Slaying the Vamps [Feminist Flashback Friday]

Ever since I started blogging I have wanted to write a post dedicated to Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It is probably one of my all time favorite shows...and I just started watching it this past winter! This probably isn't that much of a flashback or a history lesson for many of you...but Buffy is in the past, so it's ok for a Feminist Flashback Friday, right? Even if it's not, it's going to be...


Joss Whedon has made some great creations and is a pro-feminist himself, so it would make sense that his feminist beliefs rub off on his TV shows. Buffy is one of his most feminist creations.

For those of you who don't know, the show revolves around the "chosen one," the slayer, who at this point in time is Buffy Summers. Buffy spends every episode fighting "the big bad," whether it is vampires or some other form of demon. She has her crew of "scoobies" that help her out and occasionally get into trouble. My favorite of the Scoobies is Willow who has some special powers of her own: she's a witch. There's just so much that happens over the seven seasons that I'm not even going to attempt to summarize right now, so this is the best I can do right now.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer is all about strong women. Buffy herself is supernaturally, physically strong because of her status as the slayer. But she is emotionally strong as well. Sure, she has her breakdowns and times that she no longer wants to be the slayer, but overall she is a strong women, physically, emotionally, and mentally. And it's great to see a female action hero that was so sucessful. Buffy kicked ass on a weekly basis.

Willow was a strong woman as well. She went from a shy bookworm to a powerful, confident witch throughout the show. And she's the one example that I can think of in a mainstream, network show of a successful transition from straight to a lesbian. I don't know if "successful transition" is the right phrase, but there have been so many shows that make a character a lesbian for a couple shows and then she's straight again. But with Willow, she realized her sexual identity when she met Tara and she stuck with it. Yes, she did go crazy at one point, but all that did was to show how powerful and strong she actually was when it came to her magical powers.

And then there's Anya, who was a vengence demon who lost her powers (then regained them later). Even when she didn't have her supernatural powers, she was one of the key Scoobies. While it takes her a while to adjust to not having powers, she becomes one of the strong members of the team.

There are also some recurring minor strong women in the show. There's Faith, the slayer-turned-evil. Glory, who was a demon god bent on getting back to her hell.

Oh Xander. One of the two men in the Scoobies (yes, I do count Giles). He goes through a lot of identity crisis', especially in the later seasons, because he is surrounded by such powerful women and he doesn't really have a lot to offer. Buffy's the slayer, Willow and Tara are powerful witches, and Anya is an ex-demon. Some definite woman-power there.

One other thing that I like about Buffy is that it's not super focused on romantic relationships. Buffy's romantic relationships definitely play a big role in the show, but she's not relationship-centric. When Angel goes evil and when he leaves, Buffy does have a really hard time and falls apart a little bit, but then she learns that it's ok to be a strong woman on her own. Xander and Anya's relationship and Willow and Tara's relationship are key to the show as well. But in all of the relationships, each of the people are independent and strong on their own and have a pretty healthy relationship because of that (the only exception I can think of is Buffy and Spike, but that's a whole other story).

To me, one of the undertones of the show is about being the best person that you can be, no matter what your powers. While the characters themselves are probably not feminist, I think that the show is. Buffy the Vampire Slayer portrays strong women as they are. Sure some of their strength comes from supernatural powers, but the strength that I am most concerned about is their mental and emotional strength.

What Buffy has is something that is severely lacking from television today. It has great writing, great acting, and strong women. Where are shows like this today? It's not like Buffy was made all that long ago. Where did it go? Well, right now I am jonesing for a Buffy fix, so I think I am going to go watch an episode over on Hulu.

So, how many of you watched Buffy when it was on or have since picked it up, like me? Any thoughts about the feminist value of the show?

Amelia Earhart [Feminist Flashback Friday]

Feminist Flashback Friday is a feature that focuses on a feminist piece of history every Friday. This "piece of history" can be a person, event, character, movie, tv show, etc. The goal of Feminist Flashback Friday is to help connect the past (whether in historical events or entertainment or what have you) with the present and on to the future.

Amelia Earhart (July 24, 1897 - missing July 2, 1937, declared dead January 5, 1939)

Amelia Earhart: aviatrix, writer...feminist icon?

Everyone knows about Amelia Earhart's attempt to circumnavigate the wold and her disappearance. Not as well known (despite the numerous biographies) is the feminist role model side of Earhart...other than just being the first women to do stuff (I don't mean to sound flippant here, this is really important and I will get into it later).

Amelia's mother raised her and her sister to not be "nice little girls." They played outside and wore bloomers unlike the other girls in their area. She was the adventurous type who would much rather be outside. Her first experience with flying was when she secured a ramp to the top of the family toolshed, went off it in a sled, and came out of it with a "sensation of exhiliration."

When she first started flying, she had to work to save the $1000 for flying lessons. At first, seasoned pilots critiqued her flying skills, but she was determined. She continued training and honing her skills as a pilot. She gradually gained the respect of fellow pilots after years of proving herself. She eventually became the first president of The Ninety-Nines, an organization of female pilots.

Did you know that Amelia Earhart was also a writer? She wrote numerous books about her flying experiences. She was also an associate editor at Cosmopolitan magazine (isn't that weird, in a good way?). She used this platform to campaign for greater public acceptance of aviation, especially for women entering the field.

