Sunday, 16 December 2007

I don't care if you think I'm full of shit, I think you're being an idiot*.

To deny that the time of year in which one is born makes no difference to that person's development and personality is to deny that external forces, things, stimuli, etc have an effect on humans.

To deny that this does not follow a relatively cyclical pattern denies that the earth is different during different parts of the year.

In the winter, the sun shines on the planet for a shorter period of time. Many people experience a malaise during the winter due to the shortened daylight hours. When we were farmers, we saved for this time, but had less work. In the summer, when the daylight was long, there was more work to do. Sunup to Sundown in the summer might be 5am to 9pm, in the winter, it is 7am to 5pm. Now we have to work the same amount of time year round, when our bodies, much like the trees, respond to the shortened daylight hours by making us lazier, more tired, and for some, depressed.

To say this would not affect an infant is to deny that external stimuli shape our person. The Nature vs. Nurture debate is classic, and more and more we are learning that Nurture plays an important role in shaping who we are. Where once it was fact that women were not good at x, y, or z, we are learning that they are not good at it because they were not encouraged to be good at it.

Research on the few feral children that have been found has indicated that maybe even our conciousness and intelligence are shaped by nurture. If a child never hears someone talk, they will not develop language. Feral children are fascinating, go ahead and research them.


Nothing can predict the future, but we can examine how our past shaped our present. There is essentially one source of information about the effect of the time of year of birth on the individual. Science seems to have ignored this aspect, probably because the variables are very numerous and the results are not always obvious. But the one source has been around for a long time, developed back when people stayed in the same village all their lives. Observing the behavior of a summer baby and a winter baby as they grew was easier, and the external stimuli were less of a variable than they are today. Except, of course, for the relative position of the sun in the sky (or the earth's position in orbit). You know, we're not all unique precious snowflakes - then again, even snowflakes follow a pattern.


I am a cancer. I am ruled by my emotions and I crave attention. Libras never take anything serious enough for me and are flaky. I'm not sure any of my friends are Aries, mostly because before I get close enough to someone to learn their birthday, I've decided that that person always acts 'holier than thou,' and thats how Cancers typically view Aries. I have a lot of fun with Virgos, and the dramatic nature of Scorpios intrigues me. Scorpios also seem to be better able to handle my need for attention. I don't know many Capricorns, except my mother, who never understood why I was so emotional as a child. My father, on the other hand, was also a cancer, and he gets angry a lot. He never understood my desire to be left alone as a teenager, but he also had 11 siblings and my mental illness came from my mother's side.

But you know that's all crap, right? The relative position of the sun in the sky at the time of birth has no effect on anyone. I mean, why would it? It just affects the climate, makes food grow, water freeze, and lights up the world. No, humans are impervious to being affected by the relative position of the sun in the sky.

/sarcasm

You really think that the fact that both my father and I were born on a summer day in central Wisconsin is completely irrelevant in explaining why we're both so volitile and love talking to people (among other similarities)? Why doesn't my sister talk as much as we do? She was raised in the same house. Could it be because my sister was born on the coldest day of the year, when the sun set at 5 and just before the biggest holiday of the year? It is easy to see that my dad essentially married his mother. My mom can't understand my desire to have a "day off" where I do absolutely nothing. She once encouraged me to "get a third job, so you can work 60 hours a week, think about how much money that would be!" In a similar way, my dad's mom was known in the area for being a hard worker, and for expecting everyone else to work just as much. She was a businesswoman, farmer, mother, and teacher. One was raised on a farm, the other in a city. Maybe it is because they were both the youngest in their families, maybe it is because my dad was looking for someone like his mom, but nevertheless, they were both born on December 30, though 30 years apart.

*sorry about the abrasiveness of the title, I'm just sick and tired of people being so close-minded on this.

A charitable marketing ploy.

So Tampax is donating money that helps Southern Africa. According to the commercial, girls in Southern Africa often miss school during their period because they don't have protection.* Might it get me to buy tampax? Yes, actually. In fact, if I could find tampax sans applicator and bulky packaging, I would buy it. Until then, I'll stick to o.b./organic.

What that means, however, is that I can't donate to a really, really great cause. If I could ship a carton of tampons/pads to Southern Africa myself, I would. Here are some links:

Some blog
A Yahoo News Site

Where can I find out how to contribute directly to this effort? I mean, Always is also involved, and I do buy that brand, but I would like to also be able to give personally.

*More proof that we are in a man's world - school and work were designed for men and would be very different if designed for women. So clearly, we have a long way to go.

Ok, so it has a lot of the problems of other Hollywood movies, but there is something really feminist about it

Legally Blond - she started as the stereotypical woman, got dumped by a boy just trying to follow his patriarchical past. She applied for law school, hoping to get him back. In the course of trying to fit in, and then kicked ass at law school. When he wanted her back, she said, "if I'm going to be a partner in a law firm by the time I'm 30, I need a boyfriend who isn't such a complete bonehead," and walked away. In the end, she graduated - taking the place of the wedding scene for a lot of "chick flicks." What a great plot line for a protagonist. And she planned to have a real career, there was still a proposal at the end, but it was like icing on the cake.

Saturday, 01 December 2007

Pageant Moms

OMG OMG OMG

E has Pageant Moms Unleashed.

What a terrible terrible terrible WASTE of little girl's time!

Sure, they love it, who doesn't love to get dolled up, but what these girls are focusing on is "the right hair, the right make-up, the right clothes, the right smile."

Not to mention that the little girls are making money. Did I say the little girls? No, I mean the MOTHERS, the FAMILY. 6 year olds vying to get $45 grand?

That sounds like CHILD LABOR to me!!!!!

This is a horrible show, and these are horrible people. This is the dumbing down of America. These poor little girls are going to grow up so paranoid about their looks, so devoid of intelligence, so empty and perhaps even too empty to realize what they're missing.

Thank god I decided to focus on my smarts at a young age. Thank my lower-middle class upbringing. Thank whatever it was, but I would rather be smart.

Thursday, 29 November 2007

Doing Something

I just saw a sexist ad from T-Mobile and I sent them a message saying that I will not be purchasing their goods or services as long as their sexist ads persist. I'll stick by that, though I may not apply it to every business. I don't use T-Movile, so it won't be hard to not use it. In fact, I had no desire to spend money on T-Mobile, so boycotting it does not impact me. It also wouldn't impact T-Mobile. They didn't get my money before, they won't get it now, but now they know that sexism will not earn them my money, ever.

Clean and Clear

The Clean and Clear acne treatment does a better job than Proactive, according to the commercial. If true, thats a good thing, because acne, especially the worst acne, can be terrible for a teenager. Even if no one says anything, the kid still sees the problem. As a kid, I was more traumatized by being teased for crying. My weight was never a big issue, except in my head. I mean I lived in my body, I looked in the mirror, and I felt the humiliation of not being as athletic as everyone else.

Fun Fact: I once saw a book at the library about re-thinking American gym classes. "It's about time," I thought, and I scanned the book on a break from my reference job. It intrigued me as I do think physical education is very important. But 11 years of gym never taught me the things I needed to know to be fit. I only learned those things in my college gym class. I learned about the heart rate and that it didn't matter what what I did. So what if I couldn't run? I could walk and it was ok. At that point in my life, I still thought I could change people's minds, or at least have a discussion with them, even if they had never met me. So I emailed the author, telling her that I saw her book in the library. I asked how she would work with those children that might not ever get the skills of sports, but that still needed physical activity in their lives, children like I was. In her response, she asked me where I bought her book.

I was insulted. This woman arguing that she was really an academic, and that physical education was crucial to society and life, only cared that I contributed to her income with my purchase. I didn't bother to respond, thinking, "she's just a gym teacher."


Kids with acne do not need to be teased to feel bad about their acne. They see it in the mirror and they think it is ugly. If something works even better than Proactive, which works well, then great! We could eventually cure acne. Then I see the before and after. I thought I was seeing the after picture. The girl had some brown spots on her face, very faint. But it was the before. She had acne? The second girl was the same. Those girls looked like me, or any other woman, simply without make-up. I have differently colored spots all over my face. I also have a natural redness in my cheeks that doesn't look really look good. I feel more confident and professional in make-up, and people think my skin looks awesome. Really, a co-worker asked me, my 265 pound self, if I ever thought about modeling because of my skin. I was flattered, then told her the story about the time I was approached to be a model in a mall and declined because "I had to put my groceries in the fridge." And people have said that I don't look that different without my make-up, but I feel different. With make-up, I don't have to think about my face, so I can think about other things, like my job. I don't think there is anything wrong with doing what you can to feel confident.

But the women in that commercial were not suffering from acne. I've seen acne, I've seen the faces scarred by acne, and that was not acne. The Proactive commercials have far more convincing before pictures. Do not lie to me, as an adult, and do not fool any teenage girls into thinking they have acne too, when they don't.

Thursday, 08 November 2007

Where are the other man-haters?

Hearing old men endorse candidates that they thought would be the most pro-life, then realizing that they were not referring to preventing deaths in war or violence, but preventing women from having control over their body. After all, all men are created equal. All the movies and books I'm told I should like, that turn out to be written about men, for men, by men. It is always men.

If women talk about themselves, its a "chick flick", or just crap. You know what? Most modern all-guy bands suck ass. It is a bunch poorly worded mental masturbation and should shut up. Tarentino films are boring and cliched.

