We’ve had our ups and downs - like when I got stuck on the last T home with every single one of your fans leaving your concert and they sang “Our Song” at the top of their lungs and I cursed your name? Or that time when I was twenty-seven years old and cry/sang “White Horse” while thinking about my poor relationship choices and you just really helped me get through a tough time?
But this is it. We’re done now.
I can no longer stand idly by and watch you, with your bubble-gum pop brand, tell a generation of little girls who look up to you that feminism is something bad.
So this is our breakup song. Sing it to your tune but please, use my lyrics.
Happy Love Your Body Day! Today marks the 15th anniversary of the NOW Foundation’s yearly event promoting positive body images and boy, could we all use a day to celebrate this message.
Every day it seems like we are bombarded with tenshundredsthousands millions of messages that our bodies aren’t acceptable or that they need improvement. And it doesn’t help that those with seemingly “perfect” bodies are picked apart by the media for everyone to see.
But you know it’s not enough to just be thin, right? Our bodies are the subject of so much media scrutiny that even the most minute details of our appearance are analyzed.
(Incidentally, whenever I’m in a dressing room I recreate this scene.)
What happens as a result of all of this intense media scrutiny of every area of our bodies? We’re raising a nation of girls and women trained to believe that their bodies aren’t good enough. 80% of women in the US are dissatisfied with their bodies. 51% of 9 and 10 year old girls report to feel better about themselves if they are on a diet. Approximately 7 million women and girls struggle with eating disorders.
Listen, I know that it’s going to take some major societal changes to stop all of this body hating but maybe today we take some baby steps. This is my 3-Step Love Your Body pledge, will you take it with me?
1.) Let’s stop blanketly hating our bodies. You know what I mean – stop saying “ugh, I hate my body” when you really mean “I am unhappy with the way my butt looks in this particular pair of pants.”
2.) Let’s stop idolizing unrealistic images of beauty. That cover photo of Kim Kardashian was airbrushed. Sure, the girl has a stunning figure but she also has lumps and bumps just like the rest of us. Unless someone is going to photoshop your life, it’s virtually impossible to attain that magazine cover standard of beauty.
3.) Let’s start appreciating what our bodies can do, instead of what they look like. Sure, it’s the tits when someone says “you look effin’ gorgeous” but looking gorgeous isn’t all that your body can do. Try to remember that there is so much more to you than just your appearance – you are strong, you have a brain, and you can use your body however you choose.
That’s it. Three simple steps towards appreciating your body and everything that it can do. I promise to keep this pledge, will you?
I’m sure you’ve heard that October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month and are in the midst of purchasing every pink product put out by the gazillions of companies hoping to reap the benefits of increased sales based on the teensy share of their profits that will go towards cancer research, but did you know that October is also LGBT History Month?
Oh and also National Domestic Violence Awareness Month?
No? I know it’s hard to keep track of all the things we’re supposed to be aware of in any given month – I mean, I am barely aware of my own surroundings. (Seriously, I have had a poster hanging in my office advertising a luncheon with a prominent feminist academic since 2008 and only last week did I notice that this prominent academic also happens to be a friend’s sister.) But I will be the first to point out that it’s pretty shitty that all these other things get brushed under the rug by the power of pink.
Especially when some of these things are already regularly brushed under the rug. Like domestic violence.
Think I’m being an alarmist? Did you see the most recent cover of French Vogue?
Sure, for some this harkens thoughts of Christian Grey and consensual kink, but the image by itself is irresponsible at best and downright dangerous at its worst. In an open letter to Conde Naste, anti-domestic violence groups write “This truly disturbing image of a woman being choked sends a dangerous message to anyone who sees this magazine – that choking is a sign of passion rather than violence.”
And images like this one, together with the constant connection between sex and violence, are doing a bang-up job of desensitizing society.
Take Mandy Stadtmiller ’s recent conversation with Naomi Wolf for xoJane about Wolf’s new book, Vagina. Wolf talks about how desensitized people have become to violence: “So, with rape jokes, if you’re in an environment where your vagina is being demeaned, humiliated, targeted, or at Yale, where the boys were chanting, “No means yes, and yes means anal,” or with comedians. These are strategic; they may not be conscious, but they’re strategic. Because it’s stressing out your autonomic nervous system all day long, in such a way that, over time, it dials down your well-being sexually, and it dials down your well-being in other ways; because if you want to target a woman’s brain, you target the vagina.”
