Sarah Palin's Top 9

I can't believe i didn't see this yesterday while writing about Palin but it is a must read. To pique your interest, below are Sarah Palin's 9 most disturbing beliefs, via the AlterNet. For explanations on each, see the article. Because despite her being gorgeous, hunting moose, and having a child with special needs there are real issues to consider in this election, ones that she has very scary stances on...

1. Despite problems at home, Sarah Palin does not believe in giving teenagers information about sex.
2. Sarah Palin believes the U.S. Army is on a mission from God. (no, for real...)
3. Sarah Palin believes in punishing rape victims. (not just blaming, but punishing...)
4. Who's really not in favor of clean water? Sarah Palin.
5. Sarah Palin calls herself a reformer, but on earmarks and the "Bridge to Nowhere," she is a hypocrite.
6. Sarah Palin believes creationism should be taught in schools. (this is still one of the craziest to me...)
7. Sarah Palin supports offshore drilling everywhere, even if it doesn't solve our energy problems. (what aboutz teh polar bearz?! oh yea, she took them off the endangered species list...)
8. Sarah Palin loves oil and nuclear power.
9. Sarah Palin doesn't think much of community activism; she'd much rather play insider political games.

Any others that ya'll can think of?

My Thoughts on Sarah Palin

My mom called last week and exclaimed, "you must be thrilled McCain chose a woman for VP!" Then she asked me (in all seriousness) who i was going to vote for now that there was a woman in the picture. Up until that moment i didn't think that Palin would earn votes simply for having a vagina. I'll be honest, i am sometimes (usually) sexist when choosing doctors. I always go to a woman because i know that she has worked harder than most men in her class to get there. I also know she had to prove herself not only as a doctor but as a female doctor and that means she is probably more qualified for medicine than most of the men in her field. I know that she has faced sexism and has been overlooked for positions. Truth is, i may be wrong in my assumptions but it makes me feel like i am going to a more qualified, harder working person when i imagine the road that got them to where they are. Sexist? Yes. Accurate? Probably, but also not in all cases. My (il?)logic doesn't translate into politics though. Politicians are carefully bred and hand selected, not necessarily for hard work or qualifications but for fit. This is why i (and many many women) would never vote for Palin solely because she is female. In fact, polls found that women are more skeptical of Palin than men and that the Obama-Biden ticket understands the issues and concerns of women best.

Gloria Steinem wrote an op-ed last week illustrating that, "Sarah Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Hillary Clinton. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger." Steinem writes:

This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need... So let's be clear: The culprit is John McCain. He may have chosen Palin out of change-envy, or a belief that women can't tell the difference between form and content, but the main motive was to please right-wing ideologues; the same ones who nixed anyone who is now or ever has been a supporter of reproductive freedom. If that were not the case, McCain could have chosen a woman who knows what a vice president does and who has thought about Iraq; someone like Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. McCain could have taken a baby step away from right-wing patriarchs who determine his actions, right down to opposing the Violence Against Women Act.

Although Palin's inexperience scares me, what makes me more fearful is her inexpertness combined with her extreme (and often insane) positions. For example, Palin believes that creationism should be taught in public schools. She also does not believe that global warming exists. She believes that we should face the effects of global warming, but not that humans have been at all accountable for the damage. Her environmental opinions are deplorable: she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, a position that even most republicans disagree with. Palin opposes gun control, you know, because the government doesn't have the right to tell us what to do with our gun... but she supports the government's control over women's bodies. Because though we are smart and freethinking enough to shoot guns (and possibly do damage to other people's bodies), we certainly are not smart and freethinking enough to control our own bodies. There's phallic symbolism in there somewhere...

Another tactic i can't quite grasp is why it is so important to paint candidates as relatable. Palin is your average "hockey mom." Obama is the epitome of "rags to riches." I know it's important to humanize candidates but you know what? I don't want my president (or veep) to be an "average" person, I want my elected officials to be much smarter than me, better decision makers, more qualified to govern than i (or any "average person") would be. Back to my medical comparisons, let's put this in different terms: if i was going to have surgery, i wouldn't want an average person cutting me open; i would want someone skilled with a knife. I would want the best fucking surgeon out there. Just like i want the best people in office, not average hockey moms, because if anything, illustrating Palin as "average" and relatable makes her look even less qualified in my eyes. And her record does that for her already, no trite tactics necessary.

Obviously they aren't average. They are in a position to run for office. Obviously that takes (at the very least) money and power. It's insulting to try and fool me into believing they're average, and suggesting that's a good thing...

But i also think we're underestimating Palin a bit. She's the perfect person for McCain to have chose. A perfect, pearl wearing, no hair out of place, gun shooting, oil drilling, anti-choice supporting, evangelical beauty queen. I'm not being sexist, I'm just illustrating the demographic that they're trying to reach by selecting her. Obviously they didn't take the decision lightly and i doubt they were banking solely on Hilary supporters. Palin isn't being used only to lore women to vote republican, although the GOP is hopeful sisterhood will prevail. Palin was also strategically selected because McCain isn't (well, wasn't...) right-wing enough for the ultra-conservatives and Palin will drive home the message of the Christian-base. As far as the GOP thinking women vote strictly with their vaginas and that Hilary supporters would jump on the McCainmobile because he selected a female, i'm not too too worried. I hope (believe?) that women as a whole are smarter than to fall for that. What i am concerned with is how much further to the right McCain has gone in the last few months and how he may have cemented his position on the far right by selecting Palin. I don't care why they chose her, I do care though that they have both pledged to criminalize abortion by overturning Roe vs. Wade...

And because i can't resist Sarah Haskins, here's her take on Palin:

Crafts, Triathlons, and BBC Radio :)

I'm alive, i swear :) Sorry i disappeared for a bit - i've had a number of things going on which i will share with you now:

Firstly, i started an Etsy shop!! For those of you unfamiliar with Etsy, it's a kickass site that allows you to buy and sell anything and everything homemade! I know for sure i'll be doing all my holiday shopping there this year because i am all about supporting follow artists as well as staying out of the malls during those busy weekends :)

I originally began making jewelry as a way to raise money for a local women's shelter - The Center for Women and Families. It was successful last year between Thanksgiving and the New Year when people felt generous but aside from that i did not have a venue to show and sell, thus to raise money. Etsy gave me the opportunity to set up an online shop where i can display, sell, buy, etc. I will be donating 50% of my earnings to the shelter so when people purchase from my shop they aren't just supporting me but also the health and safety of women and children in Connecticut. I write this not to drum-up business but so everyone knows where their money is going :) It's been such a blast already and a great online community of crafters! I must admit i have only sold one thing so far and i don't know how excited CWFEFC will be to receive a check for $3 but hey, every bit counts! I have been working on that like crazy over the past few weeks and wanted to share.