She was the frist woman to go on a solo flight across North America and back in August 1928. She was the first woman to complete a solo flight across the Atlantic Ocean in May 1932. At this point she was gaining national fame. She used her notority as a platform for increasing the awareness of women in aviation.

She did eventually marry a man named George P. Putnam. She described her marriage as a "partnership" with a "dual control." She demanded respect from her husband.

In 1937, she was the first to attempt to circumnavigate the globe. Sadly, her plane disappeared towards the beginning of the journey around Howland Island.

Amelia Earhart was an advocate for women's issues, especially surrounding women in aviation. She was the first woman to solo fly acorss the Atlantic, the first woman to recieve the Distinguished Flying Cross, the first president of The Ninety-Nines, the first to attempt to circumnavigate the globe. She was a powerful woman who wasn't afraid to reach for her dreams and didn't back down.

Even today (as of 2006), only 6% of civilian pilots were women (Wikipedia). Aviation is still a field that is hard for women to break in to. But it's great that there is this role model, not only in the field of aviation, but for all women reaching for their dreams. Sadly, I don't think Amelia Earhart would be as remembered and well-known (despite her numerous achievements) today if she had not disappeared, never to be seen again. But just because her fame comes from these unfortunate circumstanes does not mean that she can't be a feminist icon.

I honestly did not know a whole lot about the life of Amelia Earhard before I started doing research or this post (most of which was done on Wikipedia). I knew she was a feminist icon, but now I want to do even more research and read some biographies of her. There is even a biopic coming out soon about the life of Amelia Earhart (starring Hillary Swank, who is amazing). Here is a trailer for it, it looks really good:

Check Out: 50 Books for Problematic Times

RMJ at Deeply Problematic has started a new series entitled "50 Books for Problematic Times" (50bpt). After reading Newsweek's "50 Books of Our Times," RMJ noticed that this list was a representation of something other than our "modern society"...white male privilege. RMJ counted and determine that of the 50 books on the list 84% were white, 78% were male, 96% were straight, and 66% were both white and male.

I'm pretty sure our society and world is not 66% white males. RMJ decided that what was really needed was a list of books that "shed light on society as it is today (its virtues and its flaws) without the benefit of bodies that fit into the canon." So who are these writers? This list will be comprised primarily of women writers, writers of color, LGBTQ writers, and trans writers.

RMJ comprised this list of by soliciting readers to make submissions (and possibly we'll get some reviews from RMJ herself). I submitted a few of my favorite books. And there is still time for you to make your suggestions! Click here for instructions.

This series kick off today with a review of Grapefruit by Yoko Ono submitted by Cara Kulwicki of The Curvature, Feministe, and Tangerine Dreams. This sounds like a really interesting book written by an awesome woman. I'm definitely adding it to my "to read" list. I'm excited to see what other books are going to be featured!

I will be cross-posting some of the posts from 50bpt here, but make sure you check them all out over at Deeply Problematic. RMJ will be posting one book a day until all 50 have been listed.

Why I'm Excited for August 7

It's no secret: I love movies. Way too much money is spent on me getting to see the movies I love oh-so much. I even enjoy watching bad rom-coms and teen movies. There are certain movies I get really excited for, like Harry Potter. But there is a day coming up that I am very excited for: August 7, 2009. I am not excited for some big-budget movie, but for 3 amazing-looking movies.

1. 500 Days of Summer



With movies coming out this summer like The Hangover and The Ugly Truth and all those formulaic rom-coms, I am anxiously awaiting 500 Days of Summer. While this movie has been released, it doesn't open in Grand Rapids until August 7. I will watch the trailer every so often to get my fix of its amazing-ness until the movie comes out.

Part of why I'm so excited for the movie is because I love Zooey Deschanel and Joseph Gordon-Levitt. And the music in it is so great (I've already purchased the soundtrack!). But this movie also looks so different from all those other romantic comedies. It says from the beginning: "this is not a love story." So while I can already guess how the movie is going to end (no I don't mean them breaking up, I mean how the movie ends), it is not going to be like other romantic comedies.

The man (Gordon-Levitt) thinks that his life is incomplete until he finds "the one" and the woman (Deschanel) is the one that doesn't want to be tied down while she's young and doesn't believe in love. It is refreshing to see the stereotypcial roles reversed. It's still very stereotypical to believe that the men are the ones that don't want to be in a relationship and the woman is the one who is romantic. While we all know this is not true, it's still refreshing to see that reflected in a movie.

I am reluctant to call the movie feminist or say that is has a feminist message until I see it and see how the story line actually plays out. There is only so much you can tell from a trailer. But it looks great and probably more feminist that most of the other movies coming out this summer.

2. Julie & Julia



Julie & Julia is definitely more big-budget than 500 Days of Summer. This movie stars two amazing women, Meryl Streep and Amy Adams. Julia Child was an awesome woman in and of herself. The movie shows part of her life in Paris, from starting cooking school with an all male class to her cookbook and TV show. Julie Powell on the other hand, is a woman who doesn't really seem to know what to do with her life and finds her answer in cooking.

