go forward with an unwanted pregnancy”.
“The book is also a tribute to the men and women who have provided material and emotional support for these women, and who have relentlessly campaigned for the right of women to reproductive choice at home in Ireland”.
In addition to highlighting the activities of the Irish Women’s Abortion Support Group (IWASG) and the Irish Abortion Solidarity Campaign (Iasc), Ireland’s Hidden Diaspora details the historical context that fed into the need for and creation of such groups. The book provides fascinating information about Irish immigration to England during this time, the formation of Irish feminism in Britain, and the history of Irish attitudes towards sex, contraception and women in general.
Anglo-Irish politics may have changed for the better, but the numbers of women travelling from Ireland to the UK have remained largely the same. These women face the double hardship of the cost (up to ₤1,500 including travel, accommodation, childcare and procedure), as well as the shame that is imposed upon them by laws that force covert behaviour. Until abortion is made safe and legal for all the women of Ireland, this book will be an undeniable testament to their struggle.
I also learned from Mara that while Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom, women from Northern Ireland are not entitled to abortions from the National Health Service. Since the introduction of the 1967 Abortion Act (which made abortion legal and available on the NHS in the United Kingdom) at least five women from Northern Ireland have died from unsafe abortion practices whereas in Britain there have been none.
Last year, my cousin moved to Dublin for a study abroad program. She said that on her first day there, she saw a protest for abortion rights. That same April, Maman Poulet linked to three YouTube videos made by Safe and Legal in Ireland Campaign, highlighting the costs of pretending that abortions don't happen. Maman Poulet wrote:
There is energy in this campaign and a healthy crop of new voices also and now they are engaging new technologies - lots of things to teach other social movements here. But for now I’m hoping people will listen to the voices and think about the things being said - it’s far too long since the referendums, the X case and the constant shoving under the carpet and a solution must be found to help women and stop the silence.
Incidentally, I would love to hear this same dialog take place in American accents. As one of the women in the video says, it's about dignity. Are women going to be treated with respect, or "forced to skulk around" to find the health care they need? The first step towards dignity is the ability to speak for oneself. It's wonderful that Rossiter's book and the Safe and Legal in Ireland Campaign are giving helping women's voices be heard on the issue of abortion. What they are saying is that we should trust women to make our own decisions.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants.
]]>I'd never heard of Christine de Pizan before. The back cover explains:
]]>I'd never heard of Christine de Pizan before. The back cover explains:
Pioneering female writer Christine de Pizan's spirited defence of her sex against medieval misogyny and literary stereotypes is not recognized as one of the most important books in the history of feminism and offers a telling insight into the role of women in a man's world.
I skimmed the first few pages and smiled. While Christine's religious convictions are not my cup of tea, I thought the book was interesting enough to spend $4.00 (especially because I had a gift card) and learn more. Obviously, a women writing in medieval times is of a very privileged class - her opening sentence ("One day, I was sitting in my study surrounded by books of many kinds, for it has long been my habit to engage in pursuit of knowledge.") clearly reflects this - but I still thought it worth reading. I love learning about feminists, be they Anna Julia Cooper or de Pizan, and tracing the ideas that make feminism so vibrant at its best.
Anyway, Rebecca's Reading Rants and Raves beat me to the punch, reviewing The City of Ladies back in 2007. She concluded:
She demonstrates a knowledge of literature, philosophy, and rhetoric that was inaccessible to many women of the time. If her argument fails in any sense, it is only in that she fails to address how women might rise above their station.
And while Christine focuses on negating the misogynistic assertions of other writers, her own feminist thought has its limits. She admits, through the voice of Reason, that it would "not be right for [women] to abandon their customary modesty and to go about bringing cases before a court." It is, however, necessary for Christine to abandon her own modesty, which she does in several instances, particularly through self-referencing her earlier related works. The dialogue style enables her to do this without too much self-aggrandizement.
While none of the ideas contained within The City of Ladies will shock the 21st century western mind, the larger lesson on the power of the word is invaluable.
De Pizan, in a weird way, seems to be the Kate Millet of her times. Back when I was in high school, a friend gave me a copy of Millet's book, Sexual Politics. the ch!cktionary
Millet’s revolutionary work Sexual Politics... which critiqued the subugation of women in Western literature, philosophy, and psychology, made a significant contribution toward feminist scholarship and incited a pissed off Norman Mailer to call her a “literary Molotov”.
I like that 500 years after de Pizan worried that she offended God by lamenting why he created such a vile creature as a woman (she concludes that people who speak ill of women are actually the baddies), Millet offended the literary god Mailer.
Many people feel that feminism is not compatible with religion, but clearly this is not true. De Pizan may have pioneered a unique way to wed her religious beliefs to her conception that women were not worth less than men, and this tradition has lasted across centuries and cultures. Not only does di Pizan blow that stereotype out of the water, but so does Dr. Anna Julia Cooper, a woman whose background is nothing at all like di Pizan's.