Second, as many of you know, i'm training for a triathlon... it's very soon (Sept 14th) and i'm freaking out a bit. I had a brief incident (mishap...) with a river last weekend but other than that, it's been smooth sailing. As long as there is no seaweed (my arch nemesis) in the river of the actual event, we'll be all set... i'll have more after the event, for now, send me fast and strong vibes :)

Lastly, I was on BBC's WORLD Have Your Say radio program this afternoon speaking on sexual harassment. The question was "how should women react to sexual harassment?" Although i didn't get nearly enough talk time, it was an interesting conversation to be apart of. Check out their blog and the discussion going on there at WHYS, there are over 300 responses so far! They contacted me via HollaBackCT and asked if i'd be the US speaker in the group. It was actually me and Dr. Pickman from NY representing America :) You can listed to the segment here, through podcast under WHYS: Sexual Harassment. It's a really interesting conversation that brings attention to harassment across the globe and gives voice to women who experience and combat harassment daily. The whole piece is worth checking out but if you're looking for me, i'm only on between 25:55 - 29:40 :)

I wish i had more time to talk. I would have said lots of things starting with the importance and necessity of having these conversations and bringing harassment to light. Too much of the time harassment goes unnoticed or ignored, leaving the target powerless and confused. Harassment is about power, not about sexual attraction. The host asked me if i would be offended if was a coworker of mine and whistled at me during work... um, i don't think it's ever appropriate to whistle at people, especially in a professional setting but him feeling he had the right to do so sets up a power dynamic where he is dominant. I've talked to women around the world who, no matter how they were dressed or what they looked like, have been harassed. Putting the responsibility onto the women to change her appearance will not stop harassment (as some of the callers on the show suggested). What it will do is set up an atmosphere of victim blaming. In my opinion, i don't think women should have to change their behavioral because of others' inability to treat them with respect.

Someone on the segment mentioned that when women dress a certain way, men's "hormonal impulses are triggered" and they can't help themselves. I think that's bogus. That doesn't give men any credit for the ability to control themselves. I know many hetero men that are respectful to women and would never blame their hormonal impulses for an inappropriate response.

The host also asked questions specifically about how women should respond to sexual harassment. One guest on the show mentioned she would "smack" the guy. I don't know if i'd go that far... the host loved her answer because it was so extreme and went around to the group to find out if others thought physical violence was the answer... There are certainly other ways of handling harassment. For example, a tourist in New Zealand was so frustrated by whistles and cat-calls that she was receiving from a group of men repairing on a road that she proceeded to strip out of all her clothes. The police did not approve of her response to the harassment and apprehended her saying that her actions were, "inappropriate in New Zealand" (but apparently it isn't inappropriate to whistle at and cat-call a perfect stranger...) I think asking about appropriate responses neglects context. An appropriate response for an American woman is completely different than one for a woman in Saudi Arabia where women have much fewer rights. Feeling safe is also a consideration. An appropriate response has a lot to do with how safe the target feels to report it or take action, and again, this varies through communities, countries, ethnicities, etc. What are your thoughts?

Check out the segment and pass along the online shop to anyone you think would be interested :)
That's what i've been up to, what have you been busy with these past few weeks?

Happy September everyone!! :)

Friday Feel Good: Women Owning Property!

Today's post is dedicated to my bestest friend, Jackie, who at 24 years of age purchased a condo in DC!!! She did so independently, with her own hard earned money! This is a huge step for anyone, and, in my opinion, an especially important and momentous one for a single woman. The financial autonomy, ambition, initiative, go-gettertude, and independence oozing out of this makes me go YIPPEE!!!!!!!

The topic of women and property has a long and painful history. In the US and internationally women have been viewed as property in one way or another. An extreme example is that of India where "more than 5,000 brides die annually because their dowries are considered insufficient." Less drastically, hetero women in the US take their husband's name after having their father's name for their unmarried life. Some see this as benign, other see it as first the women are property of their fathers, then their husbands...

Wait, Friday posts are supposed to be "feel good..." Sorry, i get distracted sometimes... Anyway let me quickly talk not about women as property but the history of women owning property. In the early history of the US, women's property was governed by their husbands, following that of British law. Gradually, states began giving married women limited property rights. By the early 1900s most states gave married women control over their property. However, if the marriage ended for whatever reason (though not as common back then as it is now...) the law offered women no rights to the property. Once married, the only way a woman could own property again as a single women was widowhood. Single women during that time had a bit more financial freedom, they had rights to their father's inheritance for example. But while their fathers were alive, their property rights were limited as well. Things have come a LONG way since all this...

I can't help but think of two independent women when i write about this:

1. Virginia Woolf. In her famous novel, A Room of One's Own, the progressive feminist wrote about the essentialness of a safe, private, space for women to do their own work. A space where they are not threatened, bothered, disturbed, objectified or sexualized so they could be capable of producing work comparable to Shakespeare. Woolf eloquently described how women (esp authors) were denied the opportunities available to her male counterparts. Her famous quote states, "a woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction." Woolf discussed that without money, women were completely dependent on men and without privacy, they were constantly interrupted.

Jacks, i realize you don't write fiction but i hope the new "room of your own" provides you a space for creativity, expression, and lots of bright colors.

2. Miranda Hobbes. A more contemporary, (arguably) feminist symbol of an independent woman unwilling to compromise her values for societal standards. I can't help but think of the episode where Miranda goes to buy her very own apartment. Miranda was the first of the four women to purchase property and is taken aback at all the interegation she goes through trying to purchase it without a man by her side. Her real estate agent asks why she needs this big ol' place if it's just little ol' her. Then the mortgage lender asks if her dad will be helping her with the downpayment... Um no, Miranda made parter at a prestigious law firm and has the money for it all by herself, thank you very much! GASP! haha

Anyway, here's to women owning property! Single or in a committed relationship! Young or old! Good for you and congrats on your independence and freedom! :)

The Accessibility of Sustainable Food

I have been thinking a lot about sustainability lately. Specifically how accessible a diet of sustainable food is and how much of a role class and privilege play. Speaking with my cousin, Mia, a few weeks ago got me thinking about the image associated with buying and eating local foods. Even Stuff White People Like jokes that farmer's markets are a place for white people to placate "their undying need to support local economies, and the idea of buying direct from the farmer helps them assuage the fears instilled in them from reading Fast Food Nation (and yes, every white person has read this book)." Mia talked about an upper class, pretentious image that is often associated with this lifestyle and the inaccessibility many feel because of this. I agree. Image is definitely one concern, others include actual cost, accessibility, and time.

