Monday, January 31, 2011

"Girlie-girl" culture  

159 comments


Spotted an article on Slate today that highlights a new book: Cinderella Ate My Daughter by feminist author Peggy Orenstein.

Her website describes the book:

The acclaimed author of the groundbreaking bestseller Schoolgirls reveals the dark side of pink and pretty in this wake-up call to parents: the rise of the girlie girl is not that innocent.

As a new mother, Peggy Orenstein was blindsided by the persistent ultra-feminine messages being sent to a new generation of little girls—from "princess-mania" to endless permutations of pink. How many times can you say no when your daughter begs for a pint-sized wedding gown, she wondered. How dangerous is pink and pretty anyway? Being a princess is just make-believe, isn't it? Does playing Cinderella shield little girls from early sexualization—or prime them for it?

I LOVE anything that questions the mass distribution of harmful gender role-reinforcing products to young girls that are far too easily accepted by society as "normal." Will be adding this to my reading list.

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Why do we do this to our daughters?  

11 comments
Huffington Post put up this video recently. It's a clip from a horrific show on TLC called "Toddlers & Tiaras" (which is about exactly what the title implies) that depicts one of the pageant mothers forcing her crying five year-old daughter to get her eyebrows waxed. The girl was traumatized from a previous waxing session during which her skin was ripped off.



Pure child abuse, and a prime example of how gender roles and beauty expectations operate in a vicious cycle. I'm sure this pageant mother's parent(s) forced the same twisted values on her. Even though I don't plan to have kids in my lifetime, sometimes I wish I could raise a daughter, if only to teach her that her self-worth goes beyond having well-shaped eyebrows.
Thursday, December 23, 2010

The Girl Effect  

3 comments
Ack! I've fallen off the face of the blogosphere!

I'm still here. Bear with me.

And in the mean time, watch this video. It's a couple months old, but I just saw it and found it incredibly heart-breaking and, at the same time, uplifting. It's from the NoVo Foundation.

Monday, August 16, 2010

Your daily dose of scary shit  

1 comments
A New Pill Can Make a Baby Less Likely to Be Gay -- Will It Be Used to Change Sexual Orientation in the Womb?

I worry about this because not only can this magical pill reduce the likelihood of a gay offspring, but it can also ensure that little boys are masculine and little girls are feminine. Sounds far too Brave New World to me...
Sunday, August 8, 2010

Buffet of the Week  

2 comments

Found many-a interesting things while perusing the web on my Sunday afternoon, so here's a nice little round-up for y'all.

  • If you need your daily dose of disgust, you can read about the opposition to building mosques near Ground Zero.

  • For those of you who haven't heard, an appeal has already been filed against the Prop 8 ruling. No one's particularly surprised.

  • From The New Gay: Queers You Should Know: Fred Karger, Our First Gay President?

  • In honor of World Breastfeeding Week (which ended yesterday), Kimberly Seals Allers wrote a piece for Women's eNews about the low breastfeeding rates amongst black mothers.

  • I found this absolutely horrific but thought it served as a good reminder of the lengths people will go to in order to protect their precious gender roles. A man allegedly beat his girlfriend's 17-month-old son to death because he wasn't acting "manly" enough.

  • From AlterNet: In States Where "Gun Ed" Is Prevalent, Comprehensive Sex Ed Is Nowhere to Be Found.

  • Another one from AlterNet: The GOP Fights to Make African-Americans Sicker and Poorer.

  • Scenes from an anti-choice abortion-kills-black-babies protest.

  • Ironically, Lucky magazine airbrushed Jessica Simpson to make her look thinner in her photo for an article about how much she loves her body.

  • Jane Lynch. Hosting SNL in October. 'Nuff said.

  • Thank goodness for Rachel Maddow and her ability to take on offensive media powerhouses, e.g. Bill O'Reilly.
Sunday, August 1, 2010

WBW 2010  

0 comments
August 1st-7th is:

World Breastfeeding Week


World Breastfeeding Week's purpose is to raise awareness about the numerous benefits of breastfeeding and to encourage society to stop viewing it as some sort of pornographic act that belongs in the home. New mothers have every right to breastfeed when and where they feel it necessary, but unfortunately we still have to fight for that right.