Cooper was born in 1858 to an enslaved woman. Her father was the master of the estate. She attended a religious school, where she fought to be included in classes reserved only for men. Her first book, A Voice from the South: By A Woman from the South was published in 1892 and is regarded as a pioneering treatise on black feminism. Dr. Cooper received her PhD from the Sorbonne in 1924. Do the math: she was in her early 60s at that point! Truly inspiring.
Tamu Taylor at BlackIssues explains:
Cooper's lifestyle reflected her Victorian upbringing and in many ways modeled notions of true womanhood. She carefully followed the moral proprieties and strictures of her era, yet vigorously supported the intellectual vibrancy of women and the need to agitate for women rights, specifically the rights of Black women.
These two women demonstrate that one doesn't need to be a godless heathen like me to embrace women's rights, and that sometimes religious feminists have far more in common with rabble rousers like Millet than they are given credit for. I'm so pleased that my foray to Borders led me to learn about these fabulous feminist trailblazers, to whom I am in debt.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, is about unusual things to see and do in New York City, home to feminists of all backgrounds.
]]>Let's start with the Va j-j Visor, since I learned about it first and it also has a stupid name made dumber by the phonetic spelling of vajayjay, which is a word I hate to begin with. As I wrote at my blog at the end of April:
My life was seriously lacking without this valuable piece of plastic, which is designed to "protect all of those tender and sensitive parts that you don't want exposed during various methods of hair removal." Or naked tanning. Or pubic hair dying. Not only is the plastic cup stylish and eco-friendly ("your body's natural muscular tension holds it effortlessly in place.* It is also hypoallergenic, disposable and recyclable."), but it's doctor recommended! Er, sort of:
A well-respected gynecologist in Tacoma, Washington assisted us in the development of the Va j-j Visor. He answered pertinent questions, gave expert input and opinions, and found that the Va j-j Visor offered a great fit and would help in protecting the inner vulva area during its various uses.
I love when the people who help develop a product don't share their names because perhaps they might be a little less "well-respected" as a result.
*"To create a more powerful seal, spread personal lubricant around the upper inside of the Va j-j Visor. Saliva can also be used in what we like to call the 'lick it and stick it' method."
"Lick it and stick it" method? Again, I wish I could make these things up.
Anyway, once you've used your Va j-j Visor for your Brazilian wax (although I caution people that you are not getting a Brazilian wax unless the waxer removes the hair inside the lips, so either the Va j-j Visor is useless or you getting ripped off - HA! no pun intended - and not really getting a Brazilian wax), the producers of the Cuchini want to protect you from the embarassment of camel toe. For those who are unfamiliar with camel toe, it is what happens when a woman wears a very tight bottom that clings to her vaginal lips, highlighting everything she's got. (For multiple graphic examples of camel toes, you can watch the offensive YouTube video on the Cuchini site, in which the camera pans on in women's crotches while two guys sing about camel toe to the beat of The Beach Boy's hit song, "Kokomo," which was very popular during my days on the bar and bat mitzvah circuit, leading to further trauma resulting from the Cuchini. Ah, the cost of research!)
The Cuchini, whose tag line is "Our lips our sealed," (and really, they owe major apologies to the super excellent Go-Gos for this), explains:
As we have evolved, hair down there is a thing of the past. As the landing strip and Brazilian wax have become prominent in today's world, there is no bush for the cush. And though Camel Toe may be a hot topic... it's not to the gal sporting it!
Their solution? For a mere $19.95, they will send you a doohickey to put in your bikini bottom to smooth out the bottom and thus spare you the embarassment of everyone knowing that - good god! - there's a vagina under that bikini!
Granted, I would not want everyone and their pervert uncles seeing my cooter silhouette, either. Of course, my solution is not to wear absurdly tight short shorts. This also helps avoid the dreaded "crotch rot." (Man, I can't wait until someone invents an anti-crotch rot product. I challenge readers to come up with a name for that, and I promise $10 to the best one. Seriously! Leave a comment with your anti-crotch rot product name...)
Also, I am not convinced that evolution has led to "hair down there" being a thing of the past. If so, we would not naturally have it, and therefore there'd be no need for a landing strip or Brazilian, would there? Further, as an unevolved woman (somehow my pubic region never got the message and continues to grow a wooly patch over the hatch), I noticed when I wear things that are way to tight, I get camel toe. Just trust me when I say that I have plenty of bush for the cush.
Again, the best solution to me is to not wear things that are too tight in the crotch, but then again, I'm not evolved, so what do I know? Bah. It's a democracy here (or so they say), so here's what others have to say:
Amber at The Fashion Police has an ambiguous review, but their readers have a vigorous debate going on about whether Cuchini a good thing or another way to make women hate themselves.
Lucy Vonne at Sexy Blogtime! thinks the product is a good idea, and notes, "I would enjoy a unicorn printed on mine." Ah, that makes me laugh.
