Blog Hoppers!

Image from Etsy

Happy Thursday everyone! I hope this week has treated you all well! I encourage you to take a look at the conversation happening at my post about how men cannot be feminists and join in, there's some really great stuff going on over there! Here are some of my favorite posts over the past couple days. Don't forget to leave what you have been writing and reading in the comments!!

The 5 Ways Glamour Undermines Its Size-12 Self-Acceptance Message [Glossed Over]
All of the uproar over Glamour's size 12 model didn't quite sit well with me and didn't really know why, but Wendy has explained my uneasiness about it very well.

Bros before Hos: A Post Ted Kennedy Story [Recursive Paradox]
After Sen. Ted Kennedy's death, everybody was quick to praise his contributions to women's rights. But Recursive Paradox pointed out a not very well-known story about Ted Kennedy that should also be remembered!

Will Kate Gosselin EVER get a date? [Salon Broadsheet]
How the media has been portraying Kate Gosselin as lonely.

The Feminist Lens: The Yellow Wallpaper [Small Strokes]
A look at how to teach a feminist text in a high school setting. And make sure you check out her Teaching Feminism in Schools series.

Campaigning for What, Exactly? [this ain't livin']
A critical look at Dove's Campaign for Real Beauty.

Are Animals and Humans the Same? [Womanist Musings]
PeTA's advertising techniques and how black people are often portrayed as animals.

Linkfest!

I had a hard time coming to inspiration today. But the good news: I started my job today! Actually I'm probably there right now, since this post was scheduled. The bad news: since I'm starting a job, I might not have as much time to post, so while I get adjusted to my new schedule, there might be a dip in the number of posts. But no worries, I promise to try to keep up! Just as a side note, there are some great discussions going on at my post about thin privilege and my post about the racism behind District 9, so take a look and join the conversation!

Here are some of my favorite posts of the past couple days! Don't forget to leave what you've been writing and reading in the comments...I'm all about self-promotion!

Is showing a plus-size model really 'progressive'? [Appetite for Equal Rights]
The blogosphere was going ga-ga over "the girl on page 194" of the latest Glamour, but Amy wonders if this was really that progressive.

Douchebag DESchatz uses Guinness to construct women as shared surface for beer [Deeply Problematic]
A "joke commercial" for Guinness displays themes of dehumanization and rape.

Getting out of the way so women can save the world [Feministing]
A look at the recent NYT Magazine about "Saving the World's Women."

Why Feminism Should Be Taught in School [Small Strokes]
A look at the reasons feminism should be an integral part of the curriculum from the perspective of a teacher. Also see the first part of How Feminism Should Be Taught in School: How Feminism Should NOT Be Taught in School.

For Blue Eyes: Pecola Breedlove Lives [Womanist Musings]
Renee has a great post about internalized hatred.

The Racism Behind District 9 [Movie Monday]

I had heard the bad things about District 9. I had heard that it was racist, but didn't go too much into these blog posts because I didn't want to see the spoilers because I was still interested in it. Then I read the Time magazine review of the movie that hailed it for it's innovation and social commentary on apartheid. I was confused as to why these progressive bloggers would call the movie racist and Time magazine could have such a great review because of the social commentary that the purposeful racism provides. So I had to figure this out for myself (of course, if I had read the spoilers in those blog posts, I would understand why they called it racist, but I didn't want to ruin the movie).

The movie was shot and edited in a really interesting way. It was a combination of a documentary with interviews about the incidents and actually seeing these incidents. It had great special effects - the aliens, explosions, gun fights, and all. The story line is actually fairly interesting.

*Spoiler Alert!*

District 9 is a story about aliens that have become stranded on Earth in Johannesburg, South Africa. They have been sectioned off to District 9 - a slum full of crime, violence, and prostitution - and the aliens are referred to as prawns. They are referred to as prawns because of both their appearance and the view that they are "bottom-feeders."

Now District 9 is a very clear (and pretty intentional) analogy for apartheid in South Africa, especially seeing as how it takes place in South Africa. So if the aliens are supposed to be the black South Africans, the black South Africans are not painted in that good of a light. The aliens are mean, violent, dumb, have very little social order, and are just generally pictured as evil. This is not an accurate picture of the life in the slums of South Africa during apartheid.

The writer and director, Neill Blomkamp, is a South Africa native who is now 29, but left South Africa when he was 18. In the Time magazine review of District 9, Blomkamp had this to say about the political commentary of the movie:

He became aware "that all these very serious topics about racism and xenophobia and segregation would start to shine through the science-fiction-esque veneer. I had to be very careful that i didn't get too close to these serious topics with a film that's mostly a summer thrill ride."