What is causing healthy food access problems? (via)

Poverty, or the lack of resources with which to acquire food, is the primary source of food insecurity in the United States. However, extensive documentation shows that the lack of access to food in low-income urban neighborhoods — the simple inability to buy it there — is an important additional factor. Compared to people living in higher-income areas, residents of low-income urban neighborhoods have very limited access to high quality food, enjoy fewer options in the variety of goods that are available to them, and pay higher prices for their groceries when they are available.

There have been efforts made to increase accessibility of healthy foods to low-income families including farms that accept food stamps. This is a great start but the vouchers go a lot further at the grocery store than at the local farmer's market. In May, Thomas wrote,"All modern famines are failures of entitlement, not of food production. There’s enough food, but some people due to poverty or other barriers cannot get it." This certainly makes food a feminist issue.

It also brings up healthy* "choices." I write "choices" in quotes because when the decision is between spending a few dollars more on average per meal or filling up self and kids on a tight budget, it is no longer a true choice. When paying bills or bus fare for work is at stake, making a "choice" to eat less than healthy meals is not just easy, but necessary. Time also plays a huge role. Even if someone can find discount vegetables to purchase, and a pound salmon that was on sale that week (maybe slice it up into pasta to make it go further to feed more people?), preparing this meal takes time that not every family has. Especially single parent families. Again, when the decision is between preparing this healthy meal and being late for your second job or grabbing McD's for the same price, it's no longer a real "choice." However, the price we should consider is not just a monetary one. We pay the price in terms of health, and what years of fast and over-processed foods mean for your body. These "choices" are difficult ones and although it's often easy for us to discuss the negative effects of certain choices people make from the comfort of our overprivileged cubicles, there is a lot more at stake for those we are scrutinizing.

Obviously class and privilege play a huge role. Not just in the "choices" we are able to make about our diets but also in access to fresh and reasonably priced foods. This also has a lot to do with location. For example, i was making Sirniki for a special Sunday morning breakfast last weekend and noticed we were out of eggs. I said to D, "can we go to the farm real quick for some eggs?" Then i thought about what i just said. How many people can just "go to the farm for some eggs." We are lucky enough to live 3 miles away from a farm. One with reasonably priced produce. Mostly because they save on transportation costs (when businesses don't need to pay for goods to come in from other states they save on transport and the goods are cheaper for consumers. This also saves on fuel and energy and lowers the overall carbon footprint... but that's a different post i suppose...) Anyway, i make the choice to pay $3.00 for local eggs versus $2.00 for a carton at the grocery store or $1.50 at WalMart (again, an entirely separate post...). I realize the ability to make this choice is due to privilege and not everyone is able to even consider spending $1.50 more on eggs. It's just not an option for some.

I have a difficult time rationalizing to someone the non-monetary cost of the $1.50 eggs purchased at WalMart. If i did try i would discuss the caged chickens with cut-off beaks who are force-fed medicated pellets of growth hormone, the fuel guzzling Semis used to transport the eggs from a CAFO (factory farms) in Idaho to your local store, the underpaid farmers who gave up family farms because they had no other choice, the uninsured and overworked employees that are not allowed to unionize, the environmental effects, the socioeconomic effects, etc... It is difficult to justify eating cage free eggs when they cost at least $1.50 more to someone struggling to feed his/her family, regardless the other costs involved in the decision. Although I am able to consider the other costs, to try to rationalize them to someone in a different position than me forces me to consider my own classism and privilege.

How can someone eat "healthy" on a time and money budget? Wisebread has an interesting article with resources that include: Eating Healthy - It Will Cost You, Why is it so Expensive to be Healthy? (with a wag of the finger at the objectifying photo of a cropped, overweight, body - poor form, Wisebread, poor poor form...) and Eating Locally on a Budget (for example, i bought lettuce, 4 ears of corn, a dozen eggs, a loaf of bread, 4 cucumbers, and an eggplant last week at the farmer's market for $9 total).

There is a lot of value in eating sustainable foods. Value that is often easier to consider from a privileged perspective. There needs to be more done to make these choices accessible to low income families and to provide information, resources, and support as to what these choices really mean in terms of our country's cultural, economic, agricultural, and ethical sustainability.

Some other neat stuff i found while writing this:
Food, Farming ... Feminism?
Obesity Inversely Linked to Low Income (just don't read the comments...)
Making Women Farmers “Visible” As They Feed Nations
Guerrilla Gardening
Eat Well Guide
and at the very least, watch The Meatrix

*Weight and health are not necessarily correlated. With that said, any comments that show weightist attitudes will be moderated - just a heads up so don't even try it...

Globalization AND Bad Decisions at Fault

I got into a wee bit debate at Feministing over the story of "Yang Peiyi (on the right) who had the perfect voice, [while] Lin Miaoke (on the left) had the perfect face."

China is doing all they can to impress the world over the course of these few weeks. Sometimes, however, money can't buy image. Even though these are the most expensive Olympic Games in history, they leave a lot to be desired. Not from the Olympians, because, don't get me wrong, they're doing a kick-ass job, but from China as a nation.

First, the homeless are forcibly displaced, fake fireworks, and urging people, "to quit smoking and spitting, and to adopt the Western custom of standing in line for a bus, instead of jostling." Now, it has come out that the beautiful singing of Yang Peiyi was the actual voice behind the adorable face of Lin Miaoke. Don't get me wrong, Yang Peiyi is a very cute girl! But unfortunately, her county did not deem her as "cute enough" to sing the "Ode to the Motherland." The rationale? "The reason was for the national interest. The child on camera should be flawless in image, internal feelings, and expression."

This sends several messages to little girls.
1. Talent isn't enough. You have to have "the look" to get anywhere...
2. If you do have "the look," you will get exploited for it, for the best interest of your country, of course...

We all agree this is disgusting. But the wee bit of a disagreement i got into on Feministing was because i think it goes beyond just China fucking up. I think there's a lot to be said for why they deemed Lin Miaoke "cuter." I argued that the girl who was chosen fits more in line with a Western standard of girlish cuteness. I also said that it's not entirely China's fault but the fault of a Western standard of beauty that has spread through globalization. Brad argued that i was using globalization as a cop-out and MewKunn called me mean and rude for ascertaining that Miaoke wasn't "Asian enough" (which i didn't...)

China is concerned with putting forward a specific image. One that, to some degree, mimics the US. They are working hard to keep up with US's consumption, technology, and urbal living, which is very difficult to do with a population over 1.3 billion people. I'm not saying this as it's a good thing. The US isn't the popular kid here, inviting China to sit at the cool kid's table at lunch... No. Rather as a negative of the traditions and culture lost due to the spread of globalization. I fully realize that China has it's own culture, traditions, and fashion which are unique to their nation. Globalization, however, has vast effects on beauty standards among many other things. For example, Chinese media is saturated with advertisements for eye-widening plastic surgery and skin whitening products. This isn't because the Western and European look is "better" but because it is now being widespread through media, advertising, and globalization. Which leads me back to Yang Peiyi and Lin Miaoke, the two adorable girls taught an unfortunate life lesson at the tender ages of 7 and 9.