Where are the women that agree with me? Where are these other angry man-haters out there? Why can't we get together and vent our frustration in the safety of our own home? Why can't we just vent?

Wednesday, 07 November 2007

Ignore it and it might go away

Alternet is posting about porn again. The articles ask some questions, to which porn fans have a knee jerk reaction. Porn is made for men, because women never get stimulated by sights and sounds, apparently. Porn has also gotten more violent, apparently. Young boys are trying to get girls to do anal, this according to a friend of mine that worked with some teenage boys. I think boys have always been more obsessed with sex than girls, but now they're trying to see if they can stick their dicks in as many holes as possible. What is wrong with our culture that this is important to half of it?

Everything.

Whatever - the Carl's Jr. commercial insults me, but I don't eat at Carl's Jr. I don't eat fast food period. My money is where my mouth is, but that won't stop them from spewing crap. Whatever, I'm tired of it. Movies about men, for men, I'm not watching them. When Hollywood wants my $70k a year, they can make me something that is worth watching. Like the drama about the reign of maybe the best female player the patriarchy ever had, Elizabeth I. I'll watch that.

Wednesday, 31 October 2007

Sigh, we're overdue for a plague

I hope I don't die, but so many of us need to. It is sad - there are too many people, not just too many for the earth to feed, but too many for us to logically understand. Maybe it is that our government is too big. European governments seem to care for their people better than ours. I hope I don't live long enough to see the water wars. Oil wars are bad enough.

Tuesday, 23 October 2007

Marketing

Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Oct 23, 2007 3:07 PM

Obviously. Companies of all types target their marketing. If cigarettes/tobacco are bad then please ban them. Or, at least, put REAL restrictions on thier purchase by minors. If, however, they remain legal, and there is no sign from the Democrats -or Republicans- that they will be banned then the businesses will target 'key demographics' like anyone else. Yes, it is morally wrong to sell a death-product but right now it is legal.

ps: alcohol companies also target key demographics like: euphemistically called 'urban markets' (malt liquor), 'price conscious market' (fortified wines), yuppies (expensive grain alcohol vodka in nice bottle), rednecks (NASCAR-themed Busch tallboys), hunters ('hunting edition' 30pack beer cases), college kids (cheap beer), drink-drivers (iced down tall-boy singles in gas station convenience store coolers), girls (alco-pops), etc. Again, morally bad but 'its legal'?!?


This commenter has a great point, in response to an article titled The Tobacco Industry Targets Black America, but I'm left in a conundrum. Do I reply to the commenter, indicating her own ingrained othering of women by identifying "girls" as just another niche market like "hunters" or "rednecks", in an attempt to help educate that user or not post such an off-topic comment.

As a woman, I obviously identify with a number of groups on that little list - interestingly, both the price concious market and the yuppies - but that last example makes me wonder, does albrechtkrausse think women are multifaceted enough to fit in those other groups too?

As a woman that was raised to naturally assume that we're all equal, I have a very hard time even imagining that someone could identify an entire economic or social class that had no women, but then I see news accounts of the "Iranian people rioting over gas shortages" with no women present. I think, "that't not 'people' - 'people' includes women, how can you have 'people' without women?" I wonder that every time I hear anything about the Afgahn "people" supporting the Taliban. Are they talking about "people" or are they talking about men?

But that is very tangential, back to my point.

The choice I've made is obvious. My window for commenting is small - in a day or two, we'll all have moved on to something new, and the impact of a comment will be over. Anti-feminists ready to pounce on any and all weaknesses in an argument are all over Alternet. One only has to read the comments on any and all feminist posts on that site to learn that. I don't even know if I could write a comment that was both brief and made the point about the othering of women that I am trying so hard to make here.

Of course, this ignores the fact that a lot of those alco-pops feature guys drinking them in their advertisement - actually, a lot of alcohol ads seem to assume that men are the primary buyers, at least in bulk, of alcohol. Women, at best, drink the booze, usually while trying to be sexy (for men), as opposed to just for having a good time. Then again, thats not based on any study I did.

Have any of you seen that Coors [Light?] commercial? Both woman and man are excited that something turned blue, the woman about the pregnancy test, the man about his beer. The woman then walks off, slamming the door. The man shrugs and drinks his beer. My thought is "oh, she's off to call the abortion doctor" because thats what I would do if I found myself in a relationship with someone like that. Maybe that makes me a humorless feminist, maybe it is a stupid joke, maybe it is the promotion of male irresponsibility that the entirity of the mainstream media seems to be shoving at us thats making me mad. I'll say it, any man that cares more about some stupid beer than his wife/girlfriend's pregnancy doesn't deserve to procreate. But there, I guess, is an example of alcohol marketing to "guys".

And that does it for tonight.

Saturday, 13 October 2007

The Britney Spears Show

This show has gotten really interesting lately. I was in the airport and I checked out a story about how Britney doesn't care that she no longer has custody of her kids. We're all supposed to be shocked, I guess. But like it or not, the act of having kids doesn't magically transform oneself into a mother. Men abandon their kids all the time, and women who don't want their kids often give them up for adoption. It doesn't make the kids any less valid as people, and these kids have one caring parent (their father) and are set for life. Honestly, so what if Britney wants to abandon that life and move on? The kids won't starve, in fact, they'll probably want for nothing.

If I were Britney, and in this state, I'd forget singing, I'd forget kids, and invest a good chunk of money in some stock, and make money that way, then live my life the way I wanted, read books, have parties, and have a good time. She'll never be able to run for office, thats for sure, but who the hell are we to judge her? If she never wanted kids, then she never wanted kids. As long as she helps pay for them (which I'm sure she is), then why the hell does it even matter?

Friday, 12 October 2007

stupid people do not change

by andrushka

Could you tell me what 's that has to do with President Carter? Further, thank God President Carter has grown into what he is today, that is a man of great humanity. Only stupid people do not change as they grow older. Too bad for you!

President [Me]

For a brief time in my life, and possibly always running under my surface, I've wanted to - I've thought about - being the president. I like to run for office, be in power over something, be responsible for something important.

award that they can't buy

by Jeanne

The right wing and their mouthpiece are green (not ecologically) with envy. When was the last time any one from that side of the intellectual or political fence has been recognized for anything that had to do with peace? It's an award that they can't buy, so they have to denigrate it. Fox Noise and all they represent are pathetic, backward and bellicose.

Get the Lead Out.... Of Lipstick

I'm inclined to believe the claim that humans injest more lead by drinking water, but really, do cosmetic manufacturers need to add to our lead consumption? Especially when it concerns women? Where are the pro-lifers complaining about such harms to fetuses from lead in lipstick? Oh, its only because whores wear lipstick, and their kids don't matter.

Too Many Consumer Lipsticks Have Lead, Consumer Group Says

Monday, 01 October 2007

Feminism on the ground

As a society, we've actually had the means to allow women to be free from the stricter confines of raising children for years - the condom was developed hundreds of years ago, in fact. Childcare as a profession is hardly new. I don't know much about breast pump technology, but it can't be that complicated.

The change now is the desire, mostly by women themselves, to be free from these confines. Yet women remain to be pressured by society to make unreasonable sacrifices themselves in order to reproduce.

This article, about the hostile environment that women face when they do reproduce illustrates an important point. More than an important point, a crucial one for feminists. For women to gain real equality in this society, we need to pay attention to reproduction. Business does not need to be so inflexible. It actually isn't that inflexible that it cannot allow an employee time every two or three hours - at most, three times during an 8-hour day - for people raising infants [the next generation of Americans, btw] to produce breastmilk.

The attitude of hostility to breastfeeding women is held even by other women, sometimes even by women who wouldn't otherwise think they were sexist, but it is the very epitomy of sexism. Women should not be obsessed with pregnancy and pregnancy should never hold women back. After all, men do not get held back when they want to have kids. If we, as women, are committed to ending the bullshit known as sexism, we need to make it a lot easier for women to maintain careers and reproduce.

Tuesday, 25 September 2007

The right to free speech is not to be confused with the right to an audience.

Yes. To those of us that would cry that ANY attempt to tell someone that something is not fit for print is some kind of censorship, I say, you're watering down your argument by standing for crap and insult.

(From a comment about the whole "Fuck Bush" thing in Colorado, but not really related to that. My opinion on that is that I think it is, at best, a quaint, but misplaced sentiment. At worst, it is sensationalist journalism.)

Friday, 21 September 2007

The Power of Attraction

Recently, there was a study released that confirmed that men choose their mate based on looks, which, I can only assume, means that women choose their mate based on something more. I don't know, I wasn't interested in reading the story.

But lets go with that assumption and extrapolate. It is pretty obvious that our goal in life is to promote the continued existance of the species, in some way or another. The simplest way to do that is to make more people. The way to make more people is to have sex. But what reproduction means is different for men than it is for women. Men do not need to alter their lives for a few years (9 months + nursing, which was the only way to feed babies for most of the existance of our species, except, of course, for the very very rich who had nursemaids) in order to procreate, so their main goal is finding the best possible mate in terms of overall health (including looks). Women look for a guy that is not only healthy, but likely to help out so that she isn't left with the kid, all by herself. And what does a pregnant or nursing woman need? She needs what we all need, food, shelter, and clothing, but she also needs time and relaxation. A pregnant woman needs MORE nourishment but is LESS likely to be able to get it all by herself. Women need someone to meet their basic needs on a daily basis during this time. Men only need the woman to be pregnant, healthy, and alive.

