Showing posts with label the f-word. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the f-word. Show all posts

Thursday, June 2, 2011

You know what bugs me?

Gendered nursery design.

Really? I mean, really? This child that just slid out of your birth canal OBVIOUSLY won't like pink and will like orange and brown because it happens to (apparently) have a Y chromosome?

This bugs me. Maybe more than it should given ALL THE OTHER THINGS that should be bugging me, but still. I read a lot of shelter blogs.

Sunday, January 9, 2011

In Which a Hobby Reinforces Harmful Gender Policing

I love it when blogs I would categorize as "fun" cover topics I call "serious." So imagine my delight upon finding The Studioist, and this post:


As the Guiness scientists would say, BRILLIANT!

The comments continue the goodness, with such snippets as:

"When I commented that “I think this personal space arms race is often a sign of culturally-reinforced familial dysfunction”, what I meant is that there are strong cultural narratives about how families should work that undermine families."

"...the “caveman” image insults everyone–it suggests that in the home or family sphere, men are incompetent, monosyllabic oafs, leaving women to be the Responsible Caretaker 24/7."

"I also found it strange that they call it a mom cave. As if women in general can’t have a place to themselves, unless they are a mom."


Sunday, January 2, 2011

Quibble

A number of blogs I read are written by women who are pregnant. Most of these are my cotton-candy blogs, that talk about clothes and jewelry and interior design and have pictures of cats. So I guess I shouldn't have particularly high expectations about this kind of thing, even when said bloggers are open about considering themselves kind of liberal, and mostly it's just a mistaken misuse of the word--

But I hate it when they refer to a fetus's "gender."

I mean, the kid is still a cashew-shaped blob with a tail, floating about in your amniotic fluid, and you're already talking about how it will conform to societal pressures and expectations about its appearance and behavior.

You mean your baby's sex, people. SEX.

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Mmm, what you say?

In honor of Tiger Beatdown, and Ladypalooza, and Silvana, I present you: entirely bitchin' music by ladies!

(as my taste in music is almost entirely vocally/lyrically driven, these are all female-sung, rather than focusing on female-played instruments)









My friends and I were all about Flyleaf when they first appeared on our radar. A girl! Who screams!

Also, in finding these videos, I find that I tend to buy vastly more music by men--female artists I like, like Tori Amos, I tend to not bother buying whole albums. I look her up on YouTube instead. This needs to be remedied!

Saturday, April 10, 2010

a reminder to The World:

Sometimes, emotion is a rational response.

If you insult me, my anger is not irrational. It is very rational, it is very real, and it is not a reason for you to cease listening to me.

Rationality and emotion are not mutually exclusive, people.

I wonder if this hatred of "emotion" and love of "ration" is related to the equally false mind/body dichotomy? Emotions are felt bodily, therefore they must be separate from and less than the good and rational mind. Men are rational, mind-oriented, women are irrational and body-oriented. Emotion is also bad because it is womanly--so women are bad because they are "emotional," and emotions are bad because they are "womanly," and it all goes in a big nasty circle until I want to grab the next man I talk to who says I'm being irrational and shake him till his big manly brain rattles around in his big manly skull.

And this is an ENTIRELY RATIONAL RESPONSE, people.

Rant brought to you by Tiger Beatdown and all the Freddies of the world.

[ETA five seconds later to add: "mansplaining" is my Word of the Year. Seriously, whoever made it up deserves a medal or something. In the shape of like, a dictionary with a dick.]

Monday, March 15, 2010

Friday, January 29, 2010

Watching the news

Special on the news my aunt is watching this minute:

Reporter goes to a women's gym to horrify the 20- and 30-somethings exercising by telling them that, oh noes! by the age of thirty they only have 12% of their eggs left!

I can't quite pin down exactly what's so facepalmy about this.

Is it the assumption that all women want to have children? That was definitely there. The concern that the human race might come to an end because educated able-bodied white women aren't popping out babies? There was the whole "oh no, women are having careers instead of having babies" thing.

