tigresslilly

"V for Vendetta" both the movie and the graphic novel did it sooo much better. "1984" is one of those books that so far (I'm only a fourth of the way through part three) could have benefited from major editing. I mean this tome goes on and on and on on on about doublespeak. I got the concept the first eighty times. Seriously, the book dedicates over twenty pages and two separate sections to the idea of doublespeak.

Also, I love a good metaphysical discussion as much as the next person, but how long can a dude talk about the realities of history? Some of it might just be that I don't think our current history records or our current reporting styles are so pristine that I can get too worked up about the Ministry of Truth's work. It's bad sure, I don't know if destroys objective history (as such a thing doesn't exist) or if it would bring every aspect of my life and personal thoughts into question.

Whole swaths of women's history and non-white people's history is still trying to be pieced together and learned. Whether or not we know it or understand it doesn't change that it happened.

In the neo-pagan movement one of the many questions that has to be faced if you want to use British witch-craft as a source or Wicca outer court material is whether the history matters. After all, the creations there are new with faked older lineage. If the material is valid regardless of age the good for you and if it's not good, then it's just not going to work with you.

Winston is horrified by something that we all deal with to a certain degree. Maybe it's just one of those horrors you have to be there to really understand-though if that's the case then maybe 1984 shouldn't have relied so heavily on it.

On a completely different note, how come all these super controlled societies are run by men and questioned only by men? I know what you're going to say, Juila is the catalyst for Winston's true rebellion. Without her, Winston would have just gone on being unhappy and frustrated and probably would have one day given himself away without ever experiencing any of the joy of rebellion.

I like Julia. She sneaks around eating good food pilfered from the elite's store. She sleeps with whomever she pleases. She knows where the safe areas are to go to talk or relax. She knows how to hide in plain sight and she can pick out others who are probably doing the same. Why the hell didn't we start the book off with someone who was frustrated with society and doing something about it the way Julia was? Seriously Winston is just a hopeless little whiner before Julia comes along and he would have stayed that way without her.

What gets me the most about the whole situation is even though Winston "loves" Julia and even though he would be nothing without her, he still looks down on her. She doesn't "care" about The Party's motives or larger goals. Julia doesn't get into a froth over who the party is at war with. She's not surprised that they go back and change information to suit their goals and needs, but she's not horrified either.

Of course, Julia doubts the reality of a war at all, something Winston never even considers. She believes The Party is a bunch of liars but she just doesn't care about what the truth is as it doesn't affect her. Julia believes these things are nebulous and far away compared to immediate concerns over the quality of life.

Winston is on such a high horse about the big issues. Something has to be done. The truth has to be preserved. Would he even care if his quality of life hadn't been impacted?

Beyond that, realistically what is Winston going to do? What can anyone in a society set up as Oceania do? Julia is smart enough to see that her acts of rebellion are probably the limit. You could escape into the proles maybe and then create unrest among them strong enough to cause a revolt, though it seems unlikely as Winston doesn't have the skills or the understanding he'd need to do that. You could stand up publicly in the middle of Oceania against Big Brother and be taken and hope other would follow you example, hope somehow that enough people would protest that the thought police couldn't take them all.

It's a hopeless scenario, sometimes surviving and surviving with some private joys has to be enough.

Another thing why would you trust Charrington? Seriously has Winston ever been in another party building without a telescreen? Did he really believe that The Party let people choose to install them and you know Charrington never found the time or didn't have the money or something?

And why wouldn't Charrington have brought Winston in when Winston first bought the journal or when Winston came back for the paperweight or the first time he and Julia met in the room? How much thought crime did he have to show before he got busted? I thought these people just pulled you off the street for looking at people wrong and now they take their sweet time messing with Winston before they take him in. Heck why didn't O'Brien bring him in at his apartment? It all seems really pointless to me.

Winston seemed far too afraid of pain to really be interested in a change. He cowers at the sight of the thought police. He obeys them even though he knows death and pain are unavoidable. I guess fear can do that to you, but all those words about going down swinging and doing anything to attack at the party seem really hollow when he won't even show rebellion or resistance in the face of what is certain death. How long has he been insisting that he is the dead already only to be suddenly afraid all over again when he has to face it?

Some of the torture seems uninspired and I think that Orwell didn't give human resistance enough credit. He made the human spirit's will to live unbelievably strong and yet it's ability to resist change through brutality is unexplored. I don't know, maybe Orwell was on the ball and people completely collapse all the time the minute torture is implemented. I've been led to believe that torture doesn't work partially because people won't give up correct information or any information even.

One thing Orwell did really well was talk about how once someone breaks they will tell you anything to stop the pain. I liked that Winston just confessed and confessed and confessed. I also like the scene where the one emaciated dying man begs to avoid room 101 and says he will tell them anything so long as he knows what to repeat to them.

It's still a chilling read and it's worth the time, I just think it could have been edited some is all. The book really only has 150 pages of plot and general thought in it worth reading the rest of it seems be be repetition because Orwell thought we should be beaten over the head with a concept that is easy to grasp.

I had been on break from feminist blogs for the past month or so.  That happens from time when I get news over load or when I start to feel like I'm reading the same thing over and over again.   I'm tenatively back to reading them. 

Anyhow, my favs are feministe, shakesville, and curvature.  I have another 17 or so that I follow more or less regularly and depending on my mood and the kinds of coverage, I jump favorites too. 

And this is still not on topic.  I really need better focusing skills. 

Anyhow Renee has been blogging over at feministe, though she also blogs at womanist musings.  I always read her posts because I either really agree or really don't with her take.  I find that her style can be really grating, but usually when I stop and really think about why I have a problem with her posts, I learn something new about me or my views.  So keep being conroversial Renee.  

But yes, she's written a post about what she calls Lipstick Feminism vs Dressing the Part".  I just want to start out by saying that I find the whole premises somewhat insulting.  I know there are feminists who find fashion empowering and feminists who view it as another control instrument for the patriarchy.   I know these women often clash bitterly.  Names are called and feelings are hurt. 

I still think that calling any person or any group a "lipstick feminist" is insultig.  I mean what a person chooses to wear is their choice and even when people do take time and care with their appearance, it doesn't mean that their looks are their main focus, as labeling them by their grooming seems to imply. 