Of course, men know that the best mate is more than *just* good looking, but in the end, women are more concerned with their looks than men are. And men, partially freed from worrying about how they look, partially to attract women, do other things - all kinds of other things. Everyone needs a mate to continue the species, but were not interested in just any mate. So we have competition for mates. Women strive to be the best looking, the healthiest. Whereas men strive to prove that they can provide.

So that is the mating dance of the homo sapiens sapien.

Long ago, long before written history, long before agriculture, every adult member of our species needed to devote the entire day to obtaining enough calories to stay alive. Lets not forget that men usally needed to provide for more than just themselves while the women were hampered from later stages of pregancy. Nobody had the time to develop fancy bowls, religions, or governments. Those that did starved to death. But along the way, there came agriculture, loosely defined as the cultivation or maintenance of a food resource leading to the eventual harvesting. Cultivation took a varied amount of work, from the domestication of animals to waiting around for the salmon spawn. But what this meant was that one person could suddenly feed two, three, ten, one hundred. The people that didn't have to spend their entire day looking for food also had nothing to do. The results are all around us.

I feel we are at a very important milestone in the history of our species, much like those living during the advent of agriculture. Remember how women devote years of their lives to the care of new generations? Until only recenly, only the very very rich woman could afford to both carry on her own genes AND not devote her life to pregancy. One baby might take two years, significantly more if babies died in infancy or early childhood. Women have devoted their entire lives to one thing - procreation. But after thousands of years, we've filled up the planet. Oh, technically, we could handle more growth. Technically, we could make the entire planet like California.

Technically, which really implies ignoring the unmeasurable. Simply put, there are too many people NOW. I've been caught in traffic on a SATURDAY around here more than I care to remember. So not everyone needs to have a kid to perpetuate the species. In fact, a lot of people can do a lot more good with other activites. We also have a system that allows women to just assume that any pregnancy will not only go to term, but the baby that results will live into adulthood and even old age. [Of course, this is not necessiarly the case in a large segment of the world]

The result? Women do not need to devote their lives to pregnancy. And because we're homo sapiens sapiens, we want to do other things now. Men used to spend their time looking for calories for themselves and the women. Agriculture solved this problem thousands of years ago. Women spent their time being pregnant or nursing until about a hundred years ago. The difference? Look around.

Friday, 14 September 2007

"Jumping 0.9%"

I am SO FUCKING SICK of all the play-by-play of the Dow Jones jumping up a hundred or down fifty points.


-Source
Does anyone understand statistics in this dumb country? No? I didn't think so. See that graph? You see it?

13,000

Does anyone get it?

Read the beginning of that Wikipedia article. We've got 100 years of source data about a stupid game of controling people's lives and we think we know it all. Take a look at that graph again.
There are two types of bull markets. A secular bull market is a period in which the stock market index is continually reaching all-time highs with only brief periods of correction, as during the 1990s, and can last upwards of 15 years. A cyclical bull market is a period in which the stock market index is reaching 52-week or multi-year highs and may briefly peak at all-time highs before a rapid decline, as in the early 1970s. It usually occurs within relatively longer bear markets and lasts about three years.
That little dip in the early 21st century was NOT a correction. And I cannot see these "corrections" from the 1970s. This is a bunch of made up bullshit.

This is the stupidest shit in the world. Business is the biggest bunch of bullshit. At least my history thesis was about something that actually fucking happened.
And here is where I complained about work, or my lack thereof. I've set my bar really high, but they've set my bar really really low. So they think I'm doing great, but I feel like nothing is happening.
The world is full of complete idiots. All you have to do to know that is to read the comments on anything that gets a lot of comments, especially Alternet. The glut of morons complaining about "why is this on here" is enough to make one homicidal. If you didn't like the article, STFU, who gives a shit? Feminist articles or even blog posts garner that kind of response more than any other post. The obviousness of men wanting women to stop talking at all is nauseating and pathetic. I can't even talk about it anymore, it is getting to be a cliche. Our society is going to hell, or is already there.

You know what I am sick of? All of the articles about Iraq and our failed policy. It is the same thing over and over, with extra details added. At least the feminist articles provide a perspective that we haven't heard before. Or that people besides me and other intelligent women haven't already thought of. You know the difference? I DON'T READ THOSE ARTICLES because I know that other people DO care. I DON'T think I'm the center of the world or that my opinion is shared by the entire population. I'm NOT an entitled asshole, but maybe I ought to be. Too bad I was raised to RESPECT others. Thats why I had a hard time getting into SomethingAwful. It was a big penis party full of jackasses that thought that since they went through some antimosity in high school and obsessed over computer crap that they were entitled treat anyone that veered outside their tightly and ambiguously drawn lines like shit. I'm too old for that. I was too old for that at 5.

When I was growing up, I always assumed that adults knew more than I did - those older than me knew more than I did, but now I'm peaking - I'm old enough to be really really smart, and not just for my age. And now I'm looking around with my paltry 147 IQ and realizing just how stupid the rest of the world really is. No wonder I'm depressed.

And it is so obvious that the American Empire is in decline. Any anthropologist or historian can tell you, but we're debating things like it the surge worked. IF the surge worked. IF it fucking worked???? The soldiers could have been flinging their own shit instead of bullets and it would have had the same effect.

It doesn't take a fucking weatherman to see the goddamn weather.

What were the goals for the stupid "surge" of 20% more troops? Secure Baghdad so the government can get things done. Baghdad is not secure and the government hasn't gotten anything done. Anbar is secure, wonderful, did you know that Anbar is mostly desert? 1+1 still equals 2, but we're fucking debating this. They're all just fucking morons.

Back to the Dow. I'm sure you've heard of all the fuss over the jumps, and drops of the Dow in the last month. Here is how the Dow has acted over the past year, in real terms.



I'm not going to give a shit until the Dow goes down several hundred points in a few days. Period, end of story, STFU already.

What I've been saying

We need more female writers in the media.

Monday, 03 September 2007

Science!

Human-animal embryo study wins approval

Possibilities

PROCON
Represents an advance in biologyTampers in the domain of "God" or just too much power for humans to have in general

This is really awesome!Viruses can have a greater chance to mutate in a crossover manner in cells like this, it's really dangerous. (Source)

Learn more about what gives us conciousness, thus memory, thus the ability to learn more with each generation.Diseases wipe out the majority of the population. Which means our species will continue on, but we will lose a lot of people and productivity. Which, from a rational viewpoint, isn't so bad, just as long as we live through it.

But from my viewpoint, our species will not exist forever, and we seem to be on a fast track of energy depletion (though solar is seeming to gain ground). I don't know how I will die, nor do most people. We all hope to live a long time, partially because we want to live through generations, partially because the idea of not being alive is horrifying. But we are increasingly consuming energy and space on our planet, and becoming more segmented and panicked. We're attacking each other more vigorously all over the globe, and especially within America (though American attacking within is more verbal than violent). We seem to be on the fast track to destruction, but we're really far off from that (this is potentially within the century, but probably further away), so we have time to slow down and increase our time, if we work together. If we work together... all of us, as equals, none of this "othering" crap.

Sunday, 02 September 2007

Miss Teen South Carolina

I heard about this at my networking "lunch", a little event related to the new employee network at my company. We get put into a group of 4 and then the 4 of us decide a day and time to meet and talk. Both times it was me and three guys, one of which was white and the other two asian, but the demographics are not really a factor. The people are all in IT jobs, more so than me, even though we are all in the IT part of the company.

Anyway, the other three people had heard of this, and I hadn't, so after the event, I went home and looked it up. They also mentioned that she appeared on the Today Show and explained the situation. My take is that sure, she might be ditzy, but she apparently didn't hear most of the question, and in that light, her bullshit answer, created on the spot and without flinching, is almost impressive. She is, after all, 18 and has probably been trained, in the sickening pagent world, to be like this.

Everyone loves a good rant

Mostly when one can agree with the subject, of course. My former employee (the one that turned out to be sexist) did do a very impressive rant once about his experience being a TA and the undergraduates that completely failed to retain any of the information about research he provided.

Today, on Alternet, there was an article about Obama's stance on Cuba. I'm encouraged by the shifting tide right now, as represented by this piece. Suddenly, the rest of the country is realizing (or seems to be realizing, based on my vantage point) that those Anti-Castro Cuban-Americans in Florida are just disenfranchized slaveholders, waiting to go back and claim their unearned land and begin making money again. But that is beside my point here.

The last comment (well, when I read the post) included an interesting rant on the state of American "justice"

I'm all for patrotism, but why must I be a sheep. It seems we like to point the finger at Castro and Cuba for human rights violations that many states in this country abhere to themselves, but we call it justice because it was so-called decided by a 'jury of our peers' even as it was maniplilated by the politicians in our states that have such cruel laws on the books, and then we as citizens are told the laws were passed by the respresentatives we sent to to represent our interest and if we don't like the jobs our reps are doing we can vote them out of office at the next election but the laws that we passed will stay on the books even if they are cruel....and you know what, in the end nobody have to have responsibilty for anything.

-Source

Friday, 24 August 2007

Monkeys harassing women in Kenya

This is an interesting story. There is no mention of the sex of the monkeys involved. The fact that the monkeys are not afraid of women is probably good proof of the old hunter/gatherer theory that human males hunted other animals while human females tended camp and farmed. Such was the arrangement in many Native American cultures when they met Europeans.