Meh. Just a moment of annoyance while I happened to be online.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

How do you start?

I just got into an argument with a few white male friends who insisted that American white men are discriminated against, other forms of discrimination have nearly faded out of existence, and "racism doesn't exist up North."

*facepalm*

At least one of them is genuinely a cool and understanding person. I think he's just burnt out on the atmosphere at this liberal arts college, where no matter what the class, the point is often that White Men Are Evil. If I had the emotional wherewithal to calmly discuss a few pertinent examples with him, I might be able to get somewhere. But I am an emotional person and I'm dissatisfied with my living situation and my body hates me and I'm underpaid and my dog is dying, and I just. Cannot. Do it.

So, Irrational Female I remain.

The other guy? Is a know-it-all engineering major. The numbers of disciplines in which he thinks he is an expert and is Most Emphatically not are ridiculously numerous, and no matter what the argument he seems to end it with "whatever, we're not going to agree anyway," with an undertone of "I'm right and you're wrong, no matter what you say." To which tonight, I had so say, "You're right, we're not going to," and refrain from saying "because you're never going to listen to a word I say." He's the one who said "racism doesn't exist Up North." By Up North he meant, mostly, Boston. Any minority Bostonians want to disagree? I'm sure you're out there somewhere. Not that he'll listen.

And my beloved Wulfy had to take me home and comfort me, after being astonished at the ire I showed in this argument. And, because I am a white female and this is what I know, the conversation turned toward "women's issues." Why am I a minority anyway? My "minority" comprises 51% of the population, I say. My "minority" also makes less on average than your "majority," for the same work, of the same quality, over the same time. A female coworker of mine was flat-out told by our manager that she doesn't make as much money as a man who works with us, despite doing the same work and having more experience, because "it's a man's world, honey." And here's how I really flabbergasted him:

"Can you tell me when the last time you were really scared you were going to be raped? Because I can."

My car wouldn't start and I was near my workplace, and after catching a ride over I got a male coworker who used to work as a mechanic to take me back to my car and get it to start. And I was scared shitless to get into his car, but I need my car and I knew he could fix it and I was afraid to piss him off if I told him I didn't want to ride with him after he'd gotten our manager to give him permission to leave work, and I knew for sure he could fix my car, for free, and in a far shorter time that waiting an hour in freezing weather for a AAA person who was a totally unknown quantity. And I had to weigh that against the fact that he's over six feet tall to my 5'3", and weighs nearly twice as much as I do, and I know he can lift me a foot off the ground at arm's length.

And my boyfriend had no clue that I was scared that night, that I would have reason to be scared. Because he has never faced that kind of fear.

And now I am so far away from that original argument that I don't know what to think. I'm just a mess of these stupid emotions and I've cried too many times today.

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

Oh fer...

By the way, for whom it may concern... by Belle, including this link: Kali Ma.

Y'know, I'm pretty damn monotheistic, but even I have to admit that there are Forces out there that you shouldn't be screwing around with, and Kali is definitely one of them.

Goddess =/= Happy Fluffy Loving Mother Who's Automatically On Our Side.


Oh, and btw, in the link to info about Kali that Belle provides? "She is especially known in her Destroyer aspect, squatting over her dead consort, Shiva, devouring his entrails while her yoni sexually devours his lingam, penis." How much do I love that image? He doesn't penetrate her, oh no, she devours his penis with her vagina. How great is that.

Geez.

I found this through Ren...

And here's my response:


Photobucket


(artwork compliments of The Muffin)

I generally stay out of the Feminist Blog War because it makes my brain hurt. The cartoon in question is a case in point...as are this and this, by the same blogger.

In a post defending the latter comic, the author, Mary Tracy, says:

"I wish I could be a more positive person and use my abilities to help advance the feminist cause by bringing the spotlight to the people who are causing the real damage. I am aware of this, and, for what is worth, you have my word that I will try my best to change this aspect of myself."