I love to cook myself, so I'm excited for that part of it. But I think this movie also has the potential to be empowering. There's the Julia Child side of it: taking on the men of the cooking world and disproving all the nay-sayers. I've also heard that the book (I meant to read it before the movie came out, but I haven't gotten around to it) has a message of developing a healthy relationship with food and your body image. I hope that they keep this part in the movie. It would be great to see a movie with that kind of message.

3. Paper Heart



This movie looks really sweet and awkward. Paper Heart is about the making of a documentary starring a teenage (?) girl who does not believe in love and goes around interviewing people on the subject. Then she meets this boy (Michael Cera) and starts to fall for him, but of course all of their relationship has to be taped for the documentary. This movie just looks adorably awkward, not necessarily feminist. And it kind of looks along the lines of the overall story line of 500 Days of Summer with a documentary and awkward teens (but I would probably rather see 500 Days of Summer). But Paper Heart is only coming to "select theaters" on August 7, so that means that it probably won't be coming to Grand Rapids. But I'm excited to read about what other people think of it.

Quick Hit: Sotomayor Receives Endorsement from Senate Committee

Today the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to endorse Judge Sonia Sotomayor with a 13 to 6 vote! All that's left is a full Senate vote which is expected to take place by the end of next week.

Further reading:
Senate Judiciary Committee Endorses Sotomayor [Shakesville]
Senate panel endorses Sotomayor [Feministe]
Sotomayor Approved for Supreme Court by Senate Judiciary Committee [RH Reality Check]
Committee Approves Sotomayor Nomination [Jezebel]
Senate Judiciary Committee Votes for Sotomayor [Feministing]
Senate Panel OKs Sotomayor [Appetite for Equal Rights]

Anti-Homophobic Commercials Hit the Airwaves

When I was babysitting this past weekend, we were watching the Tour de France (I'm not entirely sure why) and what really caught my attention was a commercial that came on. The commercial featured Wanda Sykes reprimanding a group of teenage boys in a pizza place for using the phrase "that's so gay."

I was very pleased with the commercial and reinforced the message to the children I was babysitting. I was so impressed by the commercial that I decided to research it a little further.

This commercial was put out by Think Before You Speak, a campaign of Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network aimed at ending homophobic language in schools.

This campaign aims to raise awareness about the prevalence and consequences of anti-LGBT bias and behavior in America’s schools. Ultimately, the goal is to reduce and prevent the use of homophobic language in an effort to create a more positive environment for LGBT teens. The campaign also aims to reach adults, including school personnel and parents; their support of this message is crucial to the success of efforts to change behavior.

This campaign has some great resources, so make sure to check them out.

I also discovered that there were two more commercials in addition to the one featuring Wanda Sykes; one featuring Hilary Duff (whom I'm not a huge fan of, but the commercial is still great). This following video contains both the Hilary Duff and Wanda Sykes commercials:



I think that these commercials have the potential to be effective because they point out how using the phrase "that's so gay" can be hurtful by turning it back on the person who says it. For example using "that's so 16-year-old boy with a cheesy mustache" to say "that's so stupid," as in the Wanda Sykes commercial.

They have the potential to get the message across, especially if they widen their reach. I would like to see these commercials reach network television. So far, I have only seen the one on ESPN (I believe, or whatever channel the Tour de France was on).

This is the third commercial that takes place at a drug store:




Update: I just saw the Wanda Sykes commercial on ABC Family...but it was after midnight.

This Week in Blogs: July 19 - 25

This week has been pretty uneventful for me. I get to spend my weekend babysitting three hyper kids, that's about as exciting as it gets. I hope all of you have had more eventful and productive weeks. Here are some of my favorite blog posts from this week. There are a lot of them because, well, there were a lot of really good posts this week and I am still constantly discovering new feminist blogs that I want to share with everyone!

Daily Kos's Feminist Wish List -- What Do You Think [Bitch Blogs]

Quick (listening) hit: Debating abstinence [Feministing]

Will "Orphan" hurt orphans? [Salon Broadsheet]

Is Marie Claire Just Messing with Us [Glossed Over]

Thoughts on oppression, masculinity, power, the male gaze, street harassment, and slavery [Gender Across Borders]

Jimmy Carter leaves church, criticizes religious sexism [Appetite for Equal Rights]

Should Tiller's Assassin Be Charged as a Domestic Terrorist? [RH Reality Check]

Those Who See "U.S." Read "Us" [Shakesville]

Dancing Around Race Relations: Prom Night in Mississippi [Jezebel]

Health Care, It's Personal [Womanist Musings]

Obama uses tradition to justify dismissing abortion rights [Deeply Problematic]

The Hermione in my Head [Feministing Community]

LOL you're a feminist [o filthy grandeur!]

Let's not be so quick to judge in 'women vs. Ben Roethlisberger [Spare Candy]

What Feminism Is and What It Should Be (with a little help from bell hooks) [Small Strokes] - a little over a week old, but still good!

And finally, both The Curvature and Jump Off the Bridge participated in the blogathon yesterday - check out their numerous posts!

What have you been writing and reading this week? Leave links in the comments!