Europeans actually thought that Native American men were "lazy" because in Europe, hunting was a leisure activity and not a means to provide meat protein. But New World cultures did not domesticate many animals, probably because there weren't many to domesticate. Dogs, of course - all cultures, actually, have domesticated dogs - and llamas in South America. The theory goes that humans inhabited the New World for only about 10,000 years, only 10% of the existence of our specific species. So Old World inhabitants had 90,000 extra years to domesticate cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, and birds for their meat protein. And the majority of our culture was probably like that of our ancestors, so other animals have adapted. Human males are to be feared because they were the ones actively seeking animals to kill.

I don't think these monkeys are "sexually harassing" the women, but they're doing
something. They may just be communicating that they know it is a female human or something. It is amazing how intelligent the monkeys are. I wonder what would happen if a woman in this village/town/area just shot at a monkey. Maybe then the monkeys would know that the human females mean business too. I mean they're smart enough to communicate about poisoned food, and other things, so they seem to have
some kind of cognitive ability. Cognitive might be the wrong word. I hope there is more primate research going on. Maybe someday, we'll break the species barrier and manage to communicate with monkeys such as these. Lets teach the monkeys how to grow their own crops - or at least help out - so they won't be such a menace.

Wednesday, 22 August 2007

Feminist Politics, Digg

My colleague said his friend got to the first page of Digg with a brand new website. A website where a "woman moaned your IP address." I remember reading Digg at my ex's house and seeing an awful lot of articles on the latest gadget or internet method. Digg is apparently mostly male.

What re-awakened me to feminism back in March was the appropriating of Jill Filipovic's photos by people completely able to mask their identity on the web. I have other interests in life, so I don't have the patience to learn all I need to know to be completely anonymous. Not to mention that the marketing practices of GoDaddy.com offended me, so I switched at least one of my domains to a host that didn't conceal my identity. But really, I'd much rather reveal my information than pay any money to an organization that just ASSUMES I'll be enticed by a scantily clad woman touted as a "girl." I like to put my money where my mouth is.

It seems to me that men have been more likely to want to learn the ins and outs of the internet, whereas women want to network and share. It also seems that people that know the ins and outs of the internet and even just computers in general think that anyone that doesn't know what they have spent years studying must be a complete moron. Furthermore, they must want attention, any kind of attention. A couple of years ago, one of these men made the decision that since we were even the slightest bit identifiable in our Live Journals and personal blogs that we must want our school's website to link to them directly. When we objected, we were told, essentially, "too bad, I found you in this obscure directory, why didn't you mask it??" Well, in the end, when this person consulted with the advisor for this project, we got our way, because we were right. Not to mention that a friend of mine said that as an alumni, the issue was making him seriously reconsider making any future donations. And since Jill put her photos on a publicly accessable website, she MUST have wanted people to oggle her body and defame her character.

My ex reads Digg, I signed up, but remembered that it was a pretty biased community. Wisdom of the masses often isn't.

Here are some Alternet pieces I liked tonight

Dogs > Women
I responded to one anti-feminist as SalB.
Feminists got Barbie some jobs, maybe we can do the same for these girls?
What happened to make-believe toys? When I was 5, the thing was My Little Pony. I never wanted to be a horse. I doubt little boys want to be cars that turn into robots.

Monday, 20 August 2007

One Study on Modern people != Evolution

Leave it to ABC to assert that studying the reactions of some people equates to truth in evolution.

Though the HuffPost title is even more disgusting, at least it doesn't include some scantily clad model from the chest down

I wonder if these researchers have heard of HISTORY!

Back in the 19th century, pink was considered a masculine color, as a watered down version of red - the color of passion, war, etc, whereas blue was "dainty."

Evolution MY ASS. [note that you need to "log in" to see the pictures, but they're not important, feel free to help me find better sources of this information].

Sunday, 19 August 2007

YesYesYesYes!!!

Holy shit, no way!

Back when I learned about how life may have formed on earth - probably from Bill Nye, that wonderful and funny science guy - I wondered when we'd be able to prove it. It was something about a sea right in amino acids and lightning strikes causing eletrification. One of these days, we'd be able to prove this theory to be true by doing it ourselves. Now, I wasn't going to do it myself - I hated labs. I mean, I love science, but I can't stand lab work. It is too damn specific for me. The microscopes never worked and my results were always just slightly off from what they should have been.

But here you have it. Artificial Life Likely in 3 to 10 Years. Kiss my ass, creationists. Kiss my entire ass, then stfu.

Losers

There is a woman at my job that never got married or had kids. She is in her 50's and has a condition that requires her to walk with a cane. It seems she might live out the rest of her days alone, though I don't know anything about her social life. But she has a job, a house, and is involved in her field.

My ex had an uncle that lived with his mother and died in his 40's. Until I began dating him, my ex assumed that was his fate too. Now that I've dumped him, I wouldn't be surprised if that was his fate. For a while in there, though, he had a future. I mean, he still does, depending on the attitude he decides to have. But, the reason I dumped him was because he didn't seem to want to have that attitude.

To me, marriage is important, for both men and women. It is a partnership, a relationship, someone to be there for you. But anyone could tell you that my co-worker's life is infinitely better than my ex's uncle's life. Well, he is dead now, so he really doesn't have a life.

It seems that the basement dwelling, living at home loser is more likely to be a man than not. Sure, women do marry men that provide for them, and can be as lazy as any loser, maybe that explains the difference. But what about all the women that never marry? Like three of my aunts and my co-worker. They're all home-owning career women. One owns a lot of houses - 3 or 4. They're not losers.

Maybe it has to do with that whole chest-beating, shoulder-hunching mentality we all learn. Chest Beaters don't face animosity, or people telling them they're not good enough because of something they can't change. Shoulder Hunchers do, and for a lot of us, it gives us a desire to prove them wrong. But it also gives us a critical eye. Maybe "they" are right, we think. Maybe I am not good enough for an A. Maybe I should study harder. Maybe I should prove this jackass wrong and force him to give me an A even though I'm an unattractive girl and not one of his precious football players or wrestlers. That was my decision in the 9th grade with my joke of an Earth Sciences teacher. He was a creationist and a sexist. If I had it to do all over again, I would have gone right to the school board. I don't care if he was up for retirement. In my world, people don't get away with being an asshole when I walk in the room.

Does anyone know if there are statistics that compare the age and gender of people living with their parents? I have a feeling that more old unmarried men still live at home than old unmarried women. In other words, there are more male losers than female losers.

Women TWICE as likely to regret their choice of mate

TWICE - well, almost - 22% of women vs 12% of men regret their choice of spouse. My knee-jerk reaction is to say that these women (who do not get divorced - or at least haven't yet) are unhappy because men are assholes more often than not - sexists. For some reason, I can't seem to type what I mean.....

They came to find that the guy who "swept them off their feet" for their beauty or something trivial turns out to be a jerk once the woman gains some weight or ages naturally. Women seem to be more forgiving of aging and weight gain in men.

Anyway, let me know what your ideas are. There were also some other survey results, like how a third of people wished they'd saved more money or taken a different career path. HALF of all people wished they had traveled more before settling down [and having kids, may I add - the main thing that hampers travel]. Then, the article posted the most rediculous, arrogant quote I've seen in a while (btw, I tend not to read things from conservatives, even when quoted in liberal blogs)

Paul Whitlock, head of savings at Bradford & Bingley bank, which commissioned the survey of 1,250 men and women, said: "There's no reason why people can't set up their own business, travel more or be prepared for that once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that may arise."
-Source
Right, anyone can set up their own business. There is NO REASON we can't. NO REASONS, there is NO COMPETITION for these people, NONE, no GIANT CORPORATIONS that have already cornered the market. No, and having your own business is the EASIEST JOB IN THE WORLD. This idiot needs a reality check, big time. What a fucking retard. Ugh.

Ugh, Fuck you too

So I was reading some HuffPost Feed articles and saw the disgusting practice even otherwise progressive men [people, since gender is not always apparent from the posts] seem to still think is a-ok. That is giving men they don't like female names. I saw "Rude E Julie Annie" and "Karla Rove."

Would it be appropriate for me to respond to that comment asking why the person did that? What else could I say that would bet my point across without it sounding like whining but also not start a fight. I want it to be short and sweet. "Thanks for letting me know that you think being a woman is an insult"?

I'm sick of this shit.

Monday, 13 August 2007

Because it deserves its own post

Once again, it is in the news

Well, maybe if we didn't actively make girls ashamed of their outside interests, they would talk about those instead.

Maybe, if we didn't belittle girl's toys, they would feel more comfortable about them and talk about those things instead.

Maybe if we stopped berating movies that girls tend to like, aka "chick flicks", girls would talk about that instead of obsessing over relationships.

As long as Hello Kitty is used to shame adults, and silmultaneously marketed to girls, girls are going to stop talking about their outside interests.

So think about it, any time you shame something typical little girls enjoy, like Barbies, Care Bears, My Little Pony, even Bratz, you aid in the psychological destruction of women, ever so slightly. So stop it. Let them be proud of their toys, even when they grow out of them, like when they become adults.

There is an excellent Cat and Girl comic that mentions this, regarding Transformers. Adult men have grown out of Transformers, but they get to relish their memories. Where is the Rainbow Bright movie? I couldn't care less about transformers.