Learn more about what you can do in honor of World Breastfeeding Week at the official website.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010

New technological trend in dating violence  

1 comments

A new weapon that is becomingly increasingly popular amongst abusive partners: text messages. The Washington Post had a chilling update in their Breaking News blog recently, highlighting this issue. They have stories to back it up, including one about a 22 year-old who was texted and called 758 times by her boyfriend.

Text messaging is allowing abusers to keep constant tabs on their partners, and because young people are handed cell phones from the minute they emerge from the womb, it can take awhile for them to notice something wrong in receiving excessive text messages from a significant other.

This is why new trends in dating violence need to be immediately woven into the anti-dating violence already implemented in schools. And for the schools that don't have any such programs, why the hell not?!?

And I don't need to remind anyone that this is yet another reason why we still need feminism: to teach young girls that their purpose extends beyond getting the attention of dudes. People wonder why women and girls stay with abusive partners - maybe this wouldn't be the case if we were taught that we can survive without a husband.
Sunday, May 9, 2010

Thoughts on Mother's Day  

0 comments

Although I'm sure many of us have our issues with the overly-commercialized "Hallmark" holiday that is Mother's Day, I can't imagine many of us have issues with honoring the women in our life who have made us who we are. That's how I see Mother's Day. Not everyone is lucky enough to have a mother like Lorelai Gilmore, but I sincerely hope that we are all lucky enough to have strong women role models in our lives.

Living with my mom hasn't always been the easiest task. I have nothing but happy memories of her as a kid - from her ability to always act as if I had given her diamonds for her birthday when really all I gave her was a bunch of pictures I scribbled, to her tendency to always stand up for me when I felt the wrath of my dad's temper (not to say that I don't love my dad - I love him very much, but the man can sure yell). But by nine years-old, she had been diagnosed with a nightmarish disease that over the years, has attacked her body and mind. At 57 years-old, though she needs constant care and is essentially wheelchair-bound, she is still kickin', defying all odds. There is a 50% chance I have inherited the disease from her, and while I don't know yet if I have it or not because I'm not at the point where I'm ready to take the test, I'm sure I inherited her never-give-up, don't-take-shit attitude. Go mom.

We have had our fair share of fights, as the disease attacked her ability to think rationally which made it increasingly difficult to be around her, but I have nothing but love for my mom. And not only was I blessed with an awesome mother, but also an older sister who looks out for me, defends me when people give me crap for being a feminist, and in a few weeks, will be sharing a house with me. I see how my mom's older sister treats her with nothing but the utmost care and love, and I know that if either my sister or me were affected by the disease (Heaven forbid) it would be no different. Because that's what women do, or should do, for each other.

So go give the women in your life big hugs, and tell 'em why they rock. Also, feel free to comment with your stories. Now, enough with the mushy stuff. I feel I have to post the hilarious video I always think of whenever Mother's Day is mentioned.

Friday, April 2, 2010

$250 million for abstinence-only education in health care reform  

13 comments

Like cockroaches, abstinence-only education programs just will not die, no matter how many times they are proven to be a load of crap (I'm not buying the new studies that say they might work).

The health care reform legislation that President Obama signed includes a renewal of $50 million per year for five years for abstinence-focused education. That's $250 million to tell young people to put their chastity belts on.

RHRealityCheck has an explanation on how this funding made its way into the health care bill:

Here are some of the things we are hearing. Even though a number of prominent Democrats including Cong. Henry Waxman (D-CA) had contacted leadership and demanded that the ab-only programs be pulled from the bill, we’ve been told that leadership was focused on the "bigger issues" and never reached consideration of the ab-only piece.

Boy, does that ever smack of the “dog ate my homework” excuse. There was no rationale for keeping this amendment in the bill. Hatch is a Republican who opposes health care reform so there was no political need to placate the author of the measure. Taking Title V out of the bill would have saved a quarter billion dollars over five years and Democrats were desperate for savings so they could show that the bill would reduce the federal deficit.