Harry's All About the Sexual Tension

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince came out last Wednesday and I have already seen it twice. I really liked the most recent installment. However, I have talked with some people who haven't read the books (gasp!) who didn't really care for it. I think that if you have read the books, you can better understand the pivotal points in relation to the Deathly Hollow (the 7th book and 7th and 8th movies). This movie doesn't do a great job at filling in people that have forgotten what has happened or hasn't read the books or seen the movies.

I thought that the movie was really good and pretty funny, at least more so that the other Harry Potter films. In this installment, the main characters discover the opposite sex. Harry and Ginny Weasley start to develop feelings for each other (which I was a little disappointed that they didn't develop this further as they did in the book), Ron starts dating Lavender Brown (which is where a good amount of the comedic relief comes from, that and the love potion Ron accidentally ingests), and Hermione is all about the teen angst when she sees Ron with Lavender.

But some controversy has come up over the sexualization of the characters. In the movie, the characters are entering their sixth year at Hogwarts, making them 16-years-old. This seems like a perfectly reasonable age to bring romantic relationships into the mix of the Harry Potter movies. But many don't think so...

An article on EW.com attacks the film for being too sexual, saying that's not what J.K. Rowling intended. Maybe the film did develop these relationships further than the book (it has been a while since I've read the book all the way through), but the book definitely had these relationships in them. The author, Jean Bentley, proclaims that, "Despite illusions to the contrary, teenagers don't actually have adult relationships."

What? I'm pretty sure if you talk to 16-year-olds, they are capable of romantic relationships, and even want them (oh no!). But apparently, according to Bentley, teenagers don't have relationships and don't have sex. While there is no sex in the Harry Potter movies (and I don't think there should be because it was technically started as a children's series, even though it's evolved into much more), there is definitely a lot of sexual tension and snogging (I love British lingo).

And what of the lovely actors who play the main characters. Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint are now between the ages of 19 and 21. Oh no! They've grown up! This seems to be particularly treacherous for Emma Watson, the beloved Hermione Granger. As Salon points out, it is harder for Watson to transition into maturity and change her image from girl to woman than it was for her co-star Daniel Radcliffe, aka Harry Potter (or would be for most any male actor).

After discussing Watson's "Interview" cover, Joy Press (author of the Salon article) states...

Is this Hermione's get-out-of-child-stardom card, I wondered? Daniel Radcliffe had already plotted his escape route last year with a quick shortcut to instant adult status: full-frontal nudity. Since it was for a serious role in a serious play (Peter Shaffer's "Equus"), Radcliffe was feted for artistic credibility and bravery (especially after he talked in interviews about the shriveling effects of a live audience on the male member).
But shifting your image into a more mature gear has very different ramifications for a young woman than for a young guy. I doubt many people actually wanted to glimpse Harry Potter's wand, whereas at least one creepy Web site counting down the days till Watson's 18th birthday popped up back in 2004.

Yes, there was some controversy surrounding Radcliffe's appearance in Equus, but, like Press says, that was accepted once it was realized that it was a "serious role." But Watson's entrance into maturity is not as easily accepted because it involves her posing seductively on covers of magazines, not taking serious roles where you have to run around naked on stage. But she's 19. We only care because we still think of her as the 10-year-old from the first Harry Potter movie. And she can hold her own against the press (at least from what I've seen) and even describes herself as "a bit of a feminist."

And speaking of the movies again, can we talk about Watson's character, Hermione? She's amazing. She's smart, sexy, and kicks ass (much like I believe Emma Watson to be). One of my favorite scenes of the series (there are many) is from Prisoner of Azkaban when she punches Malfoy for laughing at the execution of Buckbeak the Hippogriff.

Overall, I really loved the Half-Blood Prince. I appreciated the sexual tension that was there, I thought it lightened the movie and gave some great comedic relief. And really, there wasn't a whole lot of it seeing as how the movie was still PG. But, granted, it would take a lot for me to not love the movie because I am pretty much obsessed with the series. I think people just need to get over the fact that teenagers have romantic relationships. It's really not a big deal.

Further Reading:
Half-Blood Prince Suffers From Lack of Action, Emma Watson's Hotness [Jezebel]
Our Little Wizards Are All Grown Up [RHRealityCheck]
Emma Watson Owes It To Her Public To Get Naked, Says Public [Jezebel]
Just Saw Harry Potter and... [F Bomb]

Whip It, Whip It Good

Thanks to Amy at Appetite for Equal Rights for tipping me off to this.

In October, there will be a movie coming out that is the directorial debut of Drew Barrymore, starring Ellen Page, and centering around (as far as I can tell) female empowerment. This movie is Whip It.



Personally, I think this movie looks amazing. Not only is it written (Shauna Cross) by, directed (Drew Barrymore) by, and starring (Ellen Page) women, it seems to be promoting female empowerment and doing what you love to do as well as portraying strong female characters.

"You all are my new heroes." "Well, put some skates on and be your own hero."
"We cannot take losing the chance for our kid to be happy."

Ellen Page's character, Bliss, is happy participating in Roller Derby and finally finds a place where she feels like she belongs, which at first she hides from her parents. But it seems like when her parents find out, her dad supports her. I think it is important that he realizes that this makes his daughter happy and that she feel good about herself doing this. These lines show how women can take charge of their lives, do what makes them happy, and not care what others think of you. If this isn't one aspect of female empowerment, I don't know what is.