Or the most recent “rape joke” fiasco, the flyer posted in a men’s dorm room bathroom at Miami University offering pointers on the “Top Ten Ways to Get Away with Rape” including roofies and breaking and entering.
So maybe it shouldn’t be shocking to me that we’ve all become so desensitized that we’re ok with linking violence to sex or that we continue to live in a culture where we perpetually blame the victim. Just last week, I was going over a case that established that consent can be withdrawn during sex and students hemmed and hawed over this finding. Did she really say no? Maybe she was just feeling guilty because he wasn’t her boyfriend?
Wait.
No. I don’t want to live in a world like this and neither should you. Because lurking behind rape culture, hiding in the victim blaming, and masquerading as something that doesn’t happen to normal people exists domestic violence.
Because every 9 seconds in the US, a woman is assaulted or beaten. Around the world, at least one in every three women has been beaten, coerced into sex, or otherwise abused in her lifetime. Because every day in the US, more than 3 women are murdered by their husbands or boyfriends. Because on average, 24 people PER MINUTE are victims of rape, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner.
October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Let’s stop ignoring the problem.
For resources, please visit the following safe-spaces:
Fellow Boston attorney and (full disclosure) one of my favorite people, just messaged me “please write a rant about heels. and how they are destroying my life, my feet, my back, and my wallet.”
Well, you got it, Attorney V. Because as I received this message I am sitting in my empty office, heels cast aside under my desk, feet encased in fuzzy slippers, secretly thankful that everyone has taken today off and I can rest my feet.
Don’t get me wrong, I love love love heels. I am that girl who, despite being about 5’6, only buys “long” pants because I know I will never wear them with flats. I’m the girl who you are shocked to discover is actually shorter than you when she goes out in flip flops one night. And I’m the girl whose shoes you always want to try on.
But here’s the thing – high heels are not as comfortable as flip flops. (Or flats, I assume. I have legitimately never owned a pair of flats so I cannot testify to the veracity of this statement.) And they’re not exactly conducive to lawyering, especially trial lawyering. You can’t run in them – so no running between sessions on a busy morning in court. You can’t stealthily get anywhere – so no sneaking into the courtroom late. And they kind of hurt after standing all day – so… no standing all day.
And yet, we continue to wear them. Day after day, rolled ankle after rolled ankle, dozens of different shoe options for all those boring skirt suits. And we continue to judge – how many times have you secretly promised yourself you’ll never become one of those commuting ladies who wears sneakers to work and changes into shoes?
Why? What is the deal here?
Turns out high heels have been around forever. Like before Christ, forever. In 3500 BCE the first precursors of heels were discovered in Egyptian tombs and on murals. Then in 200 BCE. platform sandals with high wood or cork soles become pretty popular among Roman actors.
Lets jump way ahead to 1500 – Catherine de Medici is credited with the invention of high heels as a fashion statement when she wears two inch heels to make herself appear taller next to her husband Henry II. Heels disappear for a while here, mostly because during the French Revolution Napoleon bans them. Historians claim it was in an attempt to show equality since heels were associated with the rich, but wasn’t Napoleon really short?
In the 1860′s high heels make a comeback and are popular from that point on. Once mass-manufacturing is possible, high heel sales skyrocket. In the 1950′s Christian Dior and Roger Vivier invent the stiletto heel – which actually loses favor in the 60′s because of criticism by 2nd wave feminists.
Then, prompted by the 70′s and platform boots for both sexes, stilettos start to regain prominence in the 80′s and 90′s. The feminism and high heel argument is discarded in favor of women’s claims that they wear high heels for themselves and not for men.
And now here we are. I’m currently internet stalking these shoes while simultaneously pondering whether my decision to wear heels has turned back into society’s decision. Because sometimes, even though my feet hurt, I put on heels because there’s this pressure that exists and sometimes, I feel like I can’t escape it.
What does that mean then?