For a country so consumed with their current image, this did not make them look good...

IMO, China made a choice to cast the more stereotypically Western looking girl and chalk it up to being, "flawless in terms of her facial expression and the great feeling she can give to people." The pig tails, the big toothy smile, the lighter, long hair... that's all Western little girl "cute." And it's deemed "better" and "cuter" because of the globalized standard of beauty and cuteness. China's attempt to cast the "cuter" girl for the way she looks is intertwined with Western standards of girlishness and cuteness and since all eyes are on China right now, they are trying to fit in as much as possible with these standards.

And to address MewKunn's concern: I don't think it was Lin Niaoke's choice to look the way she does or get chosen for the reasons she did. I also think that it works to her disadvantage too that she was chosen solely based on her looks and not her talent. And it teaches her a lesson that she is not talented enough, but her looks matter. This is a lesson many women learn, early on. That they are chosen, selected, picked, dated, hired, based solely on their looks alone. She is not the one to blame, or target. Who IS at fault are the individuals who chose her based her looks and why they thought her look was "better." She may have not chosen to have the Western standard of beauty features that i discussed but i do believe a big reason she was chosen to appear on screen was because she DOES have these features. There is a difference. And the difference is one that is wrapped up in globalization, childhood, beauty standards, choices, and image.

Transgender Contestant on Top Model

There have been several occasions at which i've loved Tyra for her decisions, but this one made me particularly happy: Pure Awesomeness.


ETA: Looks like Lindsay and I think very much alike :)

It's None of Your Business...

I have had 116 hits on my blog over the past 2 days from people searching some variant of "is Dara Torres gay?"


People, who the fuck cares? She's an incredible athlete, a dedicated mother, and a passionate woman... To me, those things are so much more interesting than her sexual orientation... No? Why is it so important to you whether she's a lesbian?

Target Women: Sarah Haskins

If you hate Mondays as much as I do, then you can use a laugh today. Sarah Haskins is the most hilarious woman i have seen in a long long time! I tried to find all her Target Women episodes to post here so that i can make sure you get an lol today :)


Target Women: Birth Control



Target Women: Wedding Shows



Target Women: Suffrage



Target Women: Botox



Target Women: Feeding Your F--ing Family



Target Women: Yogurt Edition




Which one is your favorite?!

Friday Feel Good: Dara Torres

Today marks the start of the 2008 Olympics. Whether you're protesting them or not, today i'm asking you to give some props to Dara Torres.


Torres is 41 and the mother of a 2-year-old daughter, Tessa Grace. In 1982, she broke her first of three world records - she was only 14 then. In 1984 (before Michael Phelps was even born,) Torres competed in the LA Olympics and won a gold medal in the 4 x 100 freestyle relay. In 1988, she competed in the Seoul Olympics, earning a silver and a bronze medal. Torres retired once in 1989, but came back to competed in the Barcelona Games (1992) where she won another gold for the 4 x 100 free relay. At 25, she retired a second time...

In 2008 Dara Torres is competing in her 5th Olympic Games! She’ll also be oldest female swimmer in the history of the Olympics. The New York Times did a beautiful piece on her back in June.

Dana became pregnant in 2005, she continued to swim. Her daughter, Tessa, was born in April of 2006 when Dana began training once again for the 2008 Olympics!

Today's Friday Feel Good goes to Dara - a woman who is not only physically fit but continues to stay mentally and emotionally in the game. Torres is a perfect example of a woman who knows that getting older does not mean she's out of the game. Good luck in Beijing Dara, i'll be rooting for you!! :)

Female Soldiers, Raped & Silenced

My friend Mark sent me this article last week, outraged that it was "off CNN's front page within 6 hours." He wrote, "I guess we'll see how long the Pitt-Jolie baby picture articles stay in comparison."

Mark is right. Sexual assault and rape within the military is rampant, some even call it an epidemic. Adding to it is just how the assaults are covered by the media. In this article, the headline reads: Army Rape Accuser Speaks Out. Not rape victim (more favorable,) or rape survivor (most favorable,) but accuser. This type of language sets up a dynamic that forces readers to disbelieve her before even reading her story; it contributes to victim blaming and takes the focus and "fault" off the perpetrator and puts it on the survivor. Another news article's opening paragraph states, "Few problems have been more persistent or produced more bad news for the military than the issue of rape within its own ranks." Oh no! I feel so so badly for the poor military's image... Wait, no i don't. Who i do feel for are the countless female soldiers who have been sexually assaulted, raped, silenced, and even murdered. I also feel for those who have spoken out, only to be blamed, not taken seriously, and threatened to be arrested. And, it starts as early in female soldiers' careers as recruitment into the military!

While looking up information regarding rape survivors who spoke out, i found these incredibly disturbing stories: [Trigger Warning]

Sharon Mixon was a staff sergeant, and a highly decorated combat medic during Operation Desert Storm. She was in Saudi Arabia, and about to come home, when she says she was drugged and gang-raped.

"I woke up face down on a cot. I was being held down. And there were six men taking turns raping me," recalls Mixon. "They were U.S. soldiers, and they told me that if I told anybody that they would kill me. But I went and told the MPs anyway. And they told me the same thing."

"They kind of laughed and said, 'Well, what did you expect, being a female in combat? And we will always know where to find you. And if you open your mouth, you know what’s gonna happen,'” adds Mixon, who kept quiet for more than 10 years.

Mixon continued her military career until she said she began having flashbacks and was hospitalized for post-traumatic stress disorder. She has actively lobbied Congress on behalf of military rape victims.

Here's another, if you can bare it...

"They want to brush it under a rug. They want it to go away," says Marine Lt. Tara Burkhart, who comes from a military family. She was serving with distinction as a public affairs officer in Kuwait during Operation Iraqi Freedom, escorting reporters in and out of the combat zone. She and several enlisted men from her unit were invited to a party thrown by Kuwaiti nationals to thank them for all they had done.

"During the course of that evening, the sergeant who was under my command raped me," says Burkhart, who didn't initially report it. "I was afraid. I had seen what other people had gone through when they had tried to report sexual assault or rape."

She didn’t say anything, until allegations surfaced that she and her men had violated orders by drinking at the party, and that she had sex with a subordinate.

"I got my attorney. And he immediately contacted the command," says Burkhart. "'This is crazy, my client was raped.' And my command said, 'No, she’s lying. We don’t believe her. You shouldn’t either. And we’re gonna prosecute her. She’s gonna go to a court-martial.'”