Earlier I wrote: if women make movies, is it necessarily feminist in relation to the movie Jennifer's Body. While I had some doubts about that movie being feminist, Whip It, which is made by and starring women, I see as definitely feminist. This is not just because it is made by and starring women, but that fact definitely adds to the feminist nature of the movie. And it's important to support movies made by women because they are so few and far between. Of course, we'll have to wait til the movie comes out to be sure. But I will definitely be in line to see this one.

P.S. It also seems like it has great music!

Song of the Day: "The Fear" by Lily Allen

While Lily Allen is no stranger to controversy, I think she's pretty great. I have been listening to her song "The Fear" all the time recently.



Her lyrics are usually pretty sarcastic and full of social commentary, but "The Fear" takes the cake. The song is all about how people get fame and riches. I see it as a social commentary on consumer culture, but not everyone sees it that way.

The Feministe post "I'm being taken over by the fear" quotes Mark K-Punk in reference to "The Fear"...

“All Allen can do is point to her own inertia and complicity but awareness can only reinforce the very condition she is talking about [. . .] The verses are unsure whether they want to be satire or not, unsure whether they want to mock consumer-nihilism or celebrate it , unsure because – after all – what’s the alternative, where can all this mocked from? [. . .] Celebrity culture and its critique are coterminous; the jeremiads about its superficiality as cliched and empty as the culture itself, both appearing on the same pages of LondonLite. Only the negative capability of the choruses, only the admission of The Fear, breaks out of this circuit.”

Sure, it is hypocritical to critique consumer culture and the celebrity lifestyle, yet still be complicit in it. But at least she is saying something about it.

The lyric that stuck out to me at first was "And I'll take my clothes off and it will be shameless/'Cuz everyone knows that's how you get famous." In today's sexualized culture, people are known for their sexuality and availability. The same Feministe article states...

When Lily sings that couplet about how everyone knows that taking your clothes off gets you famous, she’s pointing to the fact that media culture runs on a certain kind of manufactured prurience. I mean, at this point, is anyone really shocked by nudity? Sex tapes? Infidelity? Homosexuality? Is it even possible to be?

And yet, manufactured sex “scandals” co-exist side-by-side with advertisements using sex to advertise practically everything. One punishes, one rewards. Yet they’re two sides of the same coin, it’s not hard to go from one to the other (Paris Hilton), and then back again.

Commenting on the need to be sexual to be famous, Allen is pointing out the hypocritical nature of today's Hollywood culture.

I, personally, think this song is great. I will keep listening to it and enjoying it. And I will keep listening to Lily Allen.

More from Lily Allen:

"Smile"

"Alfie"

If Women Make Movies, is it Automatically Feminist?

A red band trailer for the movie "Jennifer's Body" was recently released and a lot of people are talking. This movie is written by Diablo Cody (yes, Juno fans, Diablo Cody), directed by Karyn Kusama, and the two leads are played by Megan Fox and Amanda Seyfried (that's right, two female leads).



I have to admit, I can't stop watching this trailer. I'm really intrigued by it. Mainly because I can't decide how women are being portrayed. But also because in all stages of making the movie, amazing women were involved.

Now, I have some problems with Megan Fox and the characters she plays...and I'm not the only one. Her character in "Jennifer's Body" has some interesting implications. Basically, Jennifer (Fox) is high school cheerleader who is possessed by a demon and starts killing the guys in her high school, by what seems like sexually provoking them. This is an interesting concept to me. I can't decide if her killing of these guys is a commentary on the patriarchal view of female sexuality or if the movie is just going to play into the normal sexist horror movie format.

Sady at Tiger Beatdown comments that...

THE SUBVERSIVE CRITIQUE OF PATRIARCHAL SEXUALITY starts, in this trailer, right around the point when Naked Megan Fox, Professional Hot Lady, extends her mouth to about five times its natural size and eats a dude with it. Because: female sexual desirability is simultaneously prized and demonized. Female appetites, sexual or otherwise, are unilaterally feared and shamed.

I'm right there with you. This movie very well could be commentary on the fear of female sexual empowerment in our society. But I'm still kind of weary. Honestly, mainly because it's Megan Fox and she's hyper-sexualized...again. Is this just another excuse to see her in skimpy clothes and even...gasp...naked? Or is she using her sexuality to prove a point about patriarchal society? (note: yes, I realize it is not actually Megan Fox making these decisions, it's the writer and director...it's just easier in the terms of this post to place the agency on the character Megan Fox plays.)

Bitch magazine, like me, is still a little torn, but it seems like they are leaning toward the anti-feminist side. In their anti-feminist column, they have:

- Appears to be a vehicle to allow Megan Fox to flash her bod and be ogled by horndogs
- Makes women look like either femme fatale crazy killers (Fox) or uber-nerds (sorry Amanda Seyfried, you are really great but the beanie and glasses indicate that your character is supposed to be a dork)
- According to the plot synopsis, looks like this might be another attempt by Hollywood to punish women for liking sex by turning them into demons, putting them in insane asylums, and murdering them

Also some good points.