Well gee, good job on that changing thing, I guess...

You know, I've seen some pretty nasty shit come from the "sex-pos" side and the "radfem" side...but it seems like more of it comes from the "radfem" side, from where I stand. And it seems to me like a lot of the time, the "radfem" side sticks its fingers in its ears and goes "lalalalaIcan'thearyoustupidwhore" when someone points out that they've said something insensitive, or hurtful, or sexist, or racist, or just downright wrong. And I won't say that the "sex-pos" folks don't do that too...just way less often.

And you know, even though I'm not really involved in all of it...I'm sick of it. Really. Cut it out. Whether or not you have hairy legs or wear makeup, or you hate porn or don't really mind it, or you have a boyfriend or not, doesn't mean you are or are not a feminist...in fact, IT'S NOT THE POINT OF FEMINISM AT ALL.

Women making choices, being in charge of their own lives, not having to be forced to stay at home or cover their faces lest they be stoned, not having to be scared to walk at night lest they be raped, not being trapped in abusive relationships because they can't support themselves, being able to get a good education or have a good job or sleep with someone or not sleep with someone if they want to, is the point.

And you know, if some of those choices include deciding to not watch porn or deciding to be a sex worker, so be it. But those choices are not the be-all-end-all of feminism.

Like my jerry-rigged cartoon says, there are more important things.

Geez.

Thursday, July 3, 2008

Delayed Creep-Out

As seems to be usual, I am behind. I just found out about Purity Balls.

Oh god, the creepy. The middle-aged dads, the dressed-up teenage girls, the vows (someone please tell the author of the vows that "cover" is a word for animal sex), the ring exchange...creepy creepy creepy.

Unfortunately, the video that seems to have sparked the discussion in 2006 has disappeared into the ether waves, but I rounded up some other pertinent links:

Would you pledge your virginity to your father? (Glamour magazine)

Purity Ball
(short documentary following a father and daughter)

Hey Little Girl... (thoughtful vlog about the Balls)

Serious ew (belledame on the subject of creepy controlling sexuality, Purity Balls included)

Purity and Danger (Queen Emily on the dangers of daughters reserving their sexuality for their fathers)

*shudder*

I took an abstinence pledge in February 2002, which would have made me about 15, through the True Love Waits program.

I even got the ring, see:















I still have it--it doesn't fit anymore due to me inexplicably losing a ring size. I still wear a ring in it's place though, because it would feel seriously weird to not have one (and I need balance for the rings on the other hand).

But this whole virginity thing is wearing kind of thin. Though I was interested in boys when I made that pledge, it was basically the same sort of interest I'd felt since I was about five. This whole virginity thing seemed clear cut and easy, to a young girl who found the idea of kissing with tongue distasteful (ew, slobber).

And now, I'm old enough to do anything but rent a car, basically, and in a good relationship with a boy I love and trust and desire. And if I decide to marry this kid, it will be, oh, five years? of waiting before we're both done enough with school to be able to move to the same city on a more or less permanent basis and get our shit straight so we can get married. And five years of horny youth is a long time.

And, beyond that, I'm pretty much positive that it will be difficult for me to not clutch my "purity" with such a tight fist once I'm married. One gets used to the idea that Sex Is Bad.

(Note, in the Glamour article, one girl says she worries that she might disappoint her husband by not being pleasured by his fucking. Poor kid, won't even allow herself to worry about her own pleasure except for how it might displease her owner.)

I know a number of people who would be appalled at me not upholding abstinence-until-marriage as wonderful and Godly and something everyone should do. But neither they nor my father owns me, and they don't get to say what I believe anymore.

Before this post falls apart utterly (I have a headache forming and I'm tired), I would like to say that my parents didn't push me into the True Love Waits thing at all. In fact, I recall my mom seeming a bit reluctant to buy me that ring. I found that odd but didn't think about it at the time; I now figure it's because they knew it was kind of a dumb idea.