He should have taken these "serious topics" more seriously. While the end of the movie does become a science-fiction "thrill ride," the beginning of it is very much serious and very much about apartheid. He should have thought more about the portrayal of the aliens.

So while there is definitely supposed to be racism in the movie between humans and the aliens, the movie is more racist that it intends to be by portraying the aliens in such a bad light when they are supposed to be an analogy for black South Africans.

Christopher is the only alien that is really painted in a good light. He just wants to get home and protect his son. He's more intelligent than the other aliens. We are supposed to side with him and feel empathetic towards his decisions. But he is the one exception!

Then we get to the portrayal of the black humans in the movie. All of the main people in the movie are white and part of a private military company. The main black people in the movie were the Nigerians living in District 9. The Nigerians were major antagonists in the movie. They were cruel, thieves, and obsessed with alien technology. They even eat pieces of aliens in the thought that it will give them alien powers. Not a very friendly portrayal.

And then there is the representation of being mixed-raced. The protagonist, Wikus, becomes infected with alien technology and starts to morph into an alien. He is treated as sub-human - medical testing is done on him, he is valued solely for his ability to operate alien technology - and as soon as he escapes, he is targeted, hunted. He's not human and not an alien.

The movie would have been better on many levels if the aliens were portrayed as more sophisticated, less violent, etc. Not only would it be less racist (not completely erasing the racism), but it would also make the story more complex and increase the internal struggles of the human characters.

District 9 was hard for me to place. It was blatantly racist (and not in its representation of apartheid). How can I take a movie seriously if it aims to provide social commentary on apartheid but then is racist itself? But the movie was beautifully made and unique. Since I'm writing this right after I saw it, I am still kind of shocked. It was gruesome and gory on top of the racism. I don't know what to tell you about a recommendation. If you can handle the blatant racism (and the gore), it might be worth it to see because of its uniqueness. But I don't want to support something that is so racist. So I will let you make the decision for yourself after I have given you my opinion about the movie.

This Week in Blogs: August 16-22

Happy Sunday! As you may have noticed, I have started posting some link love on Tuesdays and Thursdays as well as Sundays now. Sunday's link love posts will be slightly different now. I will include some of my favorite posts since Thursday, but I will also feature some of my favorite posts from the week overall, including posts that were already loved previously. Just a disclaimer: I have been kind of lazy about my reading this week, so the list is not as long as it normally is. I'm always looking for new posts and blogs to read, so don't forget to leave your links in the comments!

New link love:
The Girl on page 194 - Below the Belt
A look at how we judge women's bodies by examining the "real woman" picture in Sept's issue of Glamour magazine.

Sex is scary (at least to some journalists) - Clarissa's Blog
How our fear of sex is a result of the patriarchal culture.

But men aren't pretty - o filthy grandeur
Challenging gender norms through language.

Today's WTF: Fragoli - The Undomestic Goddess
About how lesbianism is portrayed in advertising

Thomas Jefferson: The Face of a Rapist - Womanist Musings
Thomas Jefferson was an integral part of the development of our country, but should we forget that he was also a rapist? Also posted at Feministe.

Weekly Link Love:
Attn. Straight Women: Gay men are not your accessories - Feministing
"Perhaps the more subversive act today is to decline to preface the term "friend" with a description of that person's sexuality."

Michelle O.: "Intellectual Lightweight"? - Salon Broadsheet
Apparently Michelle Obama is not as smart as she thinks she is...

"Blinded by privilege": ableist language in critical discourse - Deeply Problematic
A reflection on how the language we use contributes to the oppression of others.

***********

There is a new blog on the block: Fiercly Independent
The blog is run by Leftunder Books and focuses on indie publishing, writing, reading, feminism, illustration, and some other stuff. Check it out!

Linkapalooza!

Happy Thursday everybody! Only one more day to the weekend, not that it matters to me because the entire week is like the weekend for me, just less exciting. But that's all about to change. I've finally found a job at Barnes & Noble that I will be starting soon!

Here are some of my favorite posts from the past couple days...

Lois Lane at the Movies: A Brief Herstory Part Two! [Bitch Blogs]
Looking at the role Lois Lane plays in the Superman comics and movies.

"Blinded by privilege": ableist language in critical discourse [Deeply Problematic]
A reflection on how the language we use contributes to the oppression of others.

Carnival of Feminists #2 [Female Impersonator]
A collection of feminist blog posts over the past two weeks.

Women in the Boardroom [Gender Across Borders]
Why are so few women making it to the top of employment ladder?