I think that it's hard to determine exactly how this movie is going to turn out from one trailer. And it can be interpreted many ways by different people. As we can see, Tiger Beatdown and Bitch used Jennifer's killing of men by sexually provoking them as both a positive (commentary on fear of sexuality) and a negative (punishment for sex).

I love that Amanda Seyfried is playing the protagonist. Not only is it a woman protagonist in a horror movie (not unheard of, but pretty uncommon), but I can't wait to see her kick Megan Fox's ass (I'm just hoping this happens).

And can we just pause on the "I go both ways" comment at the end of the trailer for a moment? Seriously? I don't even know how to respond. I feel like this comment falls in the anti-feminist category. It's pretty much there to appeal to some men's lesbian fantasies. And it pokes fun at bi-sexualtiy and lesbianism. Not cool.

So what do you think? This movie is made by and stars great (eh, Megan Fox, maybe) women, but is that all it needs to be feminist? The jury seems to be out on how to interpret it. I guess we'll just have to wait for more trailers and until the movie comes out. I'm sure there will be more great commentary as we get closer to its release date.

And a couple of side notes that don't really pertain to this specific conversation:
-LOVE the music in the trailer!
-I'm really happy Adam Brody is in this movie. I love him and have missed his acting.
-I also really like how the poster for "Jennifer's Body" (see above) is eerily similar to the posters for "True Blood"
-The first time I watched the trailer I laughed out load at the "I'm killing boys" comment. Haven't decided how it fits into the feminism argument, but it was funny.

Can Princesses Fall from Grace?

There's no denying it. Americans (especially young girls...who then grow into women) are obsessed with princesses. Much of this can be attributed Disney for making these princess characters into role models for young girls.

There are many things wrong with the idolization of these princess characters. For gender norms to the promise of a happily ever after to their "perfect" lives...and everything in between. Young girls grow up thinking this is how women are supposed to act if they want to reach their happily ever after, which further hurts women by confining them to very specific gender norms.

The other day, I came across this photo project/series titled "Fallen Princesses" by Dina Goldstein (you have to click on "Fallen Princesses on the left). I was really struck by this photo series for its goal to show the princesses in "real life" and not in their idolized settings.


In a JPG Magazine story, Goldstein describes the series as placing...

...Fairy Tale characters in modern day scenarios. In all of the images the Princess is placed in an environment that articulates her conflict. The '...happily ever after' is replaced with a realistic outcome and addresses current issues.

I think that this photo series does a great job at showing how unrealistic these Disney princess really are by placing them in "real life" situations that are relevant to today's society.


This picture of Jasmine might be my favorite. I like the placement of her in the army as a strong woman. It's also just a visually interesting picture.

As of right now, there are 10 pictures in the series with 2 more to shoot. The series will go on exhibit October 15, 2009.

You can read a little more about the series here.

This Week In Blogs: June 21 - 27, 2009

Every Sunday (at least I hope), I will be posting some fantastic posts from other feminist blogs from the week.

Feminist bloggers have a lot to say and deserve to have their voices heard. These women (and men) have interesting and insightful opinions on a wide variety of topics. And I cannot comment on everything that happens in feminist news. So here we go...

• A couple in Sweden raises their child outside of the gender binary. Is this possible to do in a society full of gender socialization? Is it worth it? Ann at Feministing and Holly at Feministe weigh in.

• The way to solve the "abortion problem" is to start paying women to carry their babies to term and give them up for adoption, at least according to two men from Beliefnet and Slate.
  

• What should be a man's obligation when he impregnates a woman? Apparently men should have the right to refuse child support.

• Michael Jackson died at the age of 50. While remembering his gifts to the world of music, should we forget his indiscretions?

• Amnesty International creates a new ad campaign aimed to educate people about domestic violence using an eye-tracking camera. Ellen at Choices Campus Blog and Vanessa at Feministing discuss the implications in depth.

• Should women have to sign an informed consent to get breast implants?

• Honor women filmmakers, there aren't that many of them. New war/action film from Kathryn Bigelow released on Friday.

These are only some of the great feminist blog posts that I read this week, but they offer some valuable insight into the world of feminism, feminist analysis, and women's rights.

Happy reading! If you have any other blog posts that you find interesting from this week, please leave them in the comments below.

Joss' Strong Women

I LOVE Joss Whedon. He gave us great things like Buffy, Firefly, and Dr. Horrible's Sing-A-Long Blog. He's awkwardly amazing and amazingly awkward. I was perusing the Bitch Magazine Blog the other day and came across this amazing video of Joss Whedon's speech at an Equality Now event.



In this speech, Whedon offers his many answers that he gives when asked: "Why do you always write such strong women characters?" Sometimes he attributed it to people in his life such as his mother, his father and step-father, and his wife. My favorite answer, though, was his last.

Because equality is not a concept. It's not something we should be striving for. It's a necessity. Equality is like gravity, we need it to stand on this earth as men and women, and the misogyny that is in every culture is not a true part of the human condition. It is life out of balance and that imbalance is sucking something out of the soul of every man and woman who's confronted with it. We need equality, kinda now.