Finally, we’ve been hearing that the recent publication of the Jemmott study showed that abstinence-only programs really work. One small problem with that line of thinking. Jemmott’s program would not qualify for Title V funding since it doesn’t follow the rigid, ideological eight-point definition—a point made by the authors themselves! So there is still no evidence those programs work; in fact quite the contrary.

This whole health care reform debacle is giving me an aneurysm.

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Protect our schools' textbooks  

34 comments
This whole Texas textbook debacle makes me shudder. It may sound cliche, but true change does rely heavily on our children. But how can they understand what needs to change if they are being fed B.S. in school? The entire schooling system angers the hell out of me. I wasn't taught a damn thing about feminism until twelfth grade when I had a feminist teacher for my U.S. government class, who finally explained women's suffrage in a way that I understood. Still, she was forced to teach us how to pass the AP test instead, and had to leave behind most of the truly important stuff.

Well I'll tell you: I don't remember one thing on that AP test, but I do remember her telling us how Alice Paul was sent to prison, where she went on a hunger strike and was force-fed meals through a rubber tube inserted in her throat... and all so women would be treated like human beings. Still, my eyes weren't truly opened to feminism and the importance of equality and all the social injustices that exist in this world until I went to my super liberal college. It's so upsetting to me that children are being given textbooks that glorify Christopher Columbus (and leave out his slaughtering of Native Americans), exclude the LGBTQ movement, and devote all of two pages to women's rights. And it's about to get worse! From CredoAction.com:

Led by far-right ideologues, the Texas SBOE recently gave preliminary approval to a plan that would radically change what children across the country learn in history class.

The ultra-conservative majority on the board (none of whom are experts in any academic discipline and many of whom are explicitly anti-science) took the curricula proposed by teachers and made over a hundred changes to "correct" the perceived left-wing bias.

But it gets worse. Since Texas is one of the largest textbook markets in the country, material written to cater to the Texas curricula will find its way into textbooks across the country unless textbook publishers take a stand.

We can't allow a small group of extreme ideologues on the Texas State Board of Education to re-write history.

Children who use textbooks conforming to the new standards will not learn anything about the political philosophy of Thomas Jefferson or his thoughts on the separation of church and state. When they learn about the Civil War, they'll have to study Jefferson Davis' inaugural address alongside Abraham Lincoln's. And when they study the civil rights movement they'll have to learn about the "unintended consequences" of Great Society programs, affirmative action and Title IX. Oh — and Joe McCarthy was right all along no matter what historians actually say about it.

*bangs head on desk repeatedly*

Write to the United States' largest textbook publishers and tell them this is unacceptable, please. The future of this country depends on it.

Monday, February 8, 2010

Children on diets  

3 comments
By: Kaity - from the series of guest posts written by Dr. Baldwin's students at Michigan State University.

http://www.paulabecker.com/blog/images/if-skinny1_lrg.jpg

The other day I was at a family party, and while helping with the desserts, I asked my ten-year-old cousin if she would like some cake and ice-cream. Her response? “No thank you I can’t, I’m on a diet.” I was so caught off guard by what she had just said to me! When I asked her why she was on a diet, she said she needed to lose weight because she was fat. Now we all know that as we grow, some children have a bit of a belly. But it was NEVER considered fat, just that the child was still growing into their body. It was never a concern to anyone, especially the child.

How early in life is media now infesting the minds of children of our nation? Extreme dieting, anorexia and bulimia were typically observed by young women who entered the stressful world of high school. Keeping up with unnaturally skinny models and movie stars is hard on these young women who want to be skinny, beautiful, and accepted. Nowadays though, does this really only apply to young adult women? Or are the stressors of wanting to be skinny effecting children as young as ten? Girls this young shouldn’t be concerned with the way they look. Their only concern should be which type of cereal would be more fun to eat, not the amount of calories they are consuming.