Lt. Burkhart was charged with 19 counts, including sexual misconduct, providing alcohol to enlisted men, making false statements and disobeying orders – charges that could have sent her to prison for 26 years.

The soldier who Burkhart says raped her was later accused in another rape. "He was accused during my investigation," says Burkhart. "The other victim came out and claimed that he raped her in Kuwait, too."

The Department of Defense states that "one in three women who join the US military will be sexually assaulted or raped by men in the military." Rape is too often underreported... i can't image an even higher statistic, but it's probable.

Why is the rate of rape in the military so much higher than that in civilians? I think this requires a multi-faceted response examining fraternal militarism, lack of support for survivors, and the history of rape used as a weapon of war. The military is probably the oldest "boy's club" there is and it becomes incredibly easy to "other" women when your ingroup is structured on masculine notions of power, strength, and dominance. This brings me to rape. Rape is an act of power, strictly. Is rape these male soldiers' only form of "defense" when their power is threatened? Obviously i'm using much more snark than i should, especially when talking about such a serious topic. I do so though because i'm imagining the troll comments i will get in response to this post, specifically the, "if women were never allowed in the military, they wouldn't be raped," and, "if they wanna be treated like the men they should be able to handle it." If you are a troll and you were thinking of writing that, don't waste your time.

But because of these attitudes female soldiers have an incredibly difficult time deciding to report, and reporting, sexual crimes committed against them. Because the military is so tight-knit people rarely want to report anything for fear of being ostracized. Combine the fear of social penalties for group betrayal with fraternal militarism and it sets up a hostile situation for any woman raped by a fellow soldier.

Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) wrote a piece a few months back for the LA Times where she stated, "We have an epidemic here. Women serving in the U.S. military today are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq." Now that is scary.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ETA: I cross-posted this on the feministing community blog, where I got several really thoughtful comments, check them out. One of the commentors, Jen, left this:

"There are people working to bring attention to this which will hopefully also bring results in changing this.

First off, being anti-war isn't enough or a requirement. As a veteran involved in anti-war work militant sexual assault (MST) is often viewed as something not as important as ending the war or even viewed as something totally unrelated...

You can support groups that are working to get the word out about military sexual assault and help the people who are affected by it.
Here are just three:

• SWAN
• VETWOW
• Stop Military Rape
  

...Being online so much we can also include information on discussion boards that gets real information out, not just sexist slander.
We can include the CNN report above as well as useful information like:

• Truth Dig
  
• Women's Media Center
  
• YouTube
  
• National Security Oversight
  

She was 14 last year and now she's 16?

Some believe that China has been forging passports for two of their top gymnasts, Jiang Yuguan and He Kexin.

Several online records and reports show He Kexin, the host nation's top competitor on uneven bars, and Jiang Yuyuan might not yet be 16, the minimum age for Olympic eligibility. Both were chosen for China's team.

There is also the question of Yang Yilin, a medal favorite, who may be 14 based on registration records. Yilin's date of birth was changed on the 2007 registration list, making her eligible.

Why is this a feminist issue? Because children's rights are human rights and child labor laws should not be violated, here or internationally. But China is notorious for violating child labor laws.

This is What a Feminist Looks Like

This is what a male feminist and/or pro-feminist male looks like:

Gives me chills every time...

Via

A Must Read

On trust.

Trolls

The New York Times ran a really interesting article today about trolls. Seriously, check it out, it might shed some light on trolls' behavior.

Holla Back CT

HollaBackCT is now up and running!

Submit stories and/or pictures to HollaBackCT@gmail.com

What is HollaBack?
HollaBack is a collective comprised of women and men who believe in building communities where everyone is comfortable, safe, and respected. Many people are unaware of the frequency and severity of disrespect and intimidation that numerous folks, especially women and other marginalized groups, experience in public spaces on a daily basis. HollaBack aims to expose and combat street harassment as well as provide an empowering forum in this struggle. HollaBackCT is a watch-dog blog that serves to call out all forms of street harassment that occurs specifically in Connecticut.

What is street harassment?
Street harassment is a form of sexual harassment that takes place in public spaces. At its core, street harassment is a power dynamic that constantly reminds historically subordinated groups (women and LGBTQ folks, for example) of their vulnerability to assault. Further, it reinforces the ubiquitous sexual objectification of these groups in everyday life. At HollaBackNYC, they believe that what specifically counts as street harassment is determined by those who experience it, and HollaBackCT agrees. While there is always the classic, “Hey baby, nice tits” there are so many other forms that go unnoted. If you feel like you have been harassed in any way, HOLLA BACK!

What does racism have to do with street harassment?
Replacing sexism with racism is not a proper holla back. Due in part to prevalent stereotypes of men of color as sexual predators or predisposed to violence, HollaBackCT asks that contributors do not discuss the race of harassers or include other racialized commentary. If you feel that race is important to your story, please make sure its relevance is explained clearly and constructively in your post.

Aren't you just dismissing and belittling another person’s culture with your definition of street harassment?
Street harassers occupy the full spectrum of class, race, and ethnicity. Sexual harassment, and street harassment specifically, is resisted around the world. To condense another’s culture into vague assumptions about who and what they are is to generalize dangerously about a wide range of experiences and perspectives.

Confronting street harassers can be dangerous. What about safety issues?
While everyone is vulnerable to stranger rape and sexual assault, studies show that those who are aware of their surroundings, walk with confidence and, if harassed, respond assertively, are less vulnerable. Nevertheless, direct confrontations with street harassers may prove extremely dangerous, particularly alone or in unpopulated spaces. While it is each individual’s right to decide when, how, and if to Holla Back, do keep issues of safety in mind. Upon deciding to photograph a harasser, you may consider doing so substantially after the initial encounter and from a distance, ensuring the harasser is unaware of your actions.

Does my Holla Back have to be about an incident in Connecticut?
Well no, of course not :) The site's focus will be primarily CT but we will accept stories about any location. However, if your incident is about an experience in another city that has a Holla Back site, please feel free to email them (see other Holla Back site's linked on the HollaBackCT main page).

Don't women like the attention they get? Why else would they dress like that? Also heard as "If you show off your boobage, shouldn’t you expect some compliments?"
Sure, expect them, but don’t accept them! Just because it happens doesn’t mean it’s okay. A compliment is not a compliment if it makes the recipient feel uncomfortable. How a woman (or man) is dressed is never an invitation for street harassment, offensive conversation, flirting, groping, or any sort of unsolicited attention.

Questions and answers are adapted from HollaBackNYC

Eye on Russia: Eating Disorders Treatment (again...)

It makes me really sad to see that when people do a google search for "eating disorder clinic moscow russia" my post on Russia's lack of eating disorders treatment comes up as the second link...