Joss Whedon is amazing. We need more writers like him in Hollywood to get some more strong women in entertainment. I can't remember a female character as strong, both physically and mentally, and human (kind of) as Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Thank you for these characters, Joss.

Virginity is Being Rebranded

I am a huge fan of Jessica Valenti and all of the people over at Feministing, so when I saw Valenti's article, "The Virginity Movement, Rebranded," in The Nation, I had to read it right away. Valenti's book, The Purity Myth, is about how the virginity movement is sexualizing abstinence and rolling back women's rights. According to Valenti, the virginity movement is,

much more than the same old sexism; it's a targeted and well-funded backlash hellbent on rolling back women's rights using modernized notions of purity, morality, and sexuality. Its goals are mired in old-school gender roles, and its primary tool is young women's sexuality.

In this article, she discusses how the virginity movement is fighting back against some of the bad publicity they have gotten recently, from Bristol Palin to Leslee Unruh, founder and president of the Abstinence Clearinghouse, screaming "I want more babies" on Fox News.

After these hits on the virginity movement, it has been trying to change its image. It has changed from abstinence-only education to "abstinence-centered" education apparently grounded in science.

Joe Sonka, managing editor of the Advocates for Youth blog Amplify, wrote of the lobby day, "Instead of abandoning their demonization of condoms and adherence to social conservative ideology over sound science, they would simply rebrand themselves as a curriculum that 'wasn't just about abstinence,' but was all about 'holistic approaches' to 'healthy lifestyle choices.'"

So while they claim that they are grounded in science and not just about abstinence, they are still using the same old tactics and same old curriculum to scare teenagers into not having sex.

They have even turned Bristol Palin into a poster child for abstinence. In a People magazine article, Palin said, "If girls realized the consequences of sex, nobody would be having sex." What sex education was she getting if she didn't know that sex could lead to babies? I'm pretty sure most people know this, they just aren't educated on how to stop a pregnancy from happening. It's unrealistic to expect teenagers to not be curious about sex. What is realistic is expecting them to make responsible choices about their sex lives by educating them about birth control and contraceptives.

According to Valenti, stopping the virginity movement is very important for women, teenagers, and basically the entire American population.

It's about stopping a movement committed to the regression of women's rights, enforcing gender norms and teaching America's youth -- especially young women -- that sexuality is wrong, dirty and dangerous.

Jessica Valenti does a great job at explaining the goal and strategies of the virginity movement and the reasons for fighting back. Another must-read by Valenti.

Buffy Kicks Edward's Ass

Many of you who know me know that I LOVE Buffy and that I have a weird fascination with the Twilight series (for many reasons, some feminist, some just pure curiosity in pop culture). I found this video that is a great mash up of both Buffy and Edward Cullen from Twilight. It shows the creepiness (i.e. sexist and controlling) of Edward in a more obvious way than in the actual Twilight movie. Now, I can tell the creepiness of Edward in the movie, but it is way more obvious when Buffy stands up to him.

The video is not great quality because it is just clips from Buffy episodes and Twilight (and some from Harry Potter), but it is really entertaining. Thank you to the blog The American Virgin to introducing me to the video.

The Purity Myth

This is one of the best books I have read in a while. The Purity Myth: How America's Obsession with Virginity is Hurting Women was written by Jessica Valenti, founder and executive editor of Feministing (one of my favorite blogs, you should check it out). So, how is the virginity movement harming women and girls? The virginity movement and the "purity myth" place women's value in their sexuality. Moral women are women who are pure (i.e. save themselves for marriage) and immoral women are dirty (i.e. have sex before marriage). Boys are taught to be respectful, strong, aggressive, etc. to be moral people where as girls are taught that their morality lies in their sexuality. Valenti offers many examples of this from purity balls (gag!) to Girls Gone Wild to abstinence-only education and everything in between. The book is very comprehensive in its argument and just overall a good read. It is easy to approach, funny and sarcastic, but obviously has valuable and credible research behind the argument.

So what needs to be done about the virginity movement's attack on women?

"Abstinence classes that tell girls they're dirty and used unless they "save it"; a culture that doesn't believe women who are raped; porn-based beauty standards for our genitals; a moral compass for young women that's based solely on sexuality...There's no doubt that we have a difficult fight ahead of us, but I know we're up for it," (203).

What we need is a more complex and comprehensive approach to sexuality. Should all teenagers be having sex? No, that is not what Valenti is arguing. She is simply arguing that we should teach our youth (through schools and cultural views and values) that sex is a natural thing, but you have to be prepared for it both in the way of protection and in the way of maturity. We cannot stop women from having sex. That is not what we want to do. Women's sexuality is a natural thing. We want women (and men) to be prepared for sex and not feel ashamed of their sex life.

I cannot not make this argument as eloquently as Valenti did, so I recommend that all of you read the book (and check out Feministing!).

Abortion is a Blessing

This isn't the common belief held by many people, including some feminists. I'll admit that I have occassionally used an argument along the lines of "yes, aboriton is a tragedy, but it is the lesser of two evils." I have used this argument to get anti-choicers to recognize a woman's right to choose and that sometimes it is the better option, even if it is "evil." What I was not aware of when I was making this kind of argument was that this argument might actually be deterring the pro-choice movement.