Wednesday, 08 August 2007

National Women's Day

Today, or rather, tomorrow (August 9) is National Women's Day in South Africa, a Public Holiday.

Today would be a good day for African women, if they have not already done so (my source was a BBC article over a year old) to ask to reform rape laws in South Africa. Despite the changes of the last two decades, rape laws still put the onus on the woman not just to prove she was raped by the defendant, but to prove that she didn't encourage the rape.

News flash: No rape victim can encourage rape, that is why it is called rape. Duh, period, end of story.

Tuesday, 07 August 2007

This just sounds like a very. bad. idea.

Maybe I've seen too many X-Files

We're Stressed Out

I've recently realized that the reason I was an overweight kid was from lack of activity, and that was from depression. I knew from an early age that something wasn't right in my head, and by the time I knew I was overweight, it was too late. Then again, maybe if I had joined a sport, maybe if I had stuck with all the good diet plans I started, maybe if I learned earlier that skipping breakfast was a bad idea, maybe if I learned to enjoy exercise earlier, maybe if gym teachers encouraged me instead of ignoring me. But I was a sad little girl, and I turned into a sad fat little girl, who fantasized about eating anything I wanted to eat. When I turned 16, I got my wish, and the summer that happened, I had actually lost weight, and I looked good starting my Junior year. But I slowly gained weight that year with everything that I ate, even as I attempted exercise.]

But what, exactly caused my mental illness? My mom said that she read a study that indicated that stress during pregnancy can lead to mental illness in the child. My mother, apparently, was very stressed out at work while she was pregnant with me. I've also read that children with low seratonin levels become depressed if they spend a large chunk of time around their peers as opposed to their mother [yes, mother, they didn't mention father]. Thats why I support generous maternity leave.

In America's struggle with obesity, few seem to be mentioning stress and mental illness. I'd argue that the generation growing up right now is the most stressed out, overworked, underinspired, overmedicated generation to date. And when most families need two incomes to survive, in an economy that doesn't allow for natural processes, is it a wonder that kids are fat? Is it any wonder that kids can't sleep?

UPDATE: Mom's anxiety or depression can affect brain development, study suggests

Monday, 06 August 2007

Nerd Boys are the Worst

In our society, boys learn that they are "better" than girls, and learn to beat their chests and be dominant while women learn that they are not as good as boys and hunch their shoulders*. Whites learn that they are "normal" people, and we are all expected to be attracted to the other sex. The media tells us which holidays normal people celebrate and what clothes normal people can wear. I'm female, white, raised Catholic, straight, and have been overweight all my life. I know the other side of the story. I don't know what it is like to be in the minority race, homosexual, or differently gendered, but I know what it is like to be oppressed and told that I am wrong. I know what it is like to be judged on things I can't control.

So what does this have to do with nerd boys? Nerd boys, by and large white, by my definition, whether attractive or overweight, were on the low end of the boy totem pole in childhood. Unlike the popular boys, they did not reap the rewards of the patriarchy, but instead of realizing the flaws, they bought in to it because they were men, and that made them better than women, even the women that rejected them and made fun of them. They wondered why they couldn't get a date as they pined after the cheerleaders, ignoring the just-as-imperfect nerd girls around them.

Nerd boys know oppression, and have the potential to be great allies to women, racial "minorities", homosexuals, and other non-priviledged groups. They also have the ability to become the most brutal sexist, racist, homophobic assholes society can create. Isolated from women during puberty, whether due to looks or obscure interests, they associate together, severely othering women and hypothesizing reprehensible thought patterns. For example:

I was rejected from the top Alliance guild on my server, Templar Knights, because I'm a woman. People liked my application, it was suggested that there was a spot for me - until the guildmaster came in and was like "No women, sorry". When I asked them not to judge me on things I can't control (and I was civil...I was very professional about it) they posted pictures of porn. The top guild of all time, Nihilium, also does not recruit women. Apparently we're a distraction. Well distract this, fuckers. I'm sick and fucking tired of women having to take responsibility for the actions of feckless men. What, are all men idiot children that can't control themselves? I don't believe it. It's not MY problem that hearing a woman's voice on vent makes you cream your pants. I'm perfectly capable of acting like an adult and interacting with other adults, it's not MY problem that some men supposedly lack these skills. If I'm wearing a short skirt, that doesn't turn men into rapists. Likewise, my presence doesn't turn men into gibbering idiots unable to push a button on their keyboard. They're retards all on their own.

I've reported them to Blizzard, hopefully there is some kind of mechanism for dealing with this.

-Entomologista
Furthermore, if men cannot play a game or perform adequately with women present, they cannot play or perform adequately at all.

*I was going somewhere with this analogy, I just never got back to it.

Little Girl's Toys are Embarassing

Thai police officers charged with certain offences are punished by being forced to wear a icon of little girls.

Sunday, 05 August 2007

Effing Brilliant

To admit that poverty -- real poverty, not the kind born of laziness (I suspect this is kind of poor is a rare breed) -- exists in this country is to admit that this "great" country can fail...and a lot of people don't want to accept that, because gosh darn it, we're America!

-Sig
This is such an important concept, and one I've danced around, but Sig hits the nail on the head, and it is all so obvious now. We, as Americans, are in so much denial over our reality. It was only recently that I realized that I grew up in the lower class, and that those rich people in town were not upper class, but just middle class, maybe upper-middle. The one bathroom house and two-pairs-of-jeans-per-year childhood of mine surely wasn't as bad as it could have been, but those big screen TVs and spacious kitchens I helped my mom clean when she was subbing for my aunt L's cleaning service weren't necessarily luxuries of the very rich.

Saturday, 04 August 2007

Frivolity

Two wrongs don't make a right, the war cry of the privileged. Where are my reparations for the millenia of exploited women? How much geneaology would I need to do to choose a last name that represented the women in my family? Is it enough that I won't change my name and will pass it on to at least one potential child? What about my mother's name? And what about her mother's name? And I could go on...

But no, two wrongs don't make a right. Killing Palestinians won't make up for the Holocaust, but maybe scrutiny of men in the same way they've scrutinized women might teach us a lesson. Or maybe it is just fivolous fun. Maybe it will give men the same appearance related complexes that we train girls to have.

So maybe that isn't right. No one should have appearance complexes, but I know that I do have fun with make-up. I have about 20 different colors of eye shadow that I could potentially use as lipstick or even mascara. And I use the colors - yellow on some days, brown, green, pink, or black on others. I did learn that blue and red don't work on me. On the mornings when I have extra time or patience, I can leave my apartment lookin' good. But, unlike many women, I was not socialized in a way that makes me feel compelled to paint up my face just to go out in public.

This weekend, on Alternet, this picture will represent the lead story. It is about a muckraking "journalist." I don't know much about the issue, and it isn't something that ignites my passion, maybe I'm just desensitized to BS in the media these days. Maybe I'm feeling stifled at work. Whatever, thats not the point. The point is why do I have to spend my weekend staring at this when I check Alternet?


- Source, at least for the weekend of 8/4/07

When I go to work, I might not do my eye makeup, but I work in a corporation, and the dress code is "business casual," so I always do foundation - one liquid as a base and the other powder, for finishing. Then there is this asshat, who gets to waltz around, in a suit and tie, no less, with a face like that. Jesus christ, has he ever heard of foundation at all? And what is up with that head? Gross. Have some self respect, spend a little time making yourself look better, jeez.

Hell yeah, it is mean-spirited. Maybe this guy writes about John Edwards's stylist because he is just jealous. Maybe I'm feeling petty today. Apparently, this guy gets to be petty for a living, though.

Friday, 03 August 2007

Thank Goodness, People are Saying It

After swallowing 30 years of small-government rhetoric, our infrastructure, once the pride of the developed world, is falling apart around us. We're reaping what we've sown.

Strib Editorial: Public Anger Will Follow

Howie Klein: With Republicans in charge, you get the inability for a society to act effectively and efficiently in the case of unforseen tragedies like Katrina or you get bridges with structural problems not being attended to.


On Wednesday, when I went to work out, I saw a news report about a part of America that most people barely know exists. There was a shot of a damagaed roadway - part of a broken bridge in Minneapolis. I thought, "thats not so bad," then the camera backed up, and I saw an entire bridge - a large bridge - on the ground, in the river, broken, with cars and trucks scattered about, overturned, and on top of each other. My eyes widened and I needed to know what bridge it was. Was it that bridge I used to cross from Hudson to Minnesota on I94 all the time? They mentioned Minneapolis and the Mississippi River. It wasn't until I actually saw the map and "35W" on the screen before I was sure. I keep forgetting that the river at the border at that point is the St. Croix, not the Mississippi.

So it wasn't a bridge that I crossed a lot, or one that my mom and sister might cross, but I knew people in the cities and Minnesota that could have been there, and I got nervous. When I got home, I send out a few messages and made a few posts to blogs, LJ, MySpace, and FaceBook to make sure that the people I with whom I am still in touch, along with their relatives and friends, were ok.

I didn't turn on the TV. I didn't want the innane commentary and commercials for getting it up or behemouth vehicles in my head. I just looked at the Google News results, picking my sources critically. Minnesota sources, the BBC, and, of course, Alternet. At one point during the evening, I noticed that the number one and two most read stories on the BBC News site were both about the bridge collapse. I checked Alternet to see if anyone was making appropriate political commentary, because it certainly is warrented at this point.