Friday, January 15, 2010

Why more women aren't gamers  

9 comments
Saw this very cute and very interesting video over at Sociological Images, and I was enthralled throughout the whole thing. As a girl who grew up playing Sonic the Hedgehog and Mortal Kombat on Sega Genesis, begging my father to buy me a Gameboy to be able to play Super Mario Brothers on the go, and now obsessively trying to get the high score on Wii tennis, I can't help but be interested in why women seem to feel left out from the video game world. Daniel Floyd makes some really great points, calling the video game industry a "Boys' Club" and arguing that the sexualization of female video game characters might turn women (and certainly feminists) off from video games completely. I especially love what he says towards the end:

Perhaps the ideal solution would be to just stop drawing gender lines completely. It may be that when we stop thinking so much about "games for men" versus "games for women" and just make games for people, things will start to improve. Yes, certain kinds of products and imagery appeal to men while other kinds appeal to women, and there's nothing wrong with that, but you have to wonder if all this boundary drawing around women and games has just kept them out, rather than invited them in.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Buffet of the Week  

0 comments
  • Check out The New York Times' "Women at Arms" series, which "explores how the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have profoundly redefined the role of women in the military."

  • In the Philippines, where abortion is illegal and 70% of the population cannot afford birth control, reproductive rights advocates are pushing for legislation that would require the government to provide free or low-cost reproductive services. However, these efforts are meeting harsh resistance.

  • California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill Wednesday restoring the $16.3 million in funds for domestic violence shelters that he originally cut from the state's budget in July.

  • In Saudi Arabia, a female journalist has been sentenced to 60 lashes for being involved with a TV show that discussed sex.

  • The US House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight held a hearing Wednesday to examine the violence perpetuated against women in foreign countries. Our goal is achieve re-introduction of the International Violence Against Women Act.

  • Personhood Nevada filed a ballot initiative in the state to pass a law that would define a fetus as a human being. If passed, this law would threaten abortion rights, as well as IUDs, emergency contraception, in vitro fertilization clinics, and stem cell research.

  • An article on MSNBC.com warns that certain menopause remedies that are becoming popular, such as hormone therapies, may contain dangerous side-effects.

  • With the Barbie doll losing popularity, Mattel is giving her a makeover in hopes to revive the historic toy. It's pretty horrific... let the short short dresses and copious amounts of makeup speak for themselves.

  • Michelle Obama has been active recently in Breast Cancer awareness.
Friday, September 25, 2009

Coming out in middle school  

1 comments
On the new New York Times Magazine cover is a feature story on coming out in middle school.


I think it's wonderful they showcased the plight of young gay teens. You can read the entire story online - it's worth a look!
Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Why wait? Corrupt your children early!  

2 comments
Head on over to the Huffington Post to check out their "7 Most Inappropriate Products For Children." Among the 7: baby's first high heels (which I wrote a post on awhile back), a baby doll you can breastfeed, and booby tassles for your little one. Weird stuff.

Saturday, September 12, 2009

Why children discriminate  

6 comments
There's an interesting article in Newsweek, entitled "See Baby Discriminate." It explores how and why babies and toddlers see differences between white people and people of color. The article cites several different studies that tested how children see race, similar to the infamous black doll vs. white doll study:



Most studies seem to go somewhat like this:

Vittrup's first test of the kids revealed they weren't colorblind at all. Asked how many white people are mean, these children commonly answered, "Almost none." Asked how many blacks are mean, many answered, "Some," or "A lot." Even kids who attended diverse schools answered the questions this way.

Not surprising. Racism is a cycle, perpetuated by parents passing on either their racist views or their let's-never-talk-about-race philosophy:

Combing through the parents' study diaries, Vittrup realized why. Diary after diary revealed that the parents barely mentioned the checklist items. Many just couldn't talk about race, and they quickly reverted to the vague "Everybody's equal" phrasing.

Of all those Vittrup told to talk openly about interracial friendship, only six families managed to actually do so. And, for all six, their children dramatically improved their racial attitudes in a single week. Talking about race was clearly key.

But...

Others think it's better to say nothing at all about the president's race or ethnicity—because saying something about it unavoidably teaches a child a racial construct. They worry that even a positive statement ("It's wonderful that a black person can be president") still encourages a child to see divisions within society.

The fact of the matter is... there are divisions within society. I think more than anything it's important to educate our children about prejudice and stereotypes and injustice so they can understand what they will encounter out in the world.