Tuesday, June 3, 2008

Fear, Taboo, and Kink

Upon reading this post and the following comment discussion over at my web doppelganger's--that is, Amber's--I got into a discussion with a friend, we'll call him Alcée, about the meaning of the word "kink". The discussion blended into a discussion of what is "normal" and whether there are any constants from society to society, when we eventually decided that we'd never come to an agreement on a point and moved on.

Now, keep in mind, neither of us are experts on kink--far from it. But the closest anyone seems to get to a real definition is, as he said "something that's different from the norm, [sexually]." The question then became, but what is normal? Move from society to society, or even subgroup to subgroup within a society, and the rules change. Christian devotees of Domestic Discipline wouldn't say spanking your wife for disobeying the rules and then having sex with her is kinky--it's the Lord's will for a husband to rule his wife. My Christian mother would say heck yes, that's kinky*. Some would say using a blindfold and a feather is kinky, others would say oh gee, how vanilla.

So. Societal norms. Alcée says there are no constants from society to society; like the good once-upon-a-time student of society I am, I say there are three things that are taboo in all societies:

1. Murder within the group. (Thou shalt not kill--except the Phillistines)
2. Theft within the group. (Thou shalt not steal--except from the enemies of the Lord)
3. Incest. (Honor thy father and mother, but not like that!)

He of course took issue with this. There are times when it is societally acceptable to kill a member of one's group, he says.

I say sure, but the thing is, those who are acceptable to kill have in some way placed themselves outside of society already. Within fundamentalist Muslim communities, it's okay to kill a woman who had premarital sex because by breaking the rules she put herself outside of the community. She broke the rules, she pays the price. Within our society it's okay to sentence a man to death by lethal injection who murdered his buddy who fucked his wife because by breaking the murder taboo, he stepped over the line. He broke the rules, he pays the price.**

Incest, on the other hand, is pretty definitely forbidden but the definition varies. Is it taboo to sleep with your stepbrother? Can you marry your cousin? How about your uncle? Your mom? In our society most of these are taboo (depending on what state you live in) but in others, some would be, others not. The taboo on some act labelled incest, then, is constant. Would, then, some sort of real or play union with a verboten relative be "kinky" across the board?

Enough with the broad, societal view of kink. As Toby Keith said, I wanna talk about me!

My personal definition of kink would involve fear. The things that could be considered "kinky" that I like (in practice or in theory) fly in the face of things I fear.

I'm claustrophobic, so tie me up.
I fear pain, so whip me till I bruise.
I'm scared of heights, so suspend me from the ceiling.
I'm desperately afraid of being raped, so take me by force.

Which reminded me of a link Alcée sent me earlier today, and which I used in a vaguely scientific way to explain to him how fear is related to arousal:

Flow of potassium ions in brain cells is key to sexual arousal

The interesting thing here not being the potassium, per se, but the norepinephrine. If I remember correctly, norepinephrine is released in the brain as a response to epinephrine, commonly known as adrenalin.

The fight or flight response.

The pounding heart, the panting breath, the dilated pupils, the sweat.

The confusion of one type of physical arousal with another.

I'm also not a biologist, so don't jump on my ass for getting this connection wrong. It certainly makes sense to me.


*The word "kinky" is related in my memory to a moment when the fact that my mom is not, in fact, the Blessed Virgin was hit home. We were watching Trading Spaces, and the design of one of the rooms, a bedroom, focused around a bed that the couple had been given as a sort of bizarre wedding present; it had been handed down through several pairs of newlyweds in their family. It was a large canopy bed made of clear acrylic (like a stripper's platforms) which was bad enough, but towards the end of the show we simultaneously noticed that the acrylic canopy was lined with mirrors. We looked at each other and said, in unison, "wow, that's...kinky." Keep in mind that I had pretty much never talked about sex with my mom before so the fact that she knew the word and could recognize it when she saw it was a shock to my tender teenaged sensibilities.