At the 2009 National NOW Conference, I heard Rev. Dr. Katherine Ragsdale talk about reproductive rights as an Episcopal priest. She says that "abortion is a blessing," never a tragedy. What is a tragedy, according to Ragsdale, is the loss of hopes and dreams. Whether an unplanned pregnancy is a resule of rape or just faulty birth control, abortion is blessing to that woman in need. Unplanned pregnancies can severely disrupt the hopes and dreams of women and abortions help to restore these. And when women want children and have a planned pregnancy, but health issues require her to get a late-term abortion to save her life, the loss of the hopes and dreams of having a child is the real tragedy. Not the abortion. Never the abortion.

When we, as feminists, make concessions that abortion is a tragedy but the lesser of two evils, we lose our footing and this will eventually lead to loosing the pro-choice battle. We are still fighting to uphold Roe v. Wade. Abortion providers are being murdered. This is a pro-choice battle. If we say that abortion is a tragedy, anti-choicers can use the argument that even pro-choice feminists believe that abortion is evil so it should be illegal.

As feminists, we need to stand our ground that abortion is a blessing for women who face the fear and stress of an unplanned pregnancy. We need to continue to defend the ruling of Roe v. Wade. We need to support our local or state abortion providers. We need to work for the reproductive rights of all women around the country and around the world.

The speech that Rev. Dr. Katherine Ragsdale gave at the 2009 National NOW Conference was really inspiring and eye-opening. I am so used to hearing the religious argument that abortion is murder, women shouldn't use birth control, and that LGBTQ people are less than human. But it was amazing to hear a pro-choice, reproductive and LGBTQ rights advocate who was a religious person, not to mention an Episcopal prient. Ragsdale was recently elected as the second woman and first openly lesbian or gay president and deal of Episcopal Divinity School. Ragsdale will be responsible for teaching and training a new generation of priests which will make strides (not steps) toward the religious support of reproductive and LGBTQ rights.

Rev. Dr. Katherine Ragsdale's selected sermons
EDS information on Ragsdale

What I Did This Weekend

This past weekend (June 19-21) I attended the National NOW Conference in Indianapolis, IN. It was an amazing conference filled with intelligent and passionate women. I felt right at home in the room of over 400 fellow feminists. In case any of you are interested, this is what I was up to there. I went to four workshops and saw some brilliant speakers.

The first workshop I attended was "Don't Be a Bystander: Own Your Sexual Health." This workshop covered various resources that are available about reproductive and sexual health led by a woman from SisterSong and two women from the National Library of Medicine.. I'm amazed at all of the valuable information that is out there and the work that is being done by organizations to make the information even better. Here are some of the websites that I especially liked:
Mapping Our Rights - Developed by SisterSong, this website has tons on information of the laws and policies in each state that relate to reproductive rights. Right now, it doesn't have everything, but it is still really comprehensive and you can request that they add information.
Medline Plus - Put out by the National Library of Medicine, this is a comprehensive health website, but has some great sections of Teen Sexual Health, Reproductive Health, Women's Sexual Health, etc.
Sex Etc. - a webiste geared toward LGBT teens who are questioning their sexual identity.
Women's Health - this website is pretty much what the name says, but it has some great info!

The next workshop I went to was "Square Butts, Date Rape, and Wicked Witches: Confronting Dangerous Media Messages." This was about the dangerous effect that the media has on women, from the self-esteem of girls and women to how men view women. This was an amazing workshop that was really comprehensive about the different types of advertising strageties and how the media portrays women. It also talked about things you can do to fight back. You can check out NOW's Media Hall of Shame. If you see an advertisement or news report that offends you, contact the company. If you decide to boycott a company based on their advertising campaign, make sure you let them know why. So many offensive ads have been taken out of magazines, off TV and down from billboards because people have written to the companies because of offensive material.

On Saturday, I went to "Feminist Blogging: Connecting Women Around the World." This workshop was pretty straight forward, but gave some valuable information on how to get started, what to post, and how to manage a blog.

Finally, I went to "Feminist Activism on Global Issues: CEDAW, Trafficking, Violence, Poverty, and Women's Health." This was such a jam-packed workshop and I arrived late because some other speakers ran over. But it was so comprehensive. The main focus was human and sex trafficking. You may not think that it's that big of a problem, but oh yes it is. It was kind of overwhelming to sit there and listen to all these horrible things that happen not only to women in other countries, but to women right here in the United States. The biggest problem in working against the trafficking of women is that there are no services for the women after they escape from their traffickers. I don't know what else to say because there was just so much information and it was so overwhelming.

The speakers at the conference included Lulu Flores, president of the National Women's Political Caucus; Donna Smith, health care advocate who was featured in Sicko; Barbara Ehrenreich, author of Nickel and Dimed and activist for women's and working class rights; Hon. Jennifer Brunner, first female Sec. of State of Ohio and Senate candidate to be the first female senator from Ohio; Hon. Gwen Moore, representative from Wisconsin; Dr. Julianne Malveaux, president of Bennet College for Women; and Rev. Dr. Katherine Ragsdale, the first openly lesbian or gay president and dean of the Episcopal Divinity School.

Overall, amazing conference, amazing people, amazing time!