If I ever have a daughter, I plan to sit her down and explain, "Some people might try to make you feel like you can't do certain things because you're a girl, but know that you can do anything you put your mind to. Don't let them get you down." To me, ignoring the state of our society is a surefire way to end up with confused children who think "black people are mean." Talking is key.

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Obama's speech to students  

2 comments


My favorite part:

It's the story of students who sat where you sit 250 years ago, and went on to wage a revolution and found this nation. Students who sat where you sit 75 years ago who overcame a Depression and won a world war; who fought for civil rights and put a man on the moon. Students who sat where you sit 20 years ago who founded Google, Twitter and Facebook and changed the way we communicate with each other.

So today, I want to ask you, what's your contribution going to be? What problems are you going to solve? What discoveries will you make? What will a president who comes here in twenty or fifty or one hundred years say about what all of you did for this country?

Your families, your teachers, and I are doing everything we can to make sure you have the education you need to answer these questions.


Inevitably, there's controversy surrounding this speech. Some are claiming that Obama is putting too much pressure on students to "fix" the country, but I saw this speech as a message of encouragement. Students are the future, and it's important to encourage them to see school as an opportunity to discover their passions and talents.

Also, conservatives are claiming that in addressing children, Obama was trying to "sell" his political agenda. Parents protested the speech, carrying signs with such phrases as: "Mr. President, stay away from our kids."

As far as I know, it is extremely common for presidents to address children and schools, and as far as I know, Obama didn't say the words, "SOCIALISM GOOD DEMOCRACY BAD" to the children, so where is the problem again? E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post says it well:

Upon Barack Obama's election, even my most conservative friends who supported John McCain said Obama could do a world of good for poor children in the country by stressing the importance of education, hard work, staying in school and taking responsibility. Yes, those are often thought of as conservative values.

But when Obama proposed to do just that on the first day of school, the far right -- without asking any questions or seeking any information -- decided to pounce, on the theory that everything Obama did should be attacked relentlessly as part of some secret and dangerous ideological agenda.

The Republicans must be terrified of Obama turning our children into zombies:

Friday, August 28, 2009

New commercial tells parents how to raise their children  

4 comments


HOLY CRAP, TRYING TO TALK ABOUT SEX WILL TURN YOUR DAD INTO A MIME!

Thank goodness we don't have to talk about "the parts." I was worried for a minute that I might have to explain to my children what's going on with their bodies, or explain how sex works before I tell them to "wait."

4parents.gov is an appalling website that can basically be summed up in five words: "GET MARRIED OR NO SEX." They have an entire section about loving and accepting your child should s/he turn out to be gay, and then they blatantly exclude same-sex couples by preaching marriage as the best thing since sliced bread. Look at this:

What do you want your son or daughter to know about the benefits of marriage? Talking about the value of marriage now can help your son or daughter make good choices that will impact their future. Make sure you let them know what you want for their future. Marriage can be a positive part of your child's life. Research supports this!

Talk about some of the benefits listed below. Through discussion, you can help them think about their own future.
What are the benefits married people enjoy?

* Live longer.

* Have better physical and emotional health.

* Are happier.

* Earn more.

* Enjoy better sex lives.

* Save more so they have fewer money worries.

Uh. What about the people who are pushed into marriage by their parents, society, and stupid websites like 4parents.gov, and end up unhappy because they simply married for the sake of marrying? Why does it have to be "wait until marriage" to have sex? It is so much more realistic and inclusive to simply promote waiting until someone is ready and has found the right partner.

Then again, I don't want to die young, poor, depressed, and sex-less. Hot damn! I'm gonna go get hitched right now.

Friday, August 14, 2009

5 Reasons We Still Need Feminism  

2 comments

Check out "5 Reasons We Still Need Feminism" on the Sirens Magazine website. I could easily write "50 Reasons We Still Need Feminism," but the five reasons they listed were certainly enough, which included the rape crisis and reproductive rights being in jeopardy. But just for some extra material to shove in the faces of folks who claim that feminism is dead and useless, here are my five reasons (in actuality, reproductive justice and the rape crisis would be on this list, but since Sirens already covered it, I'm trying to do something different).