Racism and Power [Womanist Musings]
"The insistence on using terms like post racial, race card, and reverse racist, stem from the desire to not only present racism in a past tense but to infer that only Whiteness should exist with the power to realize its prejudice."

Link Love

Due to the large amount of amazing posts that are written throughout the week, I have decided to change my "This Week in Blogs" feature from once a week to three times a week. It will now simply be called "Link Love" and will be posted on Tuesday, Thursday, and Sunday. Sunday's will usually be a little longer because I will highlight my absolute favorite posts from throughout the week, including posts that might have already been highlighted in previous "Link Love" posts. I decided to do this to keep the lists shorter than they have been, because including too many links in one post can be a little overwhelming...at least for me.

Movie Posters: Are You Ready for Death/Love/Prison? - Bitch Flicks
Bitch Flicks continues to look at how movie posters reflect gender norms and women.

Privilege - Clarissa's Blog
A little old, but still good. A look at the overuse of the word "privilege."

Michelle O.: "Intellectual lightweight"? - Salon Broadsheet
Apparently Michelle Obama isn't as smart as she thinks she is...

Costco and the Lil' Monkey Doll - Womanist Musings
Looking at how black dolls and white dolls are marketed differently. Also posted at Feministe.

Is Faking an Orgasm Anti-Feminist? - BlogHer
Pretty self-explanatory -- Do your feminist beliefs align with faking orgasms? Does faking an orgasm do a dis-service to yourself and to other women?

The F Word - Clutch Magazine
I bet you can guess what "f word" they are talking about!

Kate Blatt required to give pictures of genitals as a condition of employment - Deeply Problematic
About how trans people are dehumanized on a daily basis.

Attn. Straight Women: Gay men are not your accessories - Feministing
"Perhaps the more subversive act today is to decline to preface the term "friend" with a description of that person's sexuality."

Portraying Motivation Behind Sodini Killings

This morning I received an email from my friend who lives in Pittsburgh containing a link to this cartoon:


This is an editorial cartoon from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette by Rob Rogers. I think it does a good job at portraying the motivations behind the shooting at LA Fitness last week.

I have chosen not to write a lot about this horrible event because I feel like other people have done a better job at summarizing and analyzing the event than I could. So here, I will provide links to some articles that I find particularly interesting about the event:

Once more with feeling: Media Must Report Gender Motivation for Mass Shooting [WIMN's Voices]
Women At Risk [New York Times]
George Sodini: Misogynist and Racist [Womanist Musings]
Men's Rights Activists, Anti-Feminists, and Other Misogynists Comment on George Sodini [Alas, a blog]
The Sodini Killing [FBomb]

This Week in Blogs: August 2 - 8

My has this been an eventful week. On the good news, Judge Sotomayor was finally confirmed to be a justice on the Supreme Court. A definite piece of history. Then there were the misogynistic and racist shooting in Pittsburgh. Horrific. And the loss of one of my favorite 80s icons, John Hughes. Bloggers have been busy this week, reporting and analyzing this news as well as creating fantastic blog posts. Honestly, posts from everywhere this week were fantastic (not that they aren't always). I had a hard time choosing posts to feature here. The list is especially long this week, but these are some really great posts, so make sure to read through them! And leave links to what you have been writing and reading this week!

50 Books for Problematic Times - Deeply Problematic
There has also been some other great things going on at Deeply Problematic this week, so I suggest that you just go on over there and read through her posts. If I had to pick one to display here, I guess I would pick her feminist defense of Megan Fox. But seriously, just go over there

Movie Posters: A Bitch Flicks Verbal Beatdown - Bitch Flicks
Stephanie R looks at how women are represented in movie posters.

Am I a"good woman"? - Choice Campus Blog
Ellen asks what it means to be a "good woman" and why people can't just be "good people."

Girl Politics - Small Strokes
A new series examining why girls (and women) often "turn on" the most successful one of their peers.

The 20 Life-Changing Lessons in September's Cosmopolitan - Glossed Over
What you can learn from reading Cosmo.

Esquire Writer Explains It's Okay To Watch Chick Flicks - Jezebel
While I have objections to the term "chick flicks," do you think that men can enjoy them? Esquire and Jezebel do!

Race and the White Man - Womanist Musings
All about racism

Breastfeeding doll will lead to horny 5 year olds, pregnancy - Feministing
Because about caring for a baby can lead to 5 year olds having sex. Have these people ever played with a doll, that's what they're all about.

EWW! Is That Period Blood? - Jump Off the Bridge
About the creation and beauty that can come from menstrual blood.

Another magazine another photoshopped woman - Feministe
Self magazine photoshopped Kelly Clarkson to make her more skinny.