Not resources for individuals struggling with eating disorders, not addresses and phone numbers of available programs, not websites offering help and services...

That's a real shame...

It also forces me to reiterate Russia's need for treatment centers and adequate professional support.

The article I originally wrote about in the post discussed Russia's one and ONLY clinic specializing in eating disorders... a clinic with only 7 beds.

Update: I did a few more google searches hoping for info on treatment in Russia. I looked up "anorexia treatment Russia" and "bulimia treatment Russia," both searches landed my post as the first link :(

Beauty Privilege

Why do we hate tall, thin, curvy (but not too curvy!) women with perky tits? I think it has a lot less to do with the fact they "support patriarchy" and a lot more with privilege.

I knew i wasn't done the other day. Especially in regards to my first question: Is feminist and conventionally pretty compatible? I was quick with a YES! But there is a lot more to it than that. People are pissed off about this right now and i don't blame them. I think the reason there is such a divide in this topic is because some think fitting a status quo set by patriarchy, is "antifeminist." Others think it's antifeminist to call people out for their looks, conventional or otherwise. I certainly stand by my previous agreement with the latter argument, except for one other thing: privilege.

Much like white-privilege, male-privilege, hetero-privilege, and cis-privilege, there is an absolute amount of privilege that goes along with being conventionally attractive. This may be why there is such a divide within this conversation. Without putting words to it, are we all talking about the "what is beautiful is good" phenomenon?

The physical-attractiveness stereotype (AKA "what is beautiful is good") is the presumption that physically attractive people possess other socially desirable traits as well. This is based solely on their appearance.

How does physical appearance and attractiveness tie into privilege? Research shows that, "in our society people who are good-looking are assumed and expected to be better than the rest of the population. According to Kenealy, Frude, and Shaw (2001), research indicates that an individual’s physical attractiveness is an important social cue used by others as a basis for social evaluation. This leads one to believe that physical attractiveness affects how society views people and also how people can be misinterpreted based on their looks. Since many people stereotype physically attractive people as being more socially acceptable, it becomes harder for average or unattractive people to be perceived as having positive traits."

In numerous studies photos of people that were stereotypically attractive were rated more favorably by participants than photos of people not conventionally attractive. Physical appearance had many implications for those rating the photos on impressions of personality. The "beauty is good" stereotype existed in many studies where participants made biased decisions based on physical attractiveness in everyday situations. "Understanding the types of inaccurate perceptions we hold can help us to explore social stereotypes by limiting biased judgments. More specifically, this area is important to the field of social psychology such that stereotypes involving physical attractiveness and social perceptions have always been a major occurrence."
(I realize the photo is laughable but i just wanted to give ya'll an idea of the types of images they use. Even the one that is supposed to be "not attractive" has gorgeous blond hair, perfect cheek bones, big eyes, etc.)

As early as 1972 researchers found support for the "what is beautiful is good" phenomenon in a study that concluded, "stereotyping based on physical (specifically, facial) attractiveness does occur. Physically attractive individuals were rated as having more socially desirable personalities and were expected to have greater personal success on most of the life outcome dimensions." LIFE OUT DIMENSIONS! In most everything in life, just being attractive gives one an upper hand, or at least research shows that Americans believe it does?! This is how much weight we place on physical appearance!

The physical attractiveness bias exists in our professional lives, such as in hiring practices, as well:

Attractiveness biases have been demonstrated in such different areas as teacher judgments of students (Clifford & Walster, 1973), voter preferences for political candidates (Efran & Patterson, 1974) and jury judgments in simulated trials (Efran, 1974). Recently, Smith, McIntosh and Bazzini (1999) investigated the “beauty is goodness” stereotype in U.S. films and found that attractive characters were portrayed more favorably than unattractive characters on multiple dimensions across a random sample drawn from five decades of topgrossing films. There is
considerable empirical evidence that physical attractiveness impacts employment decision making, with the result that the more attractive an individual, the greater the likelihood that that person will be hired (Watkins & Johnston, 2000).

Ok so the physical attractiveness stereotype exists. How does it tie into the currently ongoing feminist conflict of appearance? I think it has a lot to do with privilege. "Beauty privilege" to be exact. Race is socially constructed, yet white privilege exists. Gender is socially constructed, yet male privilege exists. Social status is socially constructed, yet class privilege exists. I think these same rules apply to beauty privilege. For something to be socially constructed it would not have a meaning (ie a biological meaning) without a social representation that is constructed specifically to give it value. Beauty, for example, would just be a state of appearance, no negative or positive connotation to it, except for there is a socially constructed meaning for beauty that creates bias and privilege.

To look at beauty privilege in already accepted and understood terms i will turn to white privilege. The definition i put together below was adapted from Kendall Clark's definition of white privilege.

Beauty Privilege can be defined by:
1. a. A right, advantage, or immunity granted to or enjoyed by conventionally attractive people beyond the common advantage of all others
b. A special advantage or benefit of conventionally attractive people
2. A privileged position; the possession of advantage a conventionally attractive person enjoys over those not conventionally attractive people.
3. a. The special right or immunity attaching to conventionally attractive people as a social relation
b. display of beauty privilege, a social expression of a conventionally attractive people demanding to be treated as members of the socially privileged class.
4. a. To grant conventionally attractive people a particular right or immunity; to benefit or favor specially conventionally attractive people
b. To avail oneself of a privilege owing to one as a conventionally attractive person.
5. To authorize or license of conventionally attractive people what is forbidden or wrong for those not conventionally attractive; to justify, excuse.
6. To give to conventionally attractive people special freedom or immunity from some liability or burden to which non conventionally attractive people are subject; to exempt.

I realize that definition is unnecessarily long but it covers privilege extraordinarily well. Advantages of beauty privilege goes beyond financial benefits such as making more money in tips as a server or not having to pay for drinks at the bar. Research shows that the physical attractiveness phenomenon (thus beauty privilege) affects being hired for employment, called on in the classroom, sentenced for a crime, selected for a position of power, etc. Being able to actively or passively fit into the contemporary standard of beauty offers a set of privileges that go well beyond getting out of a speeding ticket.

The Happy Feminist wrote about beauty as privilege a few years back:

When I was in my 20s, I constantly got pulled over for speeding without ever once getting a ticket. I have frequently been told that the cops probably didn’t ticket me because I was young and cute (and white, but that’s not the issue here). Was I glad to not get a ticket? Sure! But the power in these situations was always in the hands of the male cops who pulled me over. They got to decide whether they deemed me attractive enough to exercise their power and discretion to let me off the hook for speeding.