Also drawing a division of either or is a huge problem.  I know "fashion feminists"  and for them it's about looking and feeling good.  They've got quite a few pieces in their wardrobes that  they lik and other women like, but men seem to abhor.  It's hard to argue that these women are slaves to the male gaze (not that women wearing outfits both genders like are).  I also know women who balance comfort and fashion or who acknowledge that some comformity is needed to live in society.  There is a range and I think that most women realize that how one dresses, like many other topics is a CHOICE thing.  Just like choosing to keep an unplanned pregnancy doesn't make you anti-feminist, choosing to wear whatever doesn't make you anti-feminist. 

Another language problem I have is the use of "cat fight".  I know Renee states in the work that she hesitates to use the word, but that's not enough.  Cat fight is a term generally used to lessen or demean conflicts and issues women have with other women.  I don't think its really acceptable to use it, especially on a topic that is stereo-typed as being "cat fightish" the lipsticks vs the baggy shirts and whatever.   I don't know the same person who brought us the post on words used to "silene", "discredit", or "belittle" using those words strikes me as wrong.  

Past the language, Renee has a point and I think it's important to make.  It has me a little sore because as of late, I'll I've heard about is my privledge, but no one seems to be offering things I can do to about that.  I think something that people forget too sometimes (not necissarily Renee, this is more general) that what I can do is limited.  I can't afford to buy sweat shop labor free clothes.  Maybe one or two pieces but not a whole collection.  Even then, where do I go for said clothing that is both fairly mainstreamish, would fit me, and wouldn't break my budget? 

Where is the money to convert from my "gas guzzler" car (which I never considered a Crown Vic to be) to an eco friendly car?   How can anyone expect me to eat food that was grown "earth friendly" and would be better for me?  I mean I can't do it all. 

I have a ton of privledge, no questions, but every cause wants me to step up.  I have to balance all the needs and my personal needs too.  I find it preachy and presumptious on people in general's part to tell me how I should live and to tell me what I have that I should strive to do better with.  I'm doing the best I can.  I like to think that most people are.  However I can't give or give up for all causes either.  Just a thought.  

Notes before reading:

1. Currently, I've got an Amanda vs dissenting voice tone.  This isn't because Amanda is alone in her struggle and has no allies.  She has many, I'd go so far to that she might have more allies than BFP does.  The reason the tone is Amanda vs. dissenting voices is because Amanda is much more visible in discussion and debate than BFP.  In many cases that I've read Amanda is dealing more with BFP advocates that BFP herself.  In rereading my writing it occurred to me that I might be setting up a tone that sounded like one person was being ganged up on.  I'm not sure how to fix this other than state up front that this is not the case.  Sorry that I couldn't think of a better way around this problem.

For those people who follow feminist blogs even passingly, I'm sure you know the Amanda Marcotte situation.  For those who don't, let me summarize what I've gathered.  My understanding of what happened is that Amanda wrote an article on Alternet about immigration and it's relation to feminism.  This is an issue that while recently becoming "trendy" has been discussed a lot by on many WOC blogs, BFP's (or brownfemipower) blog especially.  Many people felt that Amanda had taken the ideas from BFP and others without properly crediting them.  Amanda has since responded hostilely to these claims and insisted that all her inspiration came from different conference speakers.

I wish that she had just apologized and credited these other bloggers for all their work and effort, and at the same time I can understand why she didn't.  She really does think (or at least writes as if she really does think) that she didn't draw any ideas from these people's works and maybe she didn't (I don't know how her mind works).  She did feel very threatened by the attacks on her writing integrity and she should because they are serious attacks and something that could sink a just starting career.  The other side is that I'm sure everyone was aware of how serious the claims were and I'm sure they weren't just idly made. 

Obviously many people were unhappy with her response.  I didn't read BFP's blog when it was up, but the cases people present for approbation of ideas are compelling.  I know that I personally read a lot of people's works and definitely work off of them in ideas, direct responses and what not.  I don't always source back because sometimes I don't realize I've done it until later or I don't remember who wrote what.  If it had been me, I'd have been hurt by the accusation, but I probably would have given in and credited the other people because my mind is a sloppy place and for me it would probably true that BFP planted the seedling idea in my head even if I hadn't solidified it until after seeing several conferences and having time to reflect and think.  My brain takes a lot of process time and requires a lot of sources and views to help me work out kinks and sometimes I don't realize who jump started what because by the time I come to a conclusion, it's so far removed from the original whatever that sparked it I just don't think on it.  To be safe, when an issue like that is brought to my attention, if there's even a chance, I'd throw credit in. 

Amanda either thinks there isn't a chance or she doesn't work as I do on those sort of issues.  I was much more sympathetic to her case before she started commenting on Holly's feministe post on the subject, but after she started calling people right wing nuts using smoke and fire tactics I started losing some of that sympathy.  I understand she felt attacked and people react strongly toward that, but I think it's really condescending to just dismiss someone else's sincere problem or concern as being a crazy or a war starter or whatever.  The concerns are real, and Amanda should have talked with BFP about the problem in a rational way and answered others questions and concerns appropriately.  

I don't completely understand either extreme in the case.  As Amanda sees the issue as purely one of character assassination when there are obviously several important race and priveledge issues mixed in along with good questions about what it does or doesn't mean to be a good advocate.  As many people on the other side see it this has nothing to do with Amanda and everything to do with differing race and silencing issues.  Both of these issues are present.  I see why one would play down the other depending on where you stand.  What I have problems getting is why both sides can't step down and address each in their discussions because both come into play.  Maybe a lot of people feel that both aren't in play is all.  Dunno.  

Anyhow all this aside, Amanda's book came in and there are some really racist retro styled cartoons going on there.  Holly covered this in feministe here.  As appalling as the cartoons were though, I was almost relieved, because that was something I could side on.  The cartoons are racist and wrong.  There is no other side to look at here.  Whatever was going on, was completely wrong period, end of debate. 

See since the Amanda approbation issue began, I've been trying to decide what my opinion on the whole thing is.  People in the blogsphere have been actively courting my and other women's sympathies on the issue.  On one side I hear The Open Letter to White Feminists and I want to be a good advocate.  I have some issues with the context of which all the quotes were taken from, but I get the idea.  The same problem I have with many men when it comes to women's issues, I'm doing to other women who are facing race, sexuality, or religious issues.   I agree with Cara at the Curvature that being a good ally is complex and invariably means speaking out against discrimination as well as helping to get silenced voices heard.  How Amanda handled the situation lead to silencing even if none originally occurred because she tried to shift the terms of what was happening to favor her and silence the other deeper and more important (in the big picture) concerns.