1. Equal Pay Remains a Myth. Although we have laws to protect our right to fair and equal pay, a wage gap still exists. In 2008, women who were full-time wage and salary workers earned about 80 percent of their male counterparts' salaries. And the numbers are even worse for women of color. A core feminist belief (especially within Marxist Feminism) is that women cannot achieve liberation without economic independence. As long as women still continue to struggle with poverty, many have no choice but to depend on men for survival.

2. LGBT People Are Still Being Treated Like a Lesser Species. As long as people still exist who believe that same-sex marriage will lead to the apocalypse and will corrupt our children, gay people will continue to be stepped on by bigoted heterosexuals. Keith Olbermann once asked while addressing same-sex marriage opponents, "What's it to you?" Opponents of equality are selfish and ignorant people who envision a world with legalized gay marriage as a doomed world. To me, the scarier world is one in which over half the population in a state votes in favor of hatred instead of love, churches are performing fake exorcisms on frightened young people, scientific evidence is ignored for the sake of continuing harmful and medieval tactics, and entire groups of people who have done nothing but step into a gay bar are targeted by a terrorist group that wishes to poison them. In comparison to all that, love and acceptance doesn't sound so bad.

3. As High as the Rape and Violence Rates Are Here, Women Are Being Abused Even More Abroad. If you are a woman in the Middle East or in Africa, you have a shitload to worry about. Perhaps you were forced to live underground after surviving a rape because your family was so ashamed of you that they kicked you out, or maybe you have no choice but to undergo genital cutting, in which your clitoris is cut or removed or your entire vagina is sewn shut to ensure that you do not experience any type of sexual pleasure until you are forced into marriage. Or maybe you live in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where you constantly have to worry about you or your daughters or your sisters or your friends being raped endlessly and left with unwanted pregnancies, STDs, or a torn vagina. For these women, I'd say feminism is pretty damn important.

4. Racism is Alive and Well. Let's play a game called Don't Jump the Gun, in which we try with all our might to avoid declaring racism "dead" because our country finally allowed a black man into the White House. Because when said black man is still the target of racist attacks, like comparing him to a witch doctor or a "magic negro," or is targeted for an assassination by white supremacists, I think it's safe to say racism is still pretty active. And let's not forget when for the 45340598390534th time a black man was targeted by cops, and our black president defended him, he was ripped a new asshole by right-wingers.

5. Society is Laying Out the Narrowest of Paths for Our Children. Little girls play with dolls, and little boys play with trucks. If the opposite occurs, the little girl is taunted and called a "tomboy," and the little boy is called a "sissy" or a "fag." Shouldn't our children have the right to express who they are and choose what they want to do, as long as they are safe? In a perfect (see: feminist) world perhaps, but in our society, don't even think about it. Most major toy websites still have "boys" and "girls" sections with "gender-appropriate" toys that condition young boys to grow up to love violence and sports, and girls to grow up cooking meals and playing dress-up. A feminist's task is to break down these stereotypes, until finally a young boy can play with a Barbie doll without being teased by classmates and reprimanded by nervous parents who fear the boy will grow up to be (GASP!) a homosexual. Such restrictions harm children in the long run by forcing them to stifle their interests and talents if they do not fit the norm.

What are your reasons?
Sunday, July 19, 2009

Vintage (non)sexism  

6 comments
I came across this vintage Lego advertisement via Sociological Images:


I just love it. Not only is it undeniably rare to see a little girl featured in an advertisement for a traditionally "boy's" toy, but it seems even rarer to see her dressed in jeans and sneakers as opposed to pink tutus and bedazzled tiaras.

As a kid, I used to play with many "girl's" toys, like Barbie and Polly Pocket, but one of my favorite toys was a play toolkit. I used to spend hours "fixing" things with my plastic wrench and screwdriver, and I remember feeling inexplicably cool while doing so. In retrospect, I'm sure this feeling came from my knowledge that I was playing with a toy that I wasn't "supposed" to be playing with. Maybe that's why it was my favorite one.