Bridges should not just collapse like that, not in the industrialized world. That they do is a sign of serious transportation department neglect, and who controls transportation departments? We do, through our elected officials who decide the funding for such departments. Proper funding allows proper payment and resources for departments. Higher paying jobs attract better applicants and we should have the best engineers working on our ever important highway system.

This isn't brain surgery or rocket science.

The multiple inspections missed something, and while we're all busy destroying and then fucking up the rebuilding of Iraq, our own infrastructure crumbles.

Anyway, I saw a Huffington Post feed article about the event and went to check out the commentary. The long and short of the little I saw were people arguing with Republican "Concern Trolls" reacting to people making knee jerk political commentary with bullshit responses like "wait until they fish the bodies out of the water."

Ugh, give me a fucking break. I'm 2,000 miles away, I can't do a damn thing to help anyone at this point. And what happens when they do fish the bodies out? "People died, blah blah blah, I don't want to admit that my ideologies support policies that have failed in every test and implementation because they actually do work to line my pockets and I don't give a shit about anyone but my own family." One of the trolls had the screen name of country club republican, but with a different spelling and combined as one word. What idiot is actually proud of that kind of detachment from the way of life for ordinary Americans?

Needless to say, I wasn't happy with what I read. By Thursday evening, I hadn't seen a major article or blog post on Alternet yet about the elephant in the room. But on Friday evening, people started to say it. Even evidence started to appear that contradicted the popular line. The bridge was just barely over the line in the last inspections. And the fabulous Republican government that suburban Minnesotans elected in 2002 erred on the side of saving money instead of saving lives. Of course, there weren't that many lives lost. Conservatives are probably going to get needlessly religious on us too.
But on Friday came what this city's fire chief called a miraculous turn of events: the prospect that relatively few lives were lost.
- Source
If you read the article, you'll see that it wasn't a damn miracle. The fact that so many people experienced the collapse without injury was due to many factors, mainly the bridge design and the status of the river on that particular day. Minneapolis and most of the drivers were lucky, just as I was lucky that my brain injury wasn't serious enough to permanently disable me.

But there is no guarantee that next time, and if we keep on the status quo [and I have no faith that our do-nothing-but-spend-money-on-war-and-iPhone society will do a damn thing] there will be a next time, we will be so lucky. We care more about Iraq's infrastructure than our own. How many more bridges need to collapse or aging pipes need to explode in America before we start to see some major capitol projects from the government in our own damn country? Maybe all the people that lose their jobs when we abolish the biggest and most bloated, un-healthy Health Insurance companies can get jobs in the improvement of our infrastructure.

Remember how The Jungle, one book, incited our nation, even our president to improve the quality of our national food supply? Now even flooded cities and kids dying from toothaches can't inspire change. How many more disasters and tragedies before we elect and pay taxes to a government that works?

Sunday, 29 July 2007

Great

Increase in aid to Israel

We can give billions to Israel, but we can't afford to give health care to kids, or anyone, for that matter.

Washington is reportedly preparing a package of major arms sales to Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states because of concerns over Iran's nuclear programme.
Saudi Arabia, I heard a third of the insurgents in Iraq are from there, and come to think of it, weren't most of the 9/11 hijackers from there?

Saturday, 28 July 2007

Where I state the obvious because it was on my mind

Characterizing "god" as a man is a way to "other" women. And by other, I don't just mean, "not like me", I mean "nothing like men, not even like the creator of the universe, just some thing that I can't understand because I don't want to listen and accept women as my equals." And its been that way since the advent of the monotheistic religion that was the precursor to the religion that has consumed a third of the world. I wish I could lament the advent of monotheism, especially this terrible strain, without being compared to genocidal meglomaniacs. I don't want to kill anyone, I just want people to think about things a little bit.

Thursday, 26 July 2007

GROW UP, AMERICA

It took me a while before I could watch the "I have a crush on Obama" video with the Obama "girl". I wasn't sure about what I would see. I thought it was cute, but I wasn't sure about it. Then I saw Hot for Hill, and was sickened by the fact that this group had to have another lithe model sing to the female candidate. Embracing homosexuality, my ASS. Any idiot can tell that it is just another way to look at skinny, scantily clad young women prance around. Why not have a man with a crush on Hillary? Because having crushes are for submissive members of society, and men are not submissive, not even when in contact with famous people. Why have out female icons gotten smaller and smaller over the years as women in real life have gained more power? Sut Jhally (sp) claims that it is so men still feel superior to women in some way, and I agree. Furthermore, Hot for Hill embraces homosexuality in the same way that two straight girls, goaded into making out for Girls Gone Wild does. If this group really wanted to embrace homosexuality, they would have a guy singing for Obama.

So today, I had the utter misfortune of seeing the Obama "Girls" and the Giuliani "Girls" pillow fighting in Manhattan when I was at the gym. They looked clearly disinterested, but the MSNBC commentator decided to forgo any shred of journalistic integrity he might have had [but he worked for MSNBC, so that he had any is questionable] and "panted" after showing the clip. I wanted to vomit all over the elliptical machine.

Monday, 23 July 2007

Time to Blame Women Again

Working mom's are responsible for childhood obesity. They just couldn't say that homes with two parents that work outside the home are responsible - no, because women aren't devoting their entire lives to pandering to their child, obesity rates rise. It is all women's fault.

Actually, the notion that families with both adults working outsode the home, especially before a child enters school, being more likely to have obese or overweight children is more or less a no brainer. Less direct parental supervision may lead to over eating, and it might also lead to a feeling of abandonment that is quickly filled by food. But jesus christ, I thought we were past this "working moms ruining kids" bullshit, especially from the BBC.

Sunday, 22 July 2007

Guys being defensive about feminism

Here is a conversational post from FinallyFeminism101 that explains how a man might fight getting defensive on a feminist blog

Here come the progressive politics

This blog post about one of the biggest roadblocks to Israeli-Palestinian peace, from AlterNet's blog feeds, was very, very interesting.

Ha ha ha ha ha. They come RIGHT OUT AND SAY IT! We can do it, but we don't want anyone doing it to us. Wow.

How Macho are You Now?

Long ago, doctors used to not treat prostate cancer right away because it was a slow growing cancer. In this environment, my grandpa got prostate cancer. But later, in about 1987, they reexamined the cancer and found that it had spread. It spread to his testicles. The doctors had to remove his prostate and his testicles. He lived for 12 more years after that, if you can call that living. I only learned this last November, when my dad told me, because he just learned. He had also just been diagnosed with prostate cancer and had his prostate removed in January. He talks about it all the time, and I'm really glad.

According to the BBC, men don't want to get checked for prostate cancer because they are worried that it isn't "macho." Just a bit of how our idiotic gender norms harm everyone.

In a related story, we are first led to believe that having daughters leads to prostate cancer, then told that the results are inconclusive, but not until the end of the story. The media just can't seem to help itself when it comes to the birth of girls and negative consequences. Then again, maybe I'm just sensitive. I wouldn't be if so many places in the world didn't see the birth of a girl as a disappointment.

Saturday, 21 July 2007

Apologies

On a grand scale, I don't understand why we have a society set up that is so mean to women. I guess I understand why it is, what I don't get is why it has to be that way. I've come to believe that men really hate, or at least, resent women - deep down, males have a jealousy developed before they were able to consciously understand the jealousy. Then, during adulthood, we begin to want to pass our genetic material on, and for women, it is easier to be sure we’re doing it. We can be 100% sure that our kids – the ones to which we give birth – have our genetic material. Men don’t have that luxury, and I’m terribly sorry about that, but I’m tired of being punished for it.

I’m so sorry that men will never get to give birth, I’m sorry that they feel like they don’t contribute to the reproductive process. What I don’t understand is why they can’t seem to get over it. Things developed in the unconscious mind and instinct to reproduce are hard to get over, I guess. But the extent to which men will go gets very ridiculous. When men finally realized their contribution in the form of sperm, some ignored the obvious similarities between offspring and their mothers and decided that ALL of the genetic material came from the men, and women were simply carriers. Freud even developed the idiotic concept of “penis envy”, ignoring the very obvious implications of society on gender roles.

Maybe this makes me a man-hater, but really, why shouldn’t I hate men? Give me a good reason to not hate the gender that has shown me nothing but their own insecurity, the needless oppression of my gender, and hatred for something I can’t help – my uterus. My hatred of one gender is based on how that gender treats me. Men’s hatred of women is precisely because of what our bodies can do. My response is this: get the fuck over yourselves. You’ll never be able to give birth or breastfeed. We don’t think less of you because of it. If we do think less of you, it is because you can't seem to get over it.

Please note that I hve decided not to use the term "sexist" and have instead decided to just use men. I don't yet have a big readership, and I highly doubt that I have any male readers, but I know that men tend to get defensive about this kind of thing. I don't see this post as anything other than some musings and statements of realities.

If, as a man, you feel the need to be defensive, remember that actions speak much louder than words. It is also a little pointless for you to feel defensive about something you can't help. I don't imagine that you can control your subconcious feelings of insecurity over the inability to be 100% sure that you've passed on your genetic material. I do expect you to be able to understand these feelings and control your behavior. This is called maturity.

Sub-concious Inferiority Complex

Here is another part of my "evolution of sexism" theory. This part is pretty hypothetical, and just the result of what I know about young childhoodand psychology.