The anonymous blogger at McJawn is my unevolved hero for this commentary:
HAHAHHAHAHA here you go girls, the product of your dreams… You know what else works? WEARING UNDERWEAR/PANTS THAT FIT. Ugh, I wonder how many women actually bought this, shit like this blows my mind. Check out their website: https://www.cuchini.com/. It has the worst graphics and color scheme and their main font is Comic Sans, very professional. The last time I saw someone use Comic Sans was sometime in the 90’s by a 12 year old.
I actually like Comic Sans under the right circumstances, but that little dig made me laugh so hard that I nearly peed in my properly fitting, camel toe-less undies. Fortunately, I am not wearing a C-String, or that would have been really, really messy.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants, so that tells you almost everything you need to know about her, except that she also wrote a book about unusual things to see and do in New York City, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track.
]]>I decided many moons ago that I did not want to have children of my own. Of course, that doesn't mean that I hate children. It just means that I like being able to sleep in on weekends, not cook or plan dinner, and stare at the TV (or computer screen or the page of a book) blankly for hours on end. Even without children, these activities are hard enough to fit into my schedule (except the cooking). Kids would make the situation even more complicated. Seriously, you have to pay attention to them. Plus, I am a worrier. Having a kid would only exacerbate my level of anxiety.
Since my first friend, Alex Elliot had her son five years ago (and then a second child almost three years later), I have had the honorary role of an aunt. I discovered that I like it a lot. Basically, I can come over, her sons are excited to see me, and we can play for a little while. Then I can go home, relax, and stare blankly at the TV while Alex potty trains her sons or gives them bathes or fights with them to stop giving scraps to the dog. If I want to spoil her kids, I have a bit more discretionary income to do so since I don't have to pay for their basic necessities, and no one ever gets mad at an aunt for treating her nephews to things. Sure, I do worry about them, but really, I get all the benefits of hanging out with kids and significantly fewer of the headaches. It's awesome. I love being a part of their lives, and I hope that as they get older, I can be a trusted adult to help them out in both good and tough times.
In the last few years, I've ramped up my collection of "nieces" and "nephews," thanks to my reproductively inclined friends. Not that I don't adore my friends' kids - I totally do! - but I'm even more psyched about being a tante to my sister's baby. So, again, in my own self-interest, I thought I'd share some bloggers thoughts on their aunts.
At The Road Taken - From Borneo to America, we get to read about Aunt Vienna:
Aunt Vienna left us on March 8 many years ago and I always thought how appropriate she died on International Women’s day. In my young mind, she was the epitome of feminism and she was the fun aunt that all her nieces adored.
She never fit in the mold of a woman in an Asian society, and probably never wanted to. She lived life the way she chose to and gave her opinions with no veils or hypocrisy. I always thought if Aunt Vienna was born in America on the liberal west coast, she would have so much potential and perhaps happier, although she never left us the impression she was unhappy.
Incidentally, this reminds me of my own aunt. My aunt Chaya is my role model. She dedicated her life to public service and troublemaking in the service of disadvantaged people. In 1980, she served the Haitian refugee community with the VISTA program in the Miami area. She trained local residents to serve as advocates for orphans who arrived from Haiti, and while working in a detention center, she organized a protest against the deplorable conditions in which the prisoners were forced to live. This got her kicked out of VISTA, so she went back to her hometown of Chicago and contacted Jesse Jackson, who subsequently held a press conference to bring attention to the issue. My aunt has taught low income middle school students with learning and behavorial disorders for years, often fighting to get them apporpriate services. She's just an amazing woman. Someday, she has to write her memoir!
Garritygirl at Polymer Clay Ponderings sings the praises of her two role model aunts:
I did get really motivated while I was on my trip by my two aunts. Both are in their mid 80s and I can only hope and pray that I can be as healthy as they are when I'm that age.
My Aunt Pauline, who lives in Ohio, lives alone, drives all over, exercises, does yard work, volunteers at her church and lives a very active life... She's an avid computer geek and can zip around the Internet like a twenty year old. She does crossword puzzles and plays computer games to exercise her brain. I told her several times how much I admired her. I am truly inspired by her.
My other aunt, Aunt Hellen, lives in West Virginia... Aunt Hellen also is in her 80s and still drives to church... Sometimes she strolls up and down the creek lined road. She loves nature and sits out on her porch watching the hummingbirds and chickadees feed from her bird feeders. She was eager for any adventure we went on and never complained about a thing...
I hope they both get a chance to read this blog so that they both know how much they mean to me and how grateful I am to have them as my aunts. Love you Aunt Pauline and Aunt Hellen!
OK, now that I am totally choked up, I can only hope that I live up to the high quality of aunt-dom offered by Aunt Vienna, Aunt Hellen, Aunt Pauline, and my own aunt Chaya. I hope everyone had a happy mother's day, whether they are mothers or aunts or grandmas or sisters or whatever title they have while making positive contributions to the lives of children they care about.
Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants. Her first book, Off the Beaten (Subway) Track, is about unusual things to see and do in New York City.
]]>