**This is not to say that either capital punishment or honor killing is right by my own moral compass, only that it is generally accepted in that particular society.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Courtly Love

I said I'd post this here. It's about a five page paper. Not the best I've written, by far, but it made a good grade.


Courtly love, or fin amor, “fine love,” a literary tradition began in the Middle Ages, has had a lasting impact on Western thought.

The poetry of courtly love sprang up in the songs of the troubadours, often characterized as poor wandering minstrels, though in reality troubadours were often celebrated members of court. They entertained their fellow court members, in large part ladies and unmarried men, with songs of gallant knights elegantly seducing the beautiful ladies who drew their desire. Though the concept of courtly love originated in song, eventually young aristocrats imitated the stories in the troubadours’ ballads, and an elaborate set of rules sprang up to govern their affairs. Though the most “official” set was written down by Andreas Capellanus for Marie of Champagne, and consists of 31 rules, subsequent scholars have boiled down the concept of courtly love into more general elements (Halsall).

According to C.S. Lewis in The Allegory of Love, the three main elements of courtly love were humility, courtesy, and adultery (Delahoyde). The affairs of courtly love were usually extra-marital, with the lady in question a married woman being pursued by a younger, unmarried knight. Hence, the relationship between the two could be considered adulterous, especially if fully consummated, though there is disagreement about the level of physicality in the affairs of courtly love. Humility is exemplified in such relationships by the abject posturing of the knight and his raising the lady onto a pedestal, honoring her every wish as more important than his own desires. Lewis’s notion of courtesy stems from the idea that the feudalism of the times was reflected in the hierarchy of courtly love; the lady was in effect the liege lord, accepting the devotion of her vassal, the knight, but required to give reward in return.

The songs of courtly love had a very significant impact on the literature of Europe during the Middle Ages, an impact which can still be felt today. They established the tropes of love in Western literature; the anguish of the lover over the coldness of the beloved, the wan sickness of one wasting away with unrequited affection. These “ailments” had been recording much earlier by Ovid, but the troubadour tradition cemented them in Western thinking. Previously, the ballads of the Middle Ages were solely concerned with the daring exploits of male warriors like Beowulf; with the invention of courtly love, the gallant deeds of derring-do were not abandoned (the lady sets difficult tasks for the knight, in order to prove his love), but the points of view of the women in the stories were included, and room was made for romantic love. Though love poetry had existed for a long time in Arabic and Hebrew (as in the Song of Solomon), this was the first instance of it in Western literature. In fact, some scholars believe that romantic love itself was invented by the troubadours. C.S. Lewis was of the notion that romantic love was a literary invention, a lie, so to speak; however, it is of interest to note that his work relating to such matters was written well before he met the woman with whom he fell in love.

In Medieval times, women were given two role models, Mary and Eve. In the tradition of courtly love, women played both parts; beautiful, saintly Mary, passionately loved but inviolately chaste; and seductive Eve, giving in to temptation and desire. While previously, as evidenced in epics such as Beowulf, women were thought of as servants or as a way to cement political alliances through marriage, courtly love supposedly elevated the lady to a point where she commanded the lives and wills of the men pursuing her (Delahoyde). The knight obeys the every whim of the lady he loves. However, the eventual submission of the beloved to the lover is always included in such stories; while women are given a place in art and a modicum of power over their love lives, their freedom is still tightly circumscribed within the rules of courtly love. In fact, the lasting impact of the ideals of courtly love on literature has encouraged a continuation of the Medieval view of womanhood; the strong, handsome lover, the yielding beloved ultimately helpless to the lover’s desires. In the end, the lady is always subjected to the wills of men; her lover demanding payment for his adoration, her husband taking his property from the lover.