On Hollywood's Strong, Self-Hating Women - NPR
Strong business women in movies still hate themselves because they are unsuccessful in their love lives. Heaven forbid a woman succeed in business and be happy in her personal life.

Once more with feeling: Media Must Report Gender Motivation for Mass Shootings - WIMN's Voices
Some more on the misogynistic shooting in Pittsburgh.

Who's your favorite John Hughes heroine? - Salon Broadsheet
Pretty self-explanatory and and read through her posts.

Books for the Anti-Princess Girl-Feminist - Bitch Blogs
A list of children's books for the feminist-minded girls.

New Hosts for At the Movies - Another Couple of Guys - Women & Hollywood
Why is that movie critics are generally male? Women know stuff about movies too!

Liar Publishers "Fix" Their Lies

A couple weeks ago I learned of the book Liar by Justine Larbalestier, to be released in October. The book is about a young African American woman who is a compulsive liar. In the book she is described as an African American with short, nappy hair. But would you think that by looking at this cover?

The cover shows a young, white woman with long hair that covers her mouth. Picking a white model to portray a black character does not make sense and is downright offensive. Larbalestier talks about how authors actually get very little say in their cover art:

The US Liar cover went through many different versions. An early one, which I loved, had the word Liar written in human hair. Sales & Marketing did not think it would sell. Bloomsbury has had a lot of success with photos of girls on their covers and that's what they wanted. Although not all of the early girl face covers were white, none showed girls who looked remotely like Micah.

I strongly objected to all of them. I lost. (via Appetite for Equal Rights)

Bloomsbury (the publisher of Liar) obviously thought there was no problem with having a white girl portray a black character. Really? You can't see the problem?

Well, apparently they have "learned their lesson." I put this in quotes because I don't think that they really have realized what's wrong, they are just responding to the backlash. Via a tweet from @ameyawarde, I was tipped off to this article from Publisher's Weekly, that talks about how Bloomsbury plans to change the cover art to a woman who more closely resembles the character in the book.

From this article, Bloomsbury representatives had this to say about the decision to change the cover art:

“We regret that our original creative direction for Liar—which was intended to symbolically reflect the narrator’s complex psychological makeup—has been interpreted by some as a calculated decision to mask the character’s ethnicity [...] It is our hope that the important discussions about race and its representation in teen literature continue. As the publisher of Liar, we also hope that nothing further distracts from the quality of the author’s nuanced and accomplished story, and that a new cover will allow this novel’s many advocates to celebrate its U.S. publication without reservation.”

I can't really see how a white woman reflects "the narrator's complex psychological makeup" if the narrator is black. Maybe I'm just missing something, but I don't think so. I think the publisher just thought that the book would sell better if there was a white woman on the cover.

I applaud Bloomsbury's decision to change the cover. It's the right thing to do. But it never should have happened in the first place.

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!

White Men's Objectivity

Why is it that white men think that they are the only ones that can be objective?

I must be honest, I haven't been watching the Sotomayor confirmation hearings, but I have been doing my blog reading about them. From what I have been reading, it is obvious that these hearings are not being as "objective" and respectful as they claim to be.

But one of the things that really bothers me is how they are focusing on her often misquoted "wise Latina" speech (which can be read here). In this speech she talks about the importance of embracing cultural differences in reaching decisions on court cases. Women and people of color have different experiences than white men and these different experience influence their court decisions.

Many far right wing-ers think that this shows her lack of objectivity and inability to reach "fair" decisions. But I'm right there with Judge Sotomayor. Realizing how one's experiences influence their decisions is important. For some reason, many white men think that they are the only ones who can be objective because their life experiences don't effect them. But they do.

Everyone's experiences effect the way they think and the way they approach an issue. White men's privilege effects them, even if they don't recognize it. On Feministing, Samhita says...

Session's attempts to grill Sotomayor on this question of impartiality reveals the obvious ignorance that when white men hold partial beliefs they are natural and objective, whereas when women of color do, they are unable to effectively do the job.

When women or people of color (and especially women of color, it seems) use their experiences as a basis for their decisions they are emotional and biased, whereas white men reach the "truth" through their experiences.

I think what these men are delusional of is that there is actually something called objectivity. I don't think objectivity exists. Maybe you can try your hardest to be objective, but your experiences will always influence you. Only people who have the privilege of not noticing their privilege (white men) would believe that their experiences don't effect them because they can reach the "truth".

(Note: I just want to make a comment that this is not all white men. There are many white men who work towards realizing their privilege and how their experiences effect them and the people around them. But it is usually white men who make these assumptions about objectivity and bias because these white men do not realize their privilege.)