Young boys develop a jealousy of their mothers, to some extent, and of girls. They do this before they can consciously understand the jealousy. Males claim that they wouldn’t want to give birth, but really, men’s contribution to life is hard to understand, especially at an early stage of life. Our own species didn't understand it until relatively recently.

I remember, as a young child, simulating birth with my mother, hiding under her shirt, then coming out. I cannot imagine that little boys didn’t do something similar, and I cannot imagine that it doesn’t have an effect on young male brains to know that they will never, ever be able to create life in the same way.

So the unconscious mind developed a slight jealousy, as it often does, and started postulating about how men were better than women in order to make up for what seemed like a disparity. As young men developed consciousness, they forgot the root of the presumptions, but still held on to them, and then projected them onto the women and girls around them.

It would be hard to convince me that this doesn't actually happen, since it makes sense and I'm not sure how one would create an experiement to disprove this hypothesis. I mean, we've had the experiment happening all around us for millenia, and this just seems to be the result. So maybe it isn't so much a hypothesis as an interpretation. But there are definitely other, perhaps stronger factors at play in sexism, the strongest of which being the insecurity with paternity.

Friday, 20 July 2007

Goodness, it has been a while

It has been 8 whole days since my last post - far too long. I have been in a bit of an emotional slump, and Rock is busy preparing for the bar. But as I feel someone alienated from my [now] old political forum. I would like to extend the scope of this blog to progressive politics in general, but still with a decidely feminist bent.

Speaking of feminism, I heard a sound bite on NPR this morning, that "dog fighting is no worse than legal abortion"

I assume that it is something about Michael Vick's dog fighting thing. First of all, what I think is more reprehensible than dog fighting were the cruel punishments of dogs that lost. One of which was to wet down a dog (which was needlessly identified as female, did that really need to be pointed out?) and electrocute it. Cruel, horrible, and UTTERLY POINTLESS.

As for if it is no better or worse than abortion. The human body rejects certain fetuses, biologically. It can be traumatizing, not to mention frustrating, especially for those having trouble concieving in the first place. Call me cold and cruel all you want, but we need to remember that mistakes happen. MISTAKES HAPPEN, even in biology.

So how does this relate to abortion? Well, miscarriages are, basically, abortions by one's own body, and for very good reasons - maybe your body isn't ready for a baby yet, maybe it never will be, maybe it has passed that time [my mother had a miscarriage in her 40s]. Maybe the baby hasn't been formed right. For whatever reason, the body aborted the baby. Abortions are what happens when the unconcious human processes can't detect any problems, but the concious human process can. Maybe a woman is not financially stable to even reliably support herself, maybe she is not at a point in her life when she could give the best care to herself for 9 months of pregnancy. Why is this such a problem? Well, duh, women are the ones best able to know when the pregnancy isn't right, and men get uptight when women have control over anything. Well, not "men" (though traditionally, that has been the case), just sexists.

In the Namib Dessert, one of the most arrid deserts in the world, a culture of people evolved that could only support a certain number of dependents. If a woman got pregnant and gave birth to a kid it couldn't support, after birth, the mother would quickly and quietly kill the newborn infant. This was a normal and accepted practice. I'm not sure if the practice still happens, but as with much in Africa, it probably still does.

So many like to paint the decision to have an abortion as frivolous, but, damn, it couldn't be further from the truth. Just another smear tactic from sexists who are afraid when women make decisions on their own.

So is legal abortion like dog fighting? Is legal abortion like an activity to starve and abuse animals so as to make them angry? Is the decision to not bring a baby into the world that one cannot or will not support adequately (even during pregnancy) the same as getting enjoyment out of dogs brutally killing each other? The answer should be apparent.

Sunday, 15 July 2007

Talking

Published retroactively
Today's Luann comic kind of irritated me, because it was about women talking more than men. The feminist blogs said it best - that society promotes that stereotype of women talking too much and being annoying to shame women into talking even less. I, frankly, don't know how we can really say that men talk less when it is they who are all over the media. Women, on an individual level, might talk more, but men write more, and their ideas are the ones that get out there. So maybe I want men to shut the hell up. Well, maybe it is only certain men. I think one factor in women talking more is that we know that sometimes, people aren't listening, and by people, I mean the men - the sexist men - that don't think women are people, and therefore don't listen. So those poor women in relationships with those sexists need to say more to be able to get through to those asshats.

In the Luann comic, the mom is just talking in stream-of-concouisness style, and she is talking about something she did. Whereas, during the same time, the dad probably sat on the couch watching golf or something. So, in reality, maybe it is just that women actually have things to say. And really, do men talk about important things? That sexist asshat at work only talked about music and movies, because that was all he knew. I remember a time in high school, my sophomore year, when I was sitting with some girls from my junior high. They were overhearing some guys talking about some technical thing - computers, video games, whatnot - and one said "jeez, don't they have lives they can talk about?" I felt very conflicted about this statement, because I didn't particularly like these women, and I didn't think the guys' conversation meant they were losers, but it was an interesting comment, that I obviously still remember.

Now, in the human society, generalizations do not work all of the time. You can't look at one woman and assume everything about her simply because she is a woman. Intelligent people understand this, but still use generalizations because they reflect basic trends. As I said in an earlier post, as women go through puberty, they begin to focus more on interpersonal relationships, but not all of us do this. I didn't, neither did my friend C, neither did Entomologista. But because women focus on relationships so much, and lose interest for abstractions, men seem to fill the void of women talking about those things. But interpersonal relationships change every day, and abstractions remain the same. After a while, maybe people run out of things to say about a video game, movie, or sporting event, whereas it is hard to run out of things to say about an ongoing relationship.

As for me, my talking is definitely learned from my father first and his mother second. My dad talks a lot, and my mother said that her father was a big talker as well. She said she thinks that is part of why she was attracted to my dad. When my family goes somewhere, it is usually Mom, my sister and I that want to leave first, and we have to often go get Dad out of a conversation with some person and tell him we're all leaving, NOW. He once got in trouble with a couple of farmers for telling one farmer a story about another farmer that he didn't realize was intended to be private. I often describe his mother as a woman who would talk to "anyone, anywhere, about anything, at any time", and really, my dad and I learned this exact trait.

Overall, humanity is a social species, and we like to share our experiences. Some of us talk more than others, and we all talk about different things. Some of those things might just be more interesting and may necessitate more talking than other things. And really, it is rediculous to assume that guys don't talk about relationships either. Some might not, and maybe it is because they don't necessarily have relationships (those guys back in high school didn't).

There was a recent study that said that when young girls talk about relationships, it hurts them, whereas the same is not true for young boys (and I mean junior high age). I crtainly hope someone thought to ask what else each group talked about. In every woman's experience, she knows that women are often not encouraged to talk about certain things, like abstractions. Even our toys from childhood are belittled. We recently had that Transformers movie, but could you imagine a movie about My Little Pony being recieved in the same way? And it isn't because girls' toys cannot be made "cool". I seem to remember a Rainbow Bright movie I used to watch that seemed very cool. Granted, my adult mind might not be nearly as impressed, but themes in the movie could be rewritten and made very interesting. But in our society, little boys are just young people, but little girls are still inferior and weak. Maybe that is why girls growing out of that stage don't talk about that kind of thing, and instead obsess over relationships to the point that is harmful. Just some thoughts.

Saturday, 14 July 2007

Picking My Battles

Published retroactively
Generally, I avoid Alternet's comments. The commenters are, by and large, complete idiots - conservative, sexist, and hateful trolls. But, for some reason, I wanted to read the comments for Inside Fox's Latest Anti-Feminist Reality Show. The show is obviously a stupid ploy, a sexist, patronizing view of a completely made-up world. No one should watch it, and I hope that the participants feel much the same way the cast of Manos: The Hands of Fate did after its release.

But first, there were only three comments, all incredibly stupid. Then later, I checked and saw 11 comments. A couple were intelligent, pointing out that this reactionary television crap was a diatribe against Hillary Clinton, and one was the epitomy of idiocy. Some brainless twit argued that feminists think that men are sub-human and that we blame 99% of problems on men. Sigh - the first part doesn't even need commentary, as for the second part..... A. it is more "the patriarchy" and B. uh, who has been calling the shots for the past several milleniums? What a dumbass. I wish someone would reply to that comment to say, "you're a complete idiot". Why don't I?

Why don't I? Is it because I don't want to get caught in the idiocy of the Alternet comment trolls? Yes. Would it even matter? Inaction bothers me, but so does too much action in inappropriate places. I was tempted to take the t-shirt pricing post down because I didn't want to seem like I was putting so much importance on what is one small part of the battle. That is why I made a seperate post about apathy rather than just updating the t-shirt post. And what action is appropriate? I have no desire for any of the t-shirts on sale for that comic, yet, so writing a letter seems premature. I won't be linking to the comic, but since I've hidden my site from the robots, that won't make a large influence. I could link the comic and advise my (few) readers to not purchase shirts, but I think in the end, I'd rather write a letter and speak to the proprieter individually.

Thursday, 12 July 2007

You're only young once

I'm so glad that my parents lived first before having kids. They were 30 and 31 when they got married, and my mother was 34 when I was born. I'm the older of two kids.

Approximately 750,000 American women between the ages of 15 and 19 get pregnant each year. Of course some of these young women come to adore and enjoy their roles as mothers, but they had the rest of their lives for that. The opportunity to be independent, focused on self-improvement and intellectual discovery, and career-driven without complications, has been lost.