The flip side is that I can't honestly say whether approbation occurred or not.  I think it's likely though probably not intentional, but I can't claim to know Amanda's inner workings.  I get the anger and I see why people would want to boycott her writings, but the other side is isn't a person supposed to be innocent until she's proven guilty and if she said she didn't do it, who am I, especially as a person who hasn't read BFP's work and who hasn't heard those speakers to cast such a judgment?

So I was horrified that these kind of drawings would be included by pleased because I could put the Amanda issue to rest.  Unfortunately (and fortunately, more fortunately than not really) Amanda has apologized about the cartoons that went into her book.  Not that it makes it all better, but she is taking responsibility.  She is removing the images as soon as possible.  She doesn't make excuses for her oversight and that's admirable.  Perhaps not enough, but I'd like to think that people make mistakes, recognize them, and then try to be better people.  Maybe all can't be good right away, but it's a start.  Certainly I know that I have and will probably again step in it as I try to figure out where I stand and why I stand there.  I'd like to think that an apology and an attempt to repair the damage I've done best as I can would open the door way for forgiveness. 

I know I'm not Amanda and deciding that she's wrong and not a person to listen to doesn't make me wrong and all that.  It's just that I'm trying to decide what is reasonable and what is not.  For me it's easiest to do that when I think about it in terms of what I'd want or what I could feasibly do.

And I understand people who have been hurt too much to continue this discussion as well.  There's only so often you can say the same thing without someone hearing you before enough is enough.  I'm relatively new to blogging and paying attention to these kinds of issues.  My hopes might be false and understanding flawed.  I can't claim to entirely get what's going on either.   I've got my take but I feel like (which means there probably is) there is something crucial I'm not seeing or getting about what's happened/happening.  

On a side note, I can say that I was thoroughly unimpressed with Seal's apology.  It sounded fairly fake and even as if they were mocking people's concern.  It started well, but the way that they went on to talk about how the images aren't very feminist friendly with the blond hair and the curvy body came off to me as kind of sarcastic and exasperated.  I didn't like that.  I felt like Seal was blowing off the issue in saying "well since none of the cartoon really supported are views and were meant to be comical you shouldn't be offended by the depictions of those with darker skin as savages".  Not a helpful apology in my eyes really

I guess to conclude, I'm continuing to fence stand on the Amanda approbation issue.  I won't be buying her book because even if I'm not certain about anything, I feel uneasy about the whole thing.  I'll read her blog and whatever other blogs I can get my hands on because I like all the views and the different focuses on different blogs.  I really hope at some point in time the feminist movement can actually take a moment and reflect on our real race and sexuality problems and move forward in a way that's beyond just having some nice conversations in name and starts reflecting in actions too.

Well, it's all over the place.  I figured that it had been written about enough, but I guess I have a few thoughts on the whole thing anyhow.  He's called the ferret and he's apparently never going to live down his Free For All Gropers Dream .  In fairness, I dislike the idea for a number of reasons.  
1. this "open source" boob thing already is the default for women.  
2. Touching people in a sexual way is an inimate act and I don't want strangers attempting it or asking to attempt it.
3. The idea that men can validate women or women can validate men is creepy and kind of gross to me.  Validate yourself and get some confidence.  

I thought about posting more, but honestly I don't want to.  Feministing has an article (though I find it just this side of snarky they haven't in my opinion really addressed the issue as fairly as possible there's a lot I agree with but the tone is perhaps too harsh for me I don't know, I'm still processing that )
[Unknown LJ tag]</div> has a very tastefully done take here   and telesilla has a nice ancedote here.  Also darkrose has a good read on the topic here


I like a lot of the posts the ferret has and a lot of different thought's he's expressed in the past, this one is just a huge dud for me.  It also sort of seems to me that he doesn't understand what makes a guy sketchy.  Part of it is that they would ask to fondle me or try to fondle me period. 

And another thing I don't like is how he assumes women who said know are ashamed or embarassed or that women who said yes never felt pressured at all.  IT might be different depending on what the conference is for but one thing feministing points out is that this behavior is terriblily inappropriate for any kind of technical, computer, sci-fi con.  Pretty much if it isn't sexuality oriented and even then I'm not sure how I feel about it, it's inappropriate.  Who is a bunch of guys or girls getting their jollies off in public by fondling a stranger ever appropriate or validating or healing?

I mean as far as his open source project goes, I've run into a lot of "participants" just no one with buttons and some of them don't understand the word no.  

Also I think the button puts a lot of pressure on a person to say yes if wearing a green button.  I mean said person supposedly said yes to some people but not you why not?  There's a lot of potential to breed anger, hurt, and what not there too.  Not to mention the whole sense of entitlement a person has to think they could ask. 

Whatever, the point is that I don't like the idea and at the same time I don't like the tone or response of others who don't like the idea and I'm not sure why.  Guess I could just be not liking things to not like them.  Arg, I'll be happy when this post dies and my f-list isn't bumped up for it anymore.

You know I'm as good a sport as any really, but I'm slightly annoyed at the moment.

( Spoilers for the Simpsons behind the cut )

Article pulled from Feministing. It made my day so I figured that I'd throw it out here for others.
India's Pink Vigilante Women

I don't know really, I've got a few quotes and thoughts to throw out I guess before I move on with my life. Some of them are pre-Thanksgiving and some Post-Thanksgiving. I guess the order doesn't so much matter as just that I write them before my obsessive nature internalizes them too much.

1. My poetry teacher asked me if I "usually memorized my own poems" because I told him that I "can never read one of my own poems the same way it is on paper unless I have it memorized" I said that it "depended on how long I'd spent playing with the poem". which is true but not how he understands it. I tend to take a lot of time thinking about things in my head before I write them. I'll hold certain lines for months while I wait for the rest of it to come together,. The longer I hold it in my head, the more likely I am to have the exact phrasing memorized. Tweaking it once it's already written though isn't helpful to my memorization. I didn't want to discuss it with the whole class, but I do want the last word...even if he doesn't hear it. Plus, I hate how egocentric he made it sound that I should "memorize my own poems", because I never can directly quote anything else ::rolls eyes:: He didn't mean it that way, and the truth is that I'm probably just sore about it because he made me read what I consider to be one of my more juvenile poems out loud to the class and then praised me on how good it was. I mean sure the poem's construction is fine, but if he doesn't find the subject matter and presentation to be young and immature, then he probably has a lot of his own maturing to do.