In addition to the idea of objectivity within the hearings, the media is still attacking and misrepresenting Sotomayor. I just read a post at Shakesville about The Colbert Report last night. Normally I appreciate Colbert's sarcasm and satire, but last night he went too far. In discussing Sotomayor's confirmation hearing, Colbert placed Sotomayor's head of the clip Sharon Stone from Basic Instinct where she flashes her "nethers" during an interrogation.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Stephen's Sound Advice - How to Bork a Nominee
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Jeff Goldblum

This unnecessarily sexualizes Sotomayor and further demeans her to the point that she is seen as in a lesser standing than men. Why can't Sotomayor just be valued for her professional qualifications rather than focusing on her gender and race as some sort of "disability" to making effective court decisions.

I hope that the confirmation hearings will change in tone after the first day, but I'm not so sure that they will. Conservatives will continue to focus on her experiences as a Latina as a "disability" to her ability to be a Supreme Court justice and the media will continue to make jokes about her qualifications or straight out support the conservatives treatment of her during the hearings.


Note on the cartoon:
I'm sure many of you (if not all) have seen the cartoon that I chose to include in this post. While it is straight out racist, there is some truth in it considering the first day of the hearings. Conservatives are attacking Sotomayor because she is Latina, which I assume this cartoon is trying to say. While it is racist, it does portray how conservatives and the media are treating Sotomayor. But I'm not saying that I agree with the message that the cartoon sends.

Megan Fox is Setting a Bad Example...Anyone Surprised?

I saw "Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen" for the second time last night when I took my neighbors to see it. I was interested in seeing it again not only because I like action movies but also because something about it bothered me the first time. I thought that seeing it a second time would help me get past the explosions and loud noises to help me better understand what bothered me about it the first time.

It was obvious, even the first time, that there were racial stereotypes (even though Michael Bay, the director, claims it's just comedic relief) and it was also obvious that Megan Fox's character didn't really serve a whole lot of purpose, at least not to me.

I'm not going to talk too much about the racial stereotypes, there has been a lot of discussion of that (see Newsday and Valley24 - for a more positive review of the movie). What I do want to talk about is the obsolete character of Mikaela Banes, played by Megan Fox.

To me, it seems like the only thing that Fox seems good at in this movie is having pouty lips and wearing low cut shirts while running in slow motion and falling cleavage first in front of the camera. And the main storyline surrounding Mikaela Banes is her trying to get Sam (Shia LaBeouf) to tell her that he loves her.

The first time she tries to get him to say those three words she changes into a white dress to look like the hot, innocent girl. Throughout the movie, she brings this up numerous times and threatens to leave him if he doesn't say it. The message that I got out of this is that to get boys to love you, you have to look hot and wear low cut shirts and very high heels and this is your whole purpose in life. You can't contribute meaningfully to saving the world from killer robots, you just have to get the guy to want you. What kind of message is this sending to the teenage (and younger) boys and girls that are populating the theaters in the thousands (or more, I don't know exactly)?

When I saw this last night, I took four children (1 girl and 3 boys) all under the age of 12. I didn't know what to tell them when they asked why I didn't like Megan Fox's character. Do I tell them that she's only there as a sexual object whose only purpose is to have teenage boys stare at her for hours on end (and Fox likes it that way)? What I did end up telling them was that she was setting a bad example for women and teenage girls. But they didn't really understand what I meant.

How do we talk to children (especially ones that aren't your own, in my case) about what Megan Fox and her character mean for women? How do we expect these children to grow up to have healthy relationships if they keep seeing these types of ones in the media where girl is desperate to be desired and the guy refuses to say "I love you" until the girl says it first? Not to mention how do you discuss the racial stereotypes of the Transformers with them?

Maybe it's just me or the fact that these children aren't my own (I don't want to step on the toes of their parents), but it was a really awkward moment for me when they asked why I didn't like Megan Fox. If they don't understand why this character is harmful to women, what does that mean for them when they grow up?

Nixon Excuses Interracial Abortions

On June 23, the New York Times published an article titled "On Nixon Tapes, Ambivalence Over Abortion, Not Watergate." While many of the issues discussed in the article, from Watergate to Vietnam, are very interesting and important to foreign and domestic policy, the one thing that I was struck by in the article were the three short paragraphs at the beginning of the article where Nixon discussed Roe v. Wade and abortion.

Not only did Nixon think that abortion encouraged "permisiveness" and that "it breaks the family," but he also had some interesting views for cases that would permit abortions. Nixon said, "There are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white," only later adding, "Or a rape." Apparently interracial pregnancies are just as bad as pregnancies caused by rape, according to Nixon, if not worse, because the case of rape was only added on later.