It is inexcusable that television networks, one of the best public sites for widespread education about safer sex, is acting coy at the cost of these young women's fullest lives. Until all women understand their reproductive choices, none of us can be sure that we are benefiting from the full range of gifts -- intellectual, spiritual, and otherwise -- that one half of the population has to offer.

Fox and CBS Refuse To Air Condom Ads

Tuesday, 10 July 2007

Apathy is bad

At the end of Sicko, the words "Do Something" appeared on the screen. Many have accused our generation of apathy. It isn't exactly a fair accusation, however, because more than ever before, we're overworked and strapped with debt. But that doesn't give us a right to throw up our hands and say "oh well."

Margaret Mead once said,

Never doubt that a small, group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
My mother says "the squeaky wheel gets the grease." Back in March, Kaiser was going to charge me $140 for 3 months of birth control medication, but I complained to the doctor - rather, I demanded a different prescription, and he knocked $110 off the price. Lily Tomlin once said,
I always wondered why somebody doesn't do something about that. Then I realized I was somebody.
Things don't change overnight, nor do they happen by themselves. When you see sexism somewhere, say something, do something.

Monday, 09 July 2007

Pay Women Less, Charge Us More, Then Claim We Don't Contribute to the Economy

Why are women's sizes more expensive?

Now, I like White Ninja, I'm just getting back into that comic after a long time away. But I went to check out the merchandise and was appalled that women's sizes, which typically run smaller [less fabric], are more expensive than men's sizes. One could argue that the square cuts for men are cheaper, but this is the kind of crap that pisses me off. I have a hard time going to the dry cleaner because I'm afraid that I'll end up paying more and not be able to do anything about it. Dry cleaners used to claim that "women's smaller neck sizes" blah blah blah, bullshit, bulshit, bullshit.

Back in college, the Women's Center (or just a Feminist Org, I can't remember) decided to sell cookies, as a fundraiser, at 76 cents to women and $1 to men as a demonstration on inequal pay. Some sexists decided to argue with them about this. The thing was that the women didn't HAVE to sell the cookies, and the men didn't HAVE to buy them. Unlike, say, dry cleaning and clothing, haircuts and razors, and all kinds of other things that are priced higher for women.

Sunday, 08 July 2007

A Clarification on Language

Language matters, and I do my best to choose my words carefully.

  • When I need to refer to a generic person, I will opt for the female pronoun first, if I cannot use a device like s/he or wo/man.
  • When making an accusation of sexism, I will use the term sexist as opposed to "men". Though one could claim that everyone in our society is sexist, to some degree, I define sexist as someone who willfully espouses the tenets of sexism without acknowledgment of the negative repercussions.
  • I use anti-feminist when talking about sexists that actively attempt to dismantle the feminist movement
  • Important Reading
    Stop using gendered language thoughtlessly. There is a politics to language, and it is not just being "PC." That term was invented by right-wingers to fight back against things like women's studies, African American studies, and other non-white, non-male, non-imperial challenges to a racist, Eurocentric, and patriarchal canon. When you use male nouns and pronouns to describe human, you are reinforcing the idea and practice that makes male the norm. Calling the species homo sapien "Man" is a problem. Calling land and ships and other things "she" and "her," that men are seen to control, is a problem... because it assigns the controlling role to males. Saying that "it is colder than a witch's tit" is a sexist turn of phrase. Using the term "balls" to describe courage, and making courage a male characteristic, is a problem. Calling people who lack courage or strength "pussies" is a devaluation, as well as objectification, of women.

    From The Weaponized Phallus...

    In 1986 Douglas Hofstadter, a philosopher, wrote a parody of sexist language by making an analogy with race. His article ("A Person Paper on Purity in Language") creates an imaginary world in which generics are based on race rather than gender. In that world, people would use "freshwhite," "chairwhite" and yes, "you whiteys." People of color would hear "all whites are created equal" -- and be expected to feel included. Substituting "white" for "man" makes it easy to see why using "man" for all human beings is wrong. Yet, women are expected to feel flattered by "freshman," "chairman" and "you guys."

    From Why Sexist Language Matters
  • Finally, if you "just don't get it", try Finally Feminism 101

Saturday, 07 July 2007

Queen Hatshepsut

Mummy Reveals Egyptian Queen Was Fat, Balding and Bearded

My favorite quote from this article was

"More startling, the descriptions of Hatshepsut suggest that women haven't changed all that much over the centuries."

It makes me wonder if women haven't been struggling against misogyny all this time, and only now have the free time to be effective? A friend just told me that Ancient Egyptian women may have been better off than many women of the past.

Egyptian women owned property, were equal to men under the law (could file divorce, sue, appear in court. etc.), could become literate and professional (there were female doctors and office workers), seem to have been sexually empowered, and had the right to rule (right of rule was matriarchal, but the queen usually transferred power to her husband--a Hatshepsut and other ruling queens refused to transfer power or refused to marry).


And that is why the fight for women's rights will never end - women had rights then, but we lost it.

But this article is more about the Queen's physical features. You'd have to be an idiot or complete misogynist to actually be surprised that human women have not changed in such a short span of time. But if you can't make women feel bad that they aren't as great as they used to be, and you reveal that obesity and hair loss are normal, then suddenly, women might stop starving themselves. No one wants that.

Wikipedia's article on Malnutrition has this to say:

An array of afflictions ranging from stunted growth, reduced intelligence and various cognitive abilities, reduced sociability, reduced leadership and assertiveness, reduced activity and energy, reduced muscle growth and strength, and poorer health overall are directly implicated to nutrient deficiencies.


Women are accused of not being good leaders, they are traditionally shorter and have less muscle mass than men. They did not participate in sports, and our capacity for rational thought is put into question all the time.

Women and men may not be that different physically after all. I read, in my second Women's Studies class, that our society has systematically malnourished women (and here, when I say society, I mean world society) - first due to lack of resources, and now as a way to keep women buth "fuckable" (want to be a size 0?) and suffering the effects of hunger.

Note the attempts to erase this woman from the history.

Weddings, whats the point?

One of my favorite people, a former employee, explained the significance of this day. She told me that 7 is God's number, because he rested on the seventh day after working for 6 days to create the earth. Consequently, three times as many people are getting married today than on any other day. Source

To me, marriage is the creation of legal kin, as opposed to directly biologically related kin. We seem to understand that a child has the right to see her dying mother or father, but not every kid gets to come into the hospital room. Marriage takes two biological strangers from the human species and gives them the rights we allow biological kinfolk.

Women know that their kids are their own, and that by getting pregnant, they will pass on their genetic material. Men do not have this luxury, which is just one part of my "evolution of sexism" theory, and they know it. The ultimate goal of life is to sustain life, and pass on genetic material. Women have more control over this than men, and men have been punishing us for it for a long time.


But marriage, itself, is not necessarily a punishment, especially not if the man in question can provide the woman with viable pregnancies and help her effectively raise the new people. No, the punishment comes in the form of "women don't have the minds for math" and "don't be such a girl" - not to mention rape and murder¹ after the wedding and damn, everything else I talk about.

I don't know how much more explanation I need to give before I can get to my point, but I'm satisfied with what I've already written. Many cultures have realized that the joining of two adults needs to be recognized to be official. Hence, the wedding. Some weddings are short, sweet, and to the point. Some weddings last a week. Some weddings include the slaughter of a whole cow and a town feast. Some weddings include a million dollar dress and 5,000 famous people. My parents wedding was in a small local Catholic church. The bride wore a knee length brown-green dress, the groom wore a tan couderoy suit [hey, it was the 70's]. The reception was a dinner in the church basement, and their "honeymoon" was an afternoon outing to a local lake.

But so many women put their entire lives into their wedding. I admit, as I child, I liked to play wedding, if only for the pomp. But I also liked to play queen and royal palace for the same reason, often with the chess set. I went to wedddings as a child. The dresses were beautiful, yes, but the couple often made it to the reception so much later because of the photographer. The speeches ran long, when all I wanted to do was eat and dance.

And now, we all love to hear about bridezillas and elaborate weddings - well, all except me. Despite what I believe about the true purpose of weddings, I can't get past the blatent sexism and patrimony of the ceremony. In the past, both the man and the woman were leaving their respective parents' house, but the man stands at the head of the church, with his buddies, while the women put on an elaborate parade. In the end, the grand marshall, the man who paid for the whole thing, escorts his property down the aisle to give her to this other man, for his use.

Weddings are called "her day" because in the traditional, sexist reality, weddings were her last opportunity to be beautiful and show off, and she was now a wife, destined to begin a life of servitude to this handsome man. He doesn't worry about the wedding because he knows that his life will continue as normal, but better than normal because now he has someone to take care of him - just like his mother once did.

But so many non-famous women still want the huge wedding. They want all the pomp, all the gradeur, and all the tradition. The song must be just right, the dress must be perfect, the vows must be beautiful, the flowers must be breathtaking. And in the end, who gives a crap? It is one day, one dress, and a bunch of meaningless words. The real wedding is in the signing of the document, not in "I do". The point of a wedding is to tell everyone that you are now legally related to someone else, nothing more, nothing less.

My parents walked down the aisle together. They gave themselves to each other. My mother might have worn that dress again. My parents married as adults, and they did it without fuss, or without going into tons of debt.