2. One of my very good house mates and friends has been talking to me about my "pagan" religion and how, you know, I and her mother and few others know about the "real paganism". What she's really talking about here, and what I've tried to, however unsuccessfully explain to her is that most of what she is talking about happens to be a lot of New Age and Neo-pagan things. Even then she isn't speaking for all people who fall under those labels (it would be really hard to do so). If we really stretched she may even be talking about some British Traditional Witchcraft (often just called Traditional Witchcraft, though I tend to avoid calling it that because it doesn't help to specify what tradition).

I don't think her mother is fluffy, and I don't think my house mate is fluffy, I just don't think she knows the right vocabulary. I tried to explain that "pagan" classifies as anything of a non-Abrahamic faith and that some people today also classify pagan as something that is non-Abrahamic and non-Dharminc (as to exclude Hinduism and other major faiths that may or may not fit under the pagan label). I tried to explain that even if you wanted to be more specific than that that paganism incorporates any religion that is "earth centered" or that reclaims an older faith or that is centered around a lord and lady (god and goddess) figure, or that focuses solely on a mother figure.... None of these definitions actually mean that the practitioner will "harm none" and a lot of pagans don't follow that tenant. Even pagans who do follow the "harm none and do as yee will" don't take that as a don't harm anyone ever, but rather as a "you are free to do whatever is you aren't hurting anyone, if you will hurt someone or something then think about it first". She kind of ignored me, which happens, perhaps I wasn't forceful enough, or perhaps she found my corrections had no relation to the point she was making (which they do way more than she knows).

I think what was most disturbing about our conversation wasn't that she believed that all witches harm none but that she though voodoo was evil. There are a lot of different kinds of voodoo out there and though I am painfully ignorant on the practices of any of the voodoo sects, I'm fairly certain that the practice itself is not "evil" and doesn't encourage harm to others, which is how I believe she was using the term evil when she spoke. I was surprised how tolerant and defensive she was for "pagans" when she was so angry mob against voodoo, which I believe (ironically enough) falls under the pagan umbrella.

Also have to say that whatever "real pagan books" (tm) she was looking at that don't have any spells that could cause harm to others, probably weren't that "real" and she probably didn't consider the implications of all of the spells. I mean just because you aren't doing a spell to harm someone doesn't mean you aren't causing "harm". After all doing a "love spell" could be very harmful depending on exactly what you're doing, as a cliche over used example. The question of free will and interfering with it is always a question when doing spell work. I'm not saying this should stop using any spells or whatever, just that a lot of people who claim they aren't doing any harm could be depending on the wording and what not of a spell (and assuming for the sake of this argument that spells do work).

3. I really hate Western movies. They are racist and sexist. They lack any real plot or good fight scenes. As a grand total I find them highly offensive and displeasing. I just didn't know it until now (I've never watched a western before) but I am anti-that genre right now. Perhaps not all Westerns are that way, but the hero of whatever story I was watching was an ex-soldier for the confederate who hated the "Yankees" and who hated the "Indians". In fairness, the Indian people had killed his family, which does happen and I know there were a lot of confederate soldier and I'm sure a ton of them didn't just drop their grudges for their North neighbors, but I mean its hard to want to root for a guy who is so completely prejudice. He shoots first and questions later. He has no qualms putting family and loved ones in danger. He tried to kill his own niece, who was stolen by Indians and didn't want to come back when they they finally found her five years later. Not to mention the portrayal of Indians and Mexican was sooooo incredibly offensive. The "Si signore" and the accidental "Indian wife" and the whole money killing focus bent was gross. And the portrayal of women wasn't any better. It is a period piece Women are supposed to cook and clean and get married and all that stuff, I get it. But to be sooooo incredibly meek, to insist on this one man who treats you like crap. To scream and by hysterical instead of closing the door and being quiet while under attack, it was just amazing. If women really acted like this then I'm kind of surprised that anyone survived. I couldn't believe it. My shock is part of what kept me watching because my mind was just like "I must be missing something here, they couldn't really play something this overtly offensive on cable". Apparently they can and they will.

4. I'm really surprised by women who claim to be comfortable with their bodies and don't want to touch their vaginas. I don't know what to say to these women. What brings this up, one of my good friends who is very forward thinking and who I thought (and who claims to be) was "sexually liberated" went on to talk to be about how much touching her vagina freaks her out. I mean if you don't want to masturbate fine. But how can you be so comfortable with a partner touching you and not be comfortable touching yourself? I mean how can you really know what you like or don't like if you haven't spent the time to figure it out? How can you ask a man or woman to pleasure you when the idea of doing it yourself creeps you out? You're ok with all sorts of different sex positions, toys, and experimentation with a partner, but learning about your body and it's reactions on your own is too much for you? The whole mindset is odd to me. I mean, I went through a "I'm shy/ uncomfortable touching" phase, but during that phase I wasn't comfortable with ANYONE touching me. The fact that I was uncomfortable made me even more uncomfortable with other people being in that area.

Another thing, if you aren't comfortable enough with your body to put a Nuva Ring in then you shouldn't be having sex. This one is about my sister. She's sexually active and wants to get some form of birth control, which of course I entirely approve of. She wants to be on the pill, and I asked her why. She's never had to take any kind of medication regularly before and I figured that taking it within the hour would probably not be the easiest thing for her to manage, especially considering she can't remember to finish taking strep medication. Speaking of which, she gets sick often and oral contraception doesn't always work if you are taking antibiotics Yeah there are antibiotics that would work, but neither of us know enough about the subject to know which ones do and don't work. Combine this with her allergies to some meds, and you've really limited what she can take prescription wise. Her answer is that she's uncomfortable touching herself to put the ring it. She is so against using the Nuva Ring, which has very few negative side effects that she is considering getting the six month injections instead. Because there are totally less potential draw backs there, I mean you don't have to stick anything up you vagina.

Let me get this straight, you're fine with a guy sticking is penis in you, but a little flexible ring with hormones to keep you from getting pregnant is too uncomfortable/awkward for you? I just don't get it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are plenty of reason why women don't want to/ can't use the Nuva Ring. Maybe they are allergic. Maybe their insurance won't cover it or doesn't cover enough of the costs. Maybe they have some other surrounding circumstances I'm completely ignorant of, but the point is that none of those reasons are simply because a woman is uncomfortable with her body. I know that the discomfort probably isn't that woman's fault. I know a lot of people out there are uncomfortable. I just think this discomfort is wrong and I find it particularly confusing in women who allow any kind of penetration to occur in their sex life.