Although I agree with her to a point i don't think this can be used as an argument against beauty privilege for two reasons.
1. The same argument could be made for the other forms of privilege, but we'd know it's crap. For example a statement like "POC aren't racially profiled, the power to determine who to arrest is in the hands of those doing the arresting" is faulty because we operate within a system of institutionalized racism in which the power isn't solely in the hands of a person but a response to the culture that the person exists in.
2. Even if Happy Feminist's argument is taken into account there is still an element of privilege that goes along with beauty because those who fit into the conventionally attractive category are at least given some element of power which, those who do not fit into the status quo, are not. For example, if a conventionally attractive woman is pulled over, she may or may not get a ticket. If a non-conventionally attractive woman is pulled over, she doesn't have that chance. (I use "non-conventionally attractive" because i think all women are beautiful, we are just talking about beauty in societal terms here).

This is closely linked to feminism because feminists work to educate others about privilege as well as give up our own (be it hetero, white, able-bodied, thin, cis, wealthy, etc) to live in a more just world. Could this be why some radical feminists are up in arms about others reclaiming conventional beauty?

If it is, i wish they would be more intelligent about it and lay off the personal, and unjustified, attacks.

I hate to do it but here's a gem that you'd think was written by a troll, but no, it's someone who claims to be a feminist:
"Jill Fillipovic is the original Fake Pretty Feminist. [Fame within the feminist blogosphere] is all based on looks it's all vapid it has nothing to do with women's liberation. UNTIL WOMEN ARE NO LONGER SEXED UP THEY WON'T BE SEEN AS HUMAN BEINGS BY MEN. Actually these are the women who will never see THEMSELVES as human beings. They'll be too busy buffing their nails and deodorizing their vaginas, ha!." (emphasis hers)

Wow. Way to discredit all the amazing work someone has done just because of the way she looks. How is this any better than telling a woman who is not conventionally attractive her work is meaningless because she is "ugly"? It's not.

I think all this women hate is just as much crap as beauty privilege merely because neither will get us anywhere. As far as beauty privilege goes, "beauty" itself is a socially constructed term that determines which physical appearance is better than another. Years back a heavier, pale woman was considered beautiful. It represented her wealth and abundance. Now, women starve and pay for cancer boxes (tanning beds) to achieve just the opposite look because it's what is now socially desirable. Why are we hatin on each other when we should be hatin on the system that tells women they should starve and get cancer to fit a socially desirable appearance? Beauty privilege needs to be recognized in the same way as the other privileges are. We don't tell white people they are useless or hetero women that they can't be feminists. No, we just expect them to understand their privilege and use it for good and not for evil... you know what i mean...

We can't start excluding women from the feminist movement for (intentionally or otherwise) fitting into a standard of beauty that we should be fighting against. If a woman is naturally thin we can't go around saying she must be anorexic and that being thin is unfeminist. No, she is just naturally thin and that's perfectly fine. Saying the opposite is just as much bullshit as if we were to call fat women unfeminist. In the same regard being conventionally beautiful isn't unfeminist, but it does provide an element of privilege that needs to be recognize. As feminists, we can't attack the women who fit this (almost unattainable) standard of beauty but rather we must question the standard and expand it to fit all women, hell, not just women, everyone. Ren says it best, "why are we blaming the woman with the perky tits rather than the society, which says perky tits are the best?"

"Is it Possible to be a 'Passive' Feminist?"

This started as a response to a comment on yesterday's I'm a feminist, and... post.

Anonymous said...
The gap between I'm a feminist but and I'm a feminist and...I think the hardest part for me right now is the issue of activism, and am looking for your thoughts on the necessity of activism (mostly in the verbal/written format) within the feminist identity. Looking through your "quiz" on the I'm a feminist but post, there is no way that I cannot consider myself a feminist. But, yet, I dont. Feminism made the life I lead possible, and I fully accept that fact. However, I do not identify as a feminist because I do not actively deal with feminist issues. I dont try to educate others and I try not to get too offended when people make stupid comments. I try to promote female strength and intelligence through my actions, but that's about it. I think my more or less acceptance of the status quo negates the answers to the above mentioned quiz as identifying as a feminist. So my question to you is, is it possible to be a "passive" feminist?

I bitched at Twisty yesterday for acting like the feminism police so i'm sure as hell not going to tell Anonymous what's possible and not within feminism ;)

Activism doesn't have to come in a form of standing in front of government buildings with signs, it can (and should) be things we do every day. Anonymous mentioned realizing feminism made his/her life possible as well as valuing and promoting female agency. Those are already forms of activism that Anonymous is engaging in without even recognizing it as such.

However, I do think activism is crucial to the women's movement. In fact, i think collective action is essential to any political movement because with out it all we have is a theoretical framework which is great, but not nearly enough. Activism doesn't have to be overwhelming, especially for someone just starting to view themselves as a social/political identity.

As far as whether or not it's possible to be a "passive" feminist? Sure anything is possible... but as your feminist identity develops you won't be able to hold back your outrage as you go about your life. Daily, you will encounter things, people, situations, media, etc that will piss you off beyond belief and it will become more and more difficult to remain passive. Outrage is one of the first steps in the development of feminist consciousness and once you develop a feminist lens with which to view the world it will be easy to become outraged, on a regular basis. It's what you do with that outrage that's important. My suggestion - act on it. There are many ways to do so and they are all the ways in which to engage in collective action. This will empower you, strengthen the movement, and support a goal of justice and equality. Also, research shows that feminist self-identity directly and significantly relates to collective action so although being a "passive" feminist may be an option, the more your feminist consciousness develops, the harder it will be to resist taking action.

Activism comes in many forms, here are some everyday things you can do:

• Call people out for what they say, explain that their words may be hurtful and/or oppressive
• Write letters
• Recognize your white/cis/thin/able bodied/hetero/male/etc privilege and explain it to others
• Support legislation that you believe in
• Don't shop at stores with unethical practices (like failing to promote minorities or not allowing workers to unionize... coughwalmartcough...)
• Stop engaging in "fat talk" or other talk that cuts you (or others) down
• Take part in everyday life with a critical/feminist lens
• Educate yourself and others
• Set an example
• Don't laugh at racist/homophobic/sexist/etc jokes
• Sign petitions for causes you believe in
• Engage other people in conversations about the importance of the women's movement
• Give money to causes you support
• Start a feminist book club
• Think before you speak (don't use oppressive language like "that quiz raped me!" or "that is SO gay" or even "you guys")
• Promote and celebrate diversity
• Support feminist arts
• Think outside the US to women in other countries
• Support candidates that promote affordable and accessible birth control

Other ways to take action here

What are some other forms of activism that i may have missed? Feel free to link to sites that encourage others to take action.

I'm a feminist, and...

I'm a feminist, and I like to get dolled up from time to time...