Were second wave feminists were right about this too? Are stilettos are the Western equivalent of Chinese foot-binding? Do they represent a view of womanhood as decorative, constricted, controlled, hypersexualized and enslaved by fashion?
Or are post-feminists right? Are designer shoes a symbol of power and liberation for women? Do they continue to be a feminist hot-spot? (Check out this recent “feminist” high heel!) Well, what do you think?
Bonus points if you can finish the sentence in the title of this blog.
Halloween is fast appoaching! There are so many things I love about Halloween:
Watching Hocus Pocus
Going to haunted places
Judging people for eating candy corn
Dogs in costumes
But there is one thing I HATE about Halloween… and that’s coming up with a costume for myself.
You see, I am friends with really creative people. For past Halloween celebrations, we’ve had some awesome topical and not-so topical, but still hilarious costumes including: Crazy Claire from LOST complete with cabbage patch baby, Theo Epstein, Cash Cab, and of course, Hannah Montana (my friend Hannah literally just put a Hello My Name Is… sticker on her jacket that said Montana).
Last year, I went as Pippy Longstocking and even though I loved my costume, it took me forever to come up with it. The glasses were not part of the costume…
And because I am lazy, I would really rather just buy a costume rather than to create one, but every year I run into the same dilemma. Stores only seem to sell “sexy” costumes for women.
Don’t believe me? Here’s a link to the Spirit Halloween store where I go EVERY SINGLE YEAR to try and buy a costume and fail miserably. Why? Because my options include: Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader, Harlequin Clown, Sexy Chucky, Sultry SWAT Officer, and a Sexy Scary Clown.
(Seriously? What does “sexy scary clown” even mean? Clowns are terrifying. Not sexy.)
Inevitably, I get incredibly frustrated, begin loudly lamenting that I just want to dress up as something for Halloween, not necessarily a sexy something, and then swing wildly in the other direction trying to come up with a non-sexy and super feminist costume. Like a uterus. Or Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
So in the interest of not being a sexy houseplant for Halloween, I’ve come up with some alternatives to the sexy costume standards.
Lindsay Lohan and Amanda Bynes – Roommate is a blonde, so this would work perfectly. We’ll both make cardboard cars to “ride” around in all night and get wasted.
Ruth Bader Ginsberg – when I get drunk, I make people listen to my ridiculous SCOTUS analysis for civil rights issues anyway, why not wear a black robe and pretend I’m doing it to be funny?
Suri Cruise – Black wig, impossibly perfect outfit, sour look on face. Will offer continuous judgment of others a la Suri’s Burn Book throughout the night.
Jesus’s Wife – period clothing, papyrus referencing my existence, hourly jokes about how tough it is to deal with my father in law.
Picnic Table – this was my favorite costume as a kid, so I might have to bring it back. This time, the food will be real. Nom nom nom.
This is all I’ve got for now and I’m actually kind of excited about all of these costumes. Now I just have to get started making one of them. Good thing I’ve got a month!
What are your suggestions? What are you going to be for Halloween? And I suppose since I brought it up, WHY ARE WOMEN REQUIRED TO BE SEXY THINGS FOR HALLOWEEN?!
I’m great, in case you were wondering. And not just because I get to make a reference to my favorite Russian boy-band, Hands Up. I’m pretty happy because the lovely ladies of Pussy Riot, a Russian feminist punk band have finally gotten their day in court.
Pussy Riot – in full costume
In February, members of the band staged a protest at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, an Orthodox cathedral in Moscow, protesting Vladimir Putin as a presidential candidate. The video below intermixes footage of the protest with the band’s public prayer “The Virgin, Putin Banish”.
Lyrics to the song are fearless:
“Black robe, golden shoulder straps- all of the parishioners crawl to bow. The ghost of liberty is in heaven while the gay pride is sent to Siberia in shackles. The head of the KGB, their main saint, brings protestors to prison under an escort. So that their main saint will not be offended, women must give birth and love. Virgin Mary, mother of God, become a feminist. Virgin Mary, mother of God, banish Putin.”
And precisely because of that fearlessness, members of Pussy Riot have been imprisoned since February. Three women were arrested and charged with hooliganism committed for the motives of political, ideological, racial, national, or religious hatred or enmity or for the motives of hatred or enmity towards any social group under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. (Part 2, Article 213).