5. It's much quieter on campus then at home. I'm going to miss that when I stop coming here.

6. It is much warmer here than at home and I'm going to miss that too.

7. My bed is more comfortable here...one more sad panda insert.

8. I love my fluffy soft blanket, even if everyone else thinks it's kind of dumb and not as awesome as it really is. I just hope I don't get it dirty somehow.

9. Forced family gatherings make me really nervous. My mom is a ticking time bomb you have to be wary of. I don't really know my relatives I don't really have much in common with them and now I have to spend together time with them. I'd rather not really. It is very stressful for me.

10. I resent Holidays. I know some people see it as time set a side to do X, Y, or Z positive thing but for me it is a time where I am required to feel or fulfill obligations of X, Y, or Z. I don't have fond happy memories of amazing closeness during Thanksgiving ever. It's always meant to me a lot of forced bonding. Everyone is high strung in the effort of making it work and it really just doesn't. The best family bonding times I've had either haven't been planned or were planned by the family as something we all wanted to do and make time for. Having a set period of time by the nation creates pressure/expectation/obligation where there shouldn't be one. Family should be together because they want to be not because the calender says so. Likewise, I resent Valentine's day a lot too. Maybe I'm not in the mood, you know. The system just doesn't work so well for me, I guess. I'm glad it seems to work so well for others though, who knows, maybe it's just me.

11. Missed the bf and I'm very glad to see him again. He's having a hard time though. He's sad and I'm not sure why, he won't tell me, but I wish I could help him. I like him better when he's happy but if I can't have that I like him better when he's just honest with me about what's bothering him, even when it isn't me or anything I can help. I like when he shares. Of course if he doesn't want to share, I can't make him, and I guess it's not really my business. I'm probably a little too curious and concerned for my own good.

12. Explained to the sister once again that Mom and I don't hate her bf. For people who are new to this "drama", my sister has been dating this boy for about two years when she broke up with him in Sept (after starting college). She immediately started dating someone else, within the past few weeks she broke up with the new guy and got back together with the old bf. My mom and I aren't exactly pleased. There isn't anything wrong with the bf she's seeing, we just wanted her to look around a little more. I don't think the guy she is dating is a bad guy, I just don't think he's very special is all and certainly I think my sister could do better. We wanted her to be single for a bit and to look around. We just didn't want her tied down to any one person or thing. If she doesn't feel tied down or if she feels free enough or if she thinks this guy is worth those sacrifices (even though I definitely don't agree), it's her life and she should do what she wants. The important thing is that she's happy and that she feels she's doing the right thing with our life That our mom can't help prying and reinforcing how much she doesn't want my sis to be dating is a mom thing and one that doesn't mean she hates the bf, it just means she doesn't think that dating him is in my sis's best interest. Our parents are way more vocal and prohibitive when they don't like the guy you're dating.

13. Searched for a new winter jacket and found nothing. I'm very picky.

14. Worked under the table at Calvin Klein and made about $100 dollars...woot!

....that's it for now I guess.

The bf and I were watching Batman Forever when I blurted out "I think it would be

healthier for a girl to have Cat Woman as a role model instead of Wonder woman". He turned to me with the usual "I'm waiting" look and I realized I should probably explain that a little.

See Wonder Woman if fine and all, but Cat Woman she's really got flare. Yeah, I know she's crazy, but she doesn't take a lot of shit. She knows how to twist men using the stereo types they have of women against them. I love the scene in the movie when she and Batman fight and Cat Woman says "How dare you, I'm a woman!" Batman stops fighting like a moron and moves towards her to see if she is all right. Boom Cat Woman screws him on that one.

Maybe it's because part of being a super hero is keeping life at the status quo, but I never can imagine Wonder Woman using stereo types to her advantage. I don't see her as the type to insist on her ability to be an independent individual separate from men and society. Yeah she nurses that guy back to health in the Amazon. Yeah she leaves what she knows to enter a new and odd world, not for this one man but for the fate of all mankind. And yeah with her living in an all female society, she really isn't well set up to understand sexism or to combat it. But still, I am often unimpressed with Wonder Woman.

I appreciate that Cat Woman leans on no one. She makes alliances when convenient and breaks them when they aren't. I know heroes can't do this. I know that it is admirable to stick to a sinking ship once you've promised it, but it isn't realistic. I mean realistically why do I have to maintain one thing when everything around me changes? That and for me sticking with alliances when things are going really wrong is too symbolic of how a wife should stick to a terrible marriage rather than "abandon ship" for me to stomach sometimes.

Another thing I like about Cat Woman is that while she's bitter, she doesn't hate all of man kind. I mean she likes Bruce Wayne just fine. She just doesn't like slime balls like her boss who are doing sceevey things and killing any poor person who's in the way. It's nice to see a woman who can differentiate between all men and some men. habits she doesn't want. She doesn't have a grudge against men, but the stereo types they expect her to be. That's something I'd want people in general to carry over in their real lives. And it's pretty much why Cat Woman is better than Wonder Woman.

I'm sure that there are plenty of people here who know that the New York Times recently wrote a cover story article about the word "vajayjay" (here). I was happy about it. I do like the word vajayjay because it is fun and cutesy and sometimes that's the kind of mood I'm in. I like having a slang word for my vagina that isn't in the process of being reclaimed or isn't just plain derogatory. Obviously the feminism scene is never quite that straight forward though. Some people like the word and others don't. They've got some interesting and in depth reasoning behind their opinions though. Even when I don't agree with them I can understand and respect them. Michael Smerconish apparently lacks either basic common sense or a female viewing population. I found his article on the subject to be highly offensive (to feminists and to female genitalia in general) and to lack any understanding of differing female perspectives. Perhaps I'm being to harsh on Smerconish, perhaps he and other men of his standing aren't able to "understand" any perspective beyond that of the white well off male perspective. Then again, I look at my bf who is in some ways more of a feminist than I am and I realize, no indeed, it's just that Smerconish is a schmuck

Reality TV and one more way it's completely fucked up

To quote:
""There is no indication that she was unconscious at the time," said Joseph Hundah, an executive at M-Net.