Whether or not romantic love was invented per se by Medieval poets, the work of such poets profoundly affected the meanings of the word “love.” While originally, the two types of love were sharply delineated—caritas, or charity, being Godly love, and amor, a term mainly designating carnal desire—the “religion of love” inspired by the practice of courtly love blurred the distinction. Amor became the more common word; the inscription on Dante’s medallion reads “amor vincit omnia,” love conquers all, but uses the term for romantic love instead of religious charity. The linguistic replacement of amor for caritas reflects the shift in importance between religiosity and secularism. Redemption and sublimation were formerly sought through the church; now, the acts and feelings of being in love were expected to raise men to a higher plane of being. The move from a religious society to a secular one in Europe was not solely due to the traditions of courtly love, but the ideology of courtly love (which one commenter calls “a suave new kind of paganism”) began to offer alternatives to the strict regulation of the Catholic Church; a very attractive alternative that made room for sexual pleasure (Simpson).

These ideas about the nature and function of love have had very interesting affects on life in the modern West. Christian preachers across America decry the state of the modern family, in particular the high rate of failed marriages. Such preachers often attribute the weakening of the traditional marriage structure to the immorality of our society (notable, homosexuality and pornography), but it can also be explained by a belief in a modified form of courtly love. Young lovers today still experience the symptoms of passion as described by Andreas Capellanus—the feverish desire, the loss of appetite, the preoccupation with the beauty of their beloved—Sex in the City’s “cant-live-without-you love”. However, the conventions of courtly love have an expiration date; love can be lost through discovery of the affair, or by bad conduct of the lovers, or even by spending too much time together. The modern Disneyfied version of romantic love, on the other hand, believes that this state of passion can last forever, and is a suitable basis for marriage. When the fervor of the newlyweds begins to die, however, they have none of the duty and companionship of medieval marriage to fall back on. As one story of Eleanor of Aquitaine’s Court of Love explains, once a lady marries her lover, he is no longer her lover but her husband, and the system of courtly love breaks down.

The concept of the lady herself is also consequence of courtly love, and possibly one of the more odious ones. Though the precepts of courtly love supposedly raised women to a better place in society, it kept women down for longer than it elevated them. In the (probably fictitious) Court of Love held by Eleanor of Aquitaine, Eleanor supposedly sat by the side of her husband, ruling over questions of love as the king made decisions about matters of law. While Eleanor herself was doubtless a very powerful woman, this Court of Love cemented the idea that matters of law and logic were masculine domains, while romance was for women. Echoes of this idea are heard in the voice of everyone today who tells a smart, career-driven woman that she should be finding a husband. The ideal lady in the tales of courtly love—a lady like Queen Guinevere, for instance—while originally cold toward her suitor, invariably turns into a damsel in distress, waiting to be rescued by her gallant knight. This image, so familiar as to seem innocuous, has cemented itself into the Western psyche, and with it the implication that, no matter how strong she seems, a woman still needs a man to protect and complete her, an idea that chafes any strong woman seeking to make her own way in the world. Both the image and the idea behind it are attacked in works considered feminist. For instance, Ani Difranco’s “Not a Pretty Girl” proudly proclaims “I am no damsel in distress, and I don’t need to be rescued.”

In short, the stories of courtly love and the lessons they taught had major impacts on society, both in the times of their conception and today. Though the modern world attempts to distance itself from Medieval ways of thinking, decrying them as primitive, even barbaric, the ideals of the age—including courtly love—are inextricably woven into the fabric of Western society.


Works Cited

Delahoyde, Michael. "Courtly Love." Michael Delahoyde Homeplanet. Washington State University. 08 Mar 2007 http://www.wsu.edu/~delahoyd/medieval/love.html

Halsall, Paul. "Andreas Capellanus: The Art of Courtly Love." Internet Medieval Sourcebook. Oct 1997. Fordham University. 7 Mar 2007 http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/capellanus.html

Simpson, David L. "Chivalry and Courtly Love." DePaul University. 1998. DePaul University. 8 Mar 2007 http://condor.depaul.edu/~dsimpson/tlove/courtlylove.html