As a crime, hooliganism was introduced into the criminal code in Soviet Russia and has since been modified, most recently to break down hooliganism into two separate crimes: 1.) hooliganism aggravated by the use of weapons, 2.) hooliganism aggravated by a special motive.
It is in this second crime that the government has a wide discretion to arrest and prosecute. There are two factors that must be taken into consideration: gross violation of public order and a clear disprespect towards the society. These factors are left undefined, but legal scholars have suggested several options, none of which have been formally accepted into Russian law.
In this case, the three members of Pussy Riot are being prosecuted under the second prong – “special motive” because the protest occurred in Moscow’s main Orthodox cathedral, and that “special motive” is against the Russian Orthodox Church. It is worth noting that the Orthodox Church has publicly supported Putin as a political candidate.
It is here, in the tricky tangle of Church and State, that the members of Pussy Riot find themselves – imprisoned for months, awaiting trial for protesting, under laws that many Russians are protesting.
You see, these women are facing up to 7 years in jail under the crime of hooliganism. The Church, whose very tenets include forgiveness and compassion, has been the driving force in the arrest and prosecution of Pussy Riot. And the members of Pussy Riot, whose protest movement occurred in Moscow’s main cathedral, are arguing that the protest was against Putin, not the Church. And Putin? Well he’s declined to give a comment on the case, but Prime Minister Medvedev has indicated that if this protest had happened elsewhere, members of Pussy Riot would face harsher punishment.
Russian citizens are divided are in their feelings towards the trial. In her testimony on Tuesday, a witness, Lyobov Sokologorskaya, described the satanic nature of Pussy Riot’s protest and testified that the protest has had lasting effects: “I experienced bitterness and pain and feel it to this day, It all looked like devilish skipping. They raised their legs and everything that was below their waists was visible. And that on the ambo, in front of the heavenly gates”.
Others reject this argument and are concerned with the response of the courts, indicating that Putin’s presidency will strengthen the relationship between Church and State and weaken the ability of citizens to speak out. In his Op-Ed piece in the Moscow Times, Georgy Bovy writes: “In many respects, the state’s crackdown on Pussy Riot is meant to send a strong signal to the nationalists in Russia. This strategy is driven by a belief among Putin’s ruling elite that the Soviet Union collapsed because leaders were unable to cope with a rising nationalist mood in the country. Accordingly, ethnic and religious conflict is considered the worst threat facing Russia today. This explains why Putin reacted with such speed and decisiveness to the nationalist riots in Manezh Square two years ago. In his view, nationalist and religious radicalism are interconnected, and he will use harsh measures to nip them in the bud.”
It certainly is a tangled situation, but the message being given to Russian citizens is clear: protesting the government and/or the Church will not be tolerated, especially if you are a woman.
What are your thoughts on the Pussy Riot trial? The protest? The length of the potential sentence? Has Russian gone too far in preventing freedom of speech?
With the Olympic games fast approaching, there’s been a lot of chatter about the games, the teams, and even the most sought-after swag by the Olympians themselves.
Did you know that Cuban gear is the most sought-after? Apparently, it is because the Cuban athletes are often surrounded by guards and don’t get to mingle as much with the other Olympians so there is less of an opportunity to trade swag. Also, I guess their gear is pretty cool and retro-looking. I heard this from an anonymous Olympian on NPR this morning, if you’re interested.
Another topic that seems to be trending in the Olympic discourse is gender testing. This year, the International Olympic Committee issued regulations for gender verification for men and women competing in the games. And this year, the so-called gender verification regulations are fairly different from in prior games.
In the past, sex examination efforts instated by the Olympic Committee have been humiliating and crude. Initial attempts included a sort of naked parade of female athletes before a bunch of doctors and direct gynecological exams. In the 1968 Olympic games in Grenoble, the standard for gender verification became a buccal smear for sex chromosomes and this lasted until the 1990′s.
Using a chromosomal inquiry prevented female athletes who did not possess XX chromosomes from competing in the Olympic games. This testing method would bar female athletes whose internal and external morphologic sex appeared female, but whose chromosomes contained an ambiguity. Many women who disqualified under this chromosomal testing had variations of androgen resistance, like Maria Patino the Spanish hurdler who was disqualified for her androgen resistance.