However, viewers of the incident, which took place on Saturday afternoon after an extended drinking bout which ended in copious vomiting and apparent blackout for Molokwu, remain adamant about what they saw: Bezuidenhout lay down next to the comatose young woman and penetrated her vagina with his fingers. He carried on despite the pleas of another female housemate for him stop. Under the law in South Africa - where, on average, a woman is sexually assaulted every 40 seconds - such an act constitutes rape."

This article makes me completely sick. What kind of ASSHOLE is interested in fingering an drunk passed out woman and does so in a publicly broadcasted tv show while other REAL people are right there watching and telling him to stop?!

This guy is a scum bag. I just can't even begin to express how infuriating and unsettling this is to me. And what's worse is that this Bezuidenhout prick's response to any allegations is that "This is Africa". Sorry, I didn't realize that Africa was like a rape free zone.

List because I like them and because sometimes life isn't easy to sum up

1. Have a bunch of little things to post for my own collection will be sorry to clog the f-list list that but, meh, I can be that way sometimes.

2. I have been paying attention to international peace month I just haven't had time to post prompts or really write myself. For those who want a prompt, though unfortunately I won't be able to respond myself, todays prompt is Tranquility. When have you found it? What does it mean to you? Where or how do you get it? Do you think it would get boring if there were too much of it? Is tranquility synonymous with static/homeostasis? Any thoughts of feelings you have or that come to mind with it. Again doesn't have to be about you. Can be a character or a poem or just a block of text.

3. Must post in </a></a>writers_cafe all these nifty new character creation prompts. They are really helpful and really neat and want to share.</strong>

4. Straightened my hair for the first time in years, must show the sister the pics....must talk to the sister at all because I wonder about her from time to time.

5. Should email the brother to encourage him again.

6. Have to call parents sometime tonight *le sigh*

7. Have lots and lots to do. Feel both overwhelmed and underwhelmed by the tasks. Am exicted and annoyed. Have been stalling and am not quite ready.

8. School is over whelming. Not a good think or a bad thing, just a thing. I like my classes and still find them a chore. Got my first A/ first grade back. Am pleased about it and at the same time I wonder if its earned of if the teacher's an easy grader. I can't help but doubt, me good or they are just easy?

9. Have been reading so much news and yet really nothing. Wanted to do a write up on the woman in West Virgina (or Virgina?) who was raped. But there is nothing to say, I mean, just wow. I'm surprised what happened isn't an auto hate crime, and I'm surprised about the victims bravery (she allowed her name and her mother's name to be printed). Don't know if that's ignorance or bravery. One thing to put your name there and say yes this happened to me yes I am not a faceless person and no I am not ashamed, why should I be ashamed. I was attacked, brutalized, and tortured. On the other side I feel like this woman might have allowed or been coerced to do something she wasn't ready to do or that wasn't in her best interest. I feel like the papers can be animals, especially towards people who aren't used to them. Everyone wants their gore. They aren't really interested in a story or in anything but increasing the human fascination with pain and destruction. But as much as I am sunshiny in person, I am very dark in my heart. Perhaps the papers had the best intentions, perhaps she hasn't put herself in danger through the information. Perhaps her whole life isn't about to be stripped bare and scrutinized within an inch of her life because she was abducted, held for a week, forced to each feces and drink toilet water, stabbed repetitively, raped, and strangled. People so easily lose sight of this to focus on something like “Well she wasn't living with her parents so...” or “well she did wear that...” or “well look at how many lovers she had” or even worse, “She was prone to abusive friends and relationships, maybe its time she really learned about abuse”. I get so angry when people say this, try to rationalize something that doesn't have rational. I know its a defense mechanism for some “She did these risky behaviors and I don't so I'm safe” or something to try to justify, but there is no justifying this. This was something she didn't want something that she didn't deserve.

10. I want to talk about the 16yr old threatening to rape a 12 yr old, but I don't know what to say. The coaches of the track team want to stress how good the girls were, and how composed they were. They stayed together as a group while running, they took down the license and they called the police. The police want to stress how sorry the 16yr old is now that he realizes that the girl was upset....HE SHOULD NEVER HAVE FUCKING SAID THAT!!!! It is always inappropriate even if she wasn't upset, rape is serious, it isn't something to joke about or trivialize. One in four men would rape if they knew they wouldn't be caught, and this little stat makes me sick, but it also makes me prone to believe those “I'll rape you” jokes. Sure I know they won't rape me, I don't really ever give people the chance (never am alone, always have a locked door...blah blah you name it I'm doing it to avoid that) but that you would joke about it, that you would find it funny or harmless, to me that makes you the one of four who would rape if you knew you'd get out of it. Seems though now a days discussing rape isn't serious, and the kid, with a juvenile record already, who last month was shooting paint balls at the same track team, who at the very least has anger issues and DOES seem to prey on younger girls got a slap on the wrist. No actions taken...what does this say to those girls now track coaches? That you can do ALL the right things and STILL be threaten, humiliated, and scared. Police will do nothing.

11. Southwest Airlines officially sucks. I mean come on. Neither of those women were wearing anything that is past the norm and you are hassling them for their outfit. I, like many others, can't help but notice that these women have large chests. As a buck some woman I can tell you that there is no pleasing people who accuse you of being provocative because of your chest. You wear a conservative button up shirt and everyone is whispering about how the buttons are straining. Where a turtle neck and people complain about how the fabric stretches. Wear a potatoe sack and you don't “care about you appearance” and are sloppy. What do you want any of us to do. I'll match the look that is appropriate but someone has to point it out first because there is no way I can help looking top heavy.

12. Lots of story idea. For Lauren I have a scene in the pediatric office. For my hunter I have a scene with him confronting a pack, and with Lily there is a nice drinking scene and then one at thanksgiving.