I guess this post can be read as a follow up to "I'm not a feminist, but" where i addressed why some people, even though endorsing feminist values, may not embrace the feminist identity. This post, on the other hand, looks at those of us who do identify as feminists and are no more or less feminist because we look, act, dress, think, fuck, write, a certain way. Still with me? Good.

When i first learned about the women's movement i was enlightening, outraged, empowered. I wanted to stand on the rooftop and shout "DOWN WITH PATRIARCHY!" I also became incredibly conflicted. Was i supporting patriarchy by looking the way i did? With the clothes i wore? With my new found love for bare minerals make up? With my adorable string bikini? Was i supporting a system of patriarchy by flirting? By being sexual, by letting guys buy me drinks, by loving to dance at bars? By wearing lipstick? By being 5'9 and rocking high heels? By occasionally obsessing over my weight? By liking Madonna? Was the very essence of me and all the things i enjoyed a direct result of this system and therefore meaningless, trite, cliché? Even worse, were they (therefore, I) not only existing in, but supporting, oppression, patriarchy, and inequality? My brain almost exploded. Everything i stood for got flipped on its head at which point i cut my hair 12 inches shorter, donated a my more skanky* clothes, and stopped shaving my legs (it was winter anyway ;) ... "Fuck patriarchy!" I thought "and fuck this system that expects me to look, act, think a certain way!" It was my sole intention to do everything opposite than what i was "supposed to" as a woman.

But you know what? I wasn't happy. At all. In fact, not getting to wear my stilettos and flirt made me miserable. I didn't feel any more empowered, just depressed. I needed a different feminism because the one i created for myself didn't work for me at all. The problem was that i didn't realize i was "allowed" to still be me and a feminist.

It took me a while to understand that as long as i thought through where my likes, dislikes, attitudes, beliefs, etc. came from, i was certainly entitled to them. Let me try to explain this.

Is feminist and conventionally pretty compatible? Yes. As long as you realize that your preference for looking this way may have been influenced by media and years of socialization. You recognize that and still want to look the way you do? More power to you. I think Sarah said it best, "My lipstick doesn’t negate my brain cells." Telling me i'm not a feminist because of the way i look is bullshit. You're judging me based on appearance - how is that any better than what patriarchy does in the first place? "The anger that some women are treated differently by society than others based on their looks is a valid anger, but why the hell are feminists directing it at the women who happen to fit the preferred look rather than the system that insists on ranking all of us?" You know what's even more annoying? A main reason this blog is semi-anonymous is because I don't want anyone to know what i look like. I've mentioned before that what i look like isn't the point but now it just annoys me. Would people take me more seriously or less seriously based on my appearance? Would other feminist bloggers respect what i say any more/less based on the way i look? If so, that's bullshit. And as much as i want to share pictures of me from time to time (for example, post my sexy tattooed back), this is exactly why i won't post a photo of me on the blog and that's just annoying, and distracting, because who the fuck cares? But apparently a lot of people do...

Is feminist and sex work compatible? Yes. As long as it empowers you. And you know what pisses me off? When people i respect are renouncing the feminist label because of others who tell them they are "antifeminist." (Who made you the fucking feminism police anyway?)

Is feminist and Obama supporter compatible? Yes. As long as you value what the idea of Hilary Clinton means for women. It isn't any less sexist to support a candidate because she is a woman than it is not to support her because she is one.

Is feminist and stay-at-home mom compatible? Yes. As long as it's a choice you make that works for your family and you made that decision without being pressured or forced.

Is feminist and male compatible? Yes. As long as you don't try to take over the movement ;) Many of my favorite men identify as feminists. Men have a lot to gain through the goals of the women's movement. For one, gender roles negatively impact men as well as women and the rules of masculinity are arguably just as rigid as those of femininity.

Is being a female feminist who is romantically involved with a man compatible? Yes. So is female feminist who is romantically involved with a woman, so is feminist and single... Whoever you're attracted to is cool, and you aren't any more or less feminist for finding men sexy**. Oh and marriage doesn't make you any less of a feminist either.

Is feminist and activism regarding other forms of discrimination compatible? Um... yes? Isn't that the point? Isn't feminism about equality? I didn't really understand how anyone could have thought that writing about Sean Bell distracted from feminism. Fuck that. Racism is absolutely a feminist issue, "just like poverty, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, and much more are feminist issues, simply because these are factors that oppress women on a daily basis and prevent them from living lives freely, safely and to their full potential."

Is feminist and the opposite of all the things above compatible? Yes... with (IMO) the exception of the last because i really think feminism is about equality and needs to focus on all aspects of oppression. Other than that: you can still be feminist and not conventionally beautiful. You can be feminist and not shave your legs. You can be a short feminists, a tall feminist, a skinny feminist, a fat feminist, a no make up feminist, a combat-boot wearing feminist (i feel like a fucking Dr. Seuss book...) My appearance does not determine my level of feminist commitment. Neither do my choices to or not to marry or my sexual orientation. Or whether or not i like porn. Guess what? I can vote for whoever the fuck I want and still identify as a feminist. Whatever.

Moral of the story is stop fucking shaming me for being who i am just because i don't fit into your picture perfect notion of feminism. We need to stop hatin' on each other because that is what's distracting.

And i can already see the "you must not understand intersectionality" bullshit comments i am bound to get (esp. in regards to the conventional beauty piece of all this). I do understand intersectionality. I think about it, talk about it, blog about it and understand how much intersectionality effects all of us. That's just it. All of this bullshit is part of the problem. We, as feminists, need to stop targeting each other and work together towards a common goal. PS, that goal's equality, or at least I always thought it was. So why the fuck are we wasting our time fighting with each other? Wouldn't it be extremely liberating to embrace who we are, not feel guilty for it any longer, work together, and get shit done?

I'll include MY feminism here. Because i've written it out before but it seems even more relevant now: I identify with feminism because of its commitment to social, political, and economic equality for all people. Regarding women specifically, my feminism allows me to: be independent, while depending on those I love; be flirty and "girly" whenever I want, without it compromising how people view my intelligence or sexual freedom; exercise, for me, for my body, for my health and strength, not to fit into conventional beauty; stand firm for what I believe in, and not be called too masculine or bitchy. My feminism does not discount the differences between men and women, but strongly believes that these differences are either a product of, or exaggerated by, socialization. My feminism values men because it values equality. My feminism is anti oppression. It seeks to end the discrimination of people on the basis of sex, age, race, social class, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Oh, and my feminism is always changing, because like the waves of change flow through society and politics, feminism needs to be fluid to reflect the needs of the world.

Ever been told you aren't feminism enough for whatever reason? Get snarky about that bullshit in the comment section ;)


*a word i used then, wouldn't use now
**Update 7/22: Oh no!!!