13. Got a poem too something about my desire to become one with the bed. “Desire to meld with the mattress” “Lying like a Log, Laziness in mind” “Desperate desire to escape into the oneness of a dead world” depressing I think might be the over all theme here though and I want funny or harsh or ironic or even a bit cruel. Don't want this sad self pitying lay down and disappear bullshit. I am worth more than that (really). There is something worth being here for (hopefully). I am not suffering (well not compared to other years, this one is really probably the best I've had since freshman year and in some ways its better). Its just that anger is easier to fuel me than a quiet desperation. Anger hurts and cuts but it pushes and demands. It numbs better that tender carefully guarded hope. Guess there isn't anything wrong but you know my own worries, concerns for things I am helpless to stop. I'm just waiting for it to fall in a few months. I hate being so completely pathetic. A year ago (sept 25) my friend wrote a poem for me, one that I still think applies (sadly). From my comments in lj that sadly don't carry over here:

    Jess, just:
    
    She wishes she were lesser
    and lesser, lesser still.
    She knows she could be so much more,
    The juxtoposition makes her ill.
    Impassioned, truly, for nothing...
    But yearns the unity passion suggests--
    She can fake it, oh she can fake it
    (But it's a heartache nonetheless.)
    
    Perhaps the restlessness will never leave?
    Inquisitive, objective...has a price.
    Life's a struggle, breathe just breathe...
    Tis a... comforting! No! Ineffective! Device...?
    
    Stop the analyzation.
    "But my saving grace would fall!"
    
    "No wait, but if, You see,
    A piece of you and them in me,
    Energy mine in those and this and of us all..."
    You shh, just shh, if shh
    Fuck it all///.

14. I'm thinking a lot about individuals. My energy has been focused on Kim because I can't decide how to feel about her. No question she is nice enough I will always be friendly to her, but what do I think. On one side she is friendly,easy to talk to, and she makes people feel welcomed like they belong. She has this passion and energy and still she isn't doing anything. She “works” many jobs where she doesn't do anything but place hold. I really value work, and while she's got a lot of good points I can't help but wonder if the action bely the words. Is she really empty and trying to convince people she's full? Does she really deserve the awesome recommendations she will get even though she didn't do the work? Are people who do this for her helping her or hurting her in the long run, because really if you aren't working and if you aren't helpful, shouldn't someone tell you that? After all it isn't really entirely her fault if no one has ever stopped and told her. Though to be honest I'm not big on sparing people's feelings for the sake of “kindness”, I think its really a disservice to that person. They have a right to know the truth and even if they hate you for it later, at least they can grow and move on. This “kindness” bull crap is why we have so many terrible want to be artists. No one has the balls anymore to say, “Hey you should scrap that, its great it means something to you but it isn't marketable and will never be marketable”, “You don't seem to have the skills”, “IF you want this you should do this” and so on. Everyone is all fake “its nice”, “I like it”, “it shows you and how you're feeling and therefor is art”. Just no, art is to some degree in the eye of the beholder but being a recognizable artist or actor or whatever is some degree talent, some degree luck, some degree connections, but also some degree managing to make something that is MARKETABLE that OTHERS like and value. It has personal meaning, great, I'm the public and I'm telling you it sounds terrible.

15. Thinking a lot of Ian too. He and eye are similar. He has more talent and he's crashed more than me, but we are the same. So much potential, so much smarts and talent and we are wasting it all. We probably piss the hell out of people. Ian just makes me sad because he is suffering and I know it. I know why, and in my secret heart of hearts I agree with what he feels. I feel it so deep in my own being, and it has cut me in the same way its broken him. He's better with wording it, but he caught on later than I did. This little dark cloud has been part of me, an idea forming since second grade. Couldn't name it then and I certainly can't really articulate it now, but for Ian its been all at once. Some time I'll have to quote him because I know that pain. It makes me sad that he sees it because it is a confirmation that I'm not crazy but that there is something wrong, and it makes me more sad because the realization is destroying him and he could give and be so very much. There's nothing I can do about that though, try to be there if he needs me I guess.

16. Haven't seen AJ much and want to keep it that way. In small doses he can be colorful but large ones he is a depression. Plus I don't have to worry about him too much, he's doing well in school, he's always doing well in school.

17. Saw Kevin Friday at a party. I was all dressed up and he looked right through me like I didn't exist. Of course I was giving my scared as hell deer caught in the head lights, hide behind or in the bf face. And honestly he does scare me. He is violent and I know that being with Pines could have only encouraged this. He is a drunk and I know he is a cruel one. He has hurt me in ways that I'm not sure will ever heal. Zac seems to sense these kind of things because his whole body posture changes. No matter how drunk or sober we are, he seems to recognize the threat this boy and the whole frat/sorority is in my head (possibly in real life there have been confrontations, but none of them have been so bad that they justify this throat closing sweat inducing terror). They don't confront me (haven't actually since early November of last year). They don't acknowledge me at all actually, and I don't acknowledge them. Sometimes this is sad because friendly acquaintances have joined this group after our break up and gone from willingly holding conversations with me to giving terse and hesitant nods. Sometimes I wonder what he says that does this to them. Sometimes I am afraid I know. Sometimes I wonder if I'm just being too sensitive. Though if I'm sensitive to this, my bf is more sensitive because once in a while (it is rare because I am such an observant paranoid person) he stiffens before I do. He pulls me close and his eyes get guarded. It's these times that I know he isn't reacting just to me and how I react but to the actual presence and stare of these people where I get most sad. It would be more tolerable if I could convince myself that its all in my head.

18. Anyhow, we left Friday's party early. This is part from Pines, part because we had a friend who was new to the scene and wanted to leave (we'd have left with her just because she wanted to go, but it certainly helped that I wanted to get the hell out), we left because suddenly I didn't want to be in a crowded dark place drinking gross punch and pretending to be someone I'm just not. We left because the cigarette smoke was so thick in the air I thought I'd be sick. We left because Zac is a good boy and all I have to say is that I want to go and we should tell the others before taking off and he handles everything for me. He never questions the distress, just lets me babble happily with my friend while we walk home while I wonder what happened and why I got like that. Later when everyone is in bed he just holds me and lets be be comforted by his presence. So good not to push me to talk about things he wants to know, questions and insecurities I may have placed in his mind that he deserves better than.

19. Lucky's b-day was significantly less emotional an affair. On Wednsday we went out and just had a good time at the bar. Played some games got the guitar to place “Sweet Caroline” and “Journey” because everyone's first night as 21 drinking should include these songs. Drank sex on the Beaches, two to be exact and was very much drunk. Had the boy finished the last one and we left. Asked Lucky to come back with us (lives with me) but she wasn't ready to go. Learned later we should have insisted. Knew she was drunk but thought she should take care of herself, make her own choices. She got back alone (not cool) and then was sick by herself (even less cool). If we'd taken her at midnight she could probably have avoided the sick and the walk home alone, even if it isn't a long one, is one no one should do late at night. Still it was nice to have the boy to myself. I like being places with him and sharing him but I love having him all to myself. I am such a sappy girl with the adoration of cuddling close and whispering little secrets and he seems to be satisfied with just that too. I've never dated a boy who's been so patient, who completely lacks a set of demands or an agenda. I really like it.

20. Want to talk about Harry Potter some, but I'm still working on it </a></a>the_willow has inspired it but its still all jumbled and senseless. Maybe I'll hit that in a list later.</strong>

21. Saw the “unknown” works of Claude Monet. Some of these “unknowns” were really famous and well known even to me. Some of them were charicterures though and I thought those were pretty cool not only because it was early on in Monet's life but because some of them were copied from the paper, other were clearly inspired by a cartoonist and still others were just done for himself. It was interesting to see Monet's hand at cartoons. Was surprised by all the crayon drawings, I know they were just a tool before Crayola came along and stigmatized them, I really still adore crayon now, there are a couple neat things you can do with them (though I suppose that this isn't anything that would be “great” art. Also the Clark is really a place for rich people. I come to this conclusion because well there were so many really expensive cars. I recognized the BMWs and Mercades and the arrogance in the drivers.

22. We talked about Porches, which is a hotel in town that is one of the top ten hotels in the world to stay at. It is weird to think about that because well, its in the least well off part of town. It is facing this worn dead mill and the houses in the surrounding area are run down and some of them are clearly running drug operations. I wouldn't walk alone on the streets there, and somehow this is a nice environment for a hotel....I don't know I mean I like to feel safe at the hotel and on hotel grounds and I want to see something pretty, Porches fails these. Though apparently rich people like this whole thing. They want to see squalor and I don't enjoy viewing from behind glass where they eat their gourmet breakfast, whatever, its weird.

Think that might be all I have right now though. Meh. There you are tons of words for you all to enjoy and possibly marvel at or not. Just some of the endless thoughts I didn't know how else to get out. Hope this takes the edge off me a bit.

CBS has a nice peice of light hearted journalling here...not

I found this piece so offensive in so many ways. I am not at all opposed to studies which show that live-in boyfriends do more house work than husbands. I think that the reasons for this are more complex than "the institute of marriage pressures people into gender roles". I think some of that might also have to do with people emulating the marriage mommy and daddy had (though it will be interesting to look at kids from this divorce generation and see what their marriages are like). I also think some of it is that both men and women feel more secure in a marriage so they let some of the romance and niceties they were keeping up in domestic life and in the bed room stop...because now they are really committed as opposed to when they could just move out and move on.

I also had no problem with the correlation that women are more likely to have sex with someone who holds up their end of the house work. Yes I think there are many complex reasons why a woman would be more or less sexually active and I do think that boiling it down to house work is lame and chauvenistic. However, I really do think that house work can be a big problem and having something that works for both people in the house would solve a lot of tension and probably lead to better relationships in general (sex included).

My problem is the light hearted attitude that the reporter shows. He jokes about men doing chores being an aphrodisiac. And this sort of dismissal does disgust me. He doesn't mention how tiring doing all the chores yourself can be. He doesn't mention how emotionally and mentally draining doing repetive boring tasks can be, especially if the other person in a relationship IS NOT PULLING their weight. Not he goes for the easy cheap shot joke.

Another problem is the implication that women on any level are allowing access to their bodies because someone did something for them. First off if you are living in a house and do some of the house chores, you are doing them FOR YOURSELF and FOR the QUALITY of YOUR LIVING ENVIORNMENT, not for the little Misus. Secondly cleaning a house, cooking, doing laundry, grocery shopping are all tiring time consuming jobs. Add to that daily living pressures of a job possibly kids and all of that is enough to make anyone tire and not in the "mood". On top of all that is the constant knowledge that your parnter doesn't or won't help with the work load. They don't think enough of you or your relationship to even make a tolken attempt, and suddenly there is a whole world of problem. Doing chores isn't for sex, its for the respect of yourself, your home and your partner. When you aren't doing them it shows a complete lack of thought of all three and really besides a woman's stresses, add to it an inconsiderate partner demanding one more "service" as the article seems to imply sex is just that, and you've got a pissed off lady.

My last problem with the article is how it advocates that men only do a token amount of the work "less than 50%" because she will be greatful enough to "give it up" even at these little feats. I don't like how men make it seem like they've got to trick and pry sex out of women. I don't like that an article isn't explaining and advocating chores for the right reasons. Instead its some sort of easier prostitiution method. "Dude don't spend money on her and get her flowers, just take the dishes out of the dish washer, she'll treat you real good then" sort of deal.

Another thing I'd be curious to see is the correlation of homosexual couples "live ins" and how they deal with chores and sex. I think it would help take things out of the scope of gender roles "women clean and men do whatever", but it would also help drive home the underscoring messages people send when they refuse to take responsiblity for the cleanilness of the home.

Seeing Wonder Woman

I like some of the drawings and not others.  To be honest I'm not a wonder woman gal as the creator was kind of a sick dude and really I feel like wonder woman is just an awfully odd character, but I figured its interesting to look at.  Maybe I'll have more thoughts on it later...

Pastor Rapes his Two Teenage Daughters and claims that it's to teach them how to be good Husbands

Yeah a sick article. It reminds me of all the reasons Christianity can be so messed up. On one side there is this "don't have sex before marriage or there is a fate worse than death waiting for you" speech. It leads to "purity balls" and "Chasity promises" where Fathers, take control of their eleven year old daughters sexuality.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want sex to be this be out there thing that is all awesome and should be done right away. But I think that teaching abstinance in combination with safe sex techniques is more appropriate. Acknowledging the dangers and things a person should consider without trying to make it a scandal or something terrible. Supporting your kids and todays youth in whatever decisions they make after they have all the facts-yeah you might have hoped they would make a different decision. You many have wanted something else for them, but you can't control these kinds of decisions. Shetlering them and informing them is one thing, but forbidding them, scaring them, forcing them (one way or the other) is wrong.

Ovbiously what this pastor did is wrong. It makes me sick that if wife and religious community support him. They should support those two girls that he raped for years. He might claim it was for religion, but it was for his own lust. I what did he teach those girls, to allow their 'husbands' to rape them? To give into their husband's authority no matter the place and time? To allow people to make them small and weak. So much of this makes me so angry.