Testing solely for the presence of XX or XY chromatin proved to be an unreliable test for gender because, as is generally accepted, gender is determined by a multitude of factors. Like Maria Patino, an athlete could have the internal and external sex organs of a female, the secondary sexual characteristics of a female (breasts) but have a hormonal condition that would cause disqualification under the test.
Throughout the 1970′s, 80′s and 90′s, concerns over chromosomal testing to determine gender were voiced repeatedly. In response to these concerns, the International Olympic Committee instituted a more in-depth inquiry, utilizing DNA-based methods to detect Y chromosomal material. This method was used from the 1992 games through 1999, when the International Olympic Committee’s Executive Board decided to discontinue the practice.
Then, in 2009 the International Association of Athletics Federations requested that South African runner, Caster Semenya undergo a gender test after her win. The IAAF stated that the motivation for the test was to determine whether Semenya had a “rare medical condition giving her an unfair competitive advantage.” The results of the test were not released to the public and Semenya reached an agreement with the IAAF to keep her medal from the Beijing games and her prize money.
Perhaps due in part to the great controversy drawn in connection with Caster Semenya, the International Olympic Committee has issued regulations to “identify circumstances in which a particular athlete will not be eligible (by reason of hormonal characteristics) to participate in the 2012 OG Competitions in the female category.
The regulations call for an expert panel made up of an endocrinologist, a gynecologist, and a genetic expert to review cases of suspected female hyperandrogenism to determine whether the condition exists and whether it provides the athlete with an unfair competitive advantage. If the panel determines that the athlete has an unfair advantage as a result of “male-level” testosterone from female hyperandrogenism, the athlete will not be able to compete as a female, but may compete as a male provided she qualifies in the athletic category.
These regulations differ from previous gender verification tests in several ways:
Not all females are required to undergo testing
Only certain persons/entities can file a formal request for testing for female athletes
The regulations make clear that the test does not determine sex or gender.
This is an interesting way for the IOC and the IAAF to get around “gender verification” and it kinda, sorta feels like the regulations were crafted with an eye to American constitutional law. To me, it feels like the crafters of these regulations knew they were creating rules that discriminated against women, so in order to address an unfair competitive advantage, they drafted the rules pretty narrowly.
What do you think? Should the IOC have gender verification for all athletes? Should the IOC have testing for female hyperandrogenism? What is the broader message here about male and female athletes? About male and female bodies?
(Oh, and OMGOMGOMG how excited are you for the Olympics?!)
Yup, that’s exactly what it looks like - a wooden iron and ironing board made for a child. And I loved it. I would spend hours ironing my father’s handkerchiefs, singing songs about being some sort of Cinderella or washerwoman, and imagining that I was a character in a fairytale.
Today, my real-life adult ironing board and iron is shoved into the closet with my washer/dryer and in the last year I have been more apt to throw my clothes into the dryer to get wrinkles out than to iron.
But, that’s not to say that the gendered rearing of children doesn’t have an effect on how we do gender as we age. In fact, how we play as kids is an important contributor to how we develop cognitively. We know that gendered toys have long-term consequences for our later cognitive and social development and because of these consequences, the media and the family (as institutions) reinforce gendered play consistently.
Girls play with toys designed to foster nurturing and motherly role-play, while boys play with toys designed to foster activity and manipulative play. Gender stereotyped toys reinforce gender roles through these stereotyped activities and roleplay.
So does that mean that all girls have to grow up to be princesses or mothers or shop-til-you-droppers? (I’m reaching into my murky memory for childhood toys and games and I keep thinking of Mall Madness, forgive me.) Or that all boys have to grow up to soldiers or train engineers or ninjas?
Clearly not. But that doesn’t mean the marketing for gendered toys isn’t out there. Check out this little girls awesome rant about gendered marketing.
The thing is, though, that even though me and this little girl know that all this marketing gender roles stuff is bs, it’s still out there. And it’s kind of tough for us not to give in. I mean, Riley’s giving this rant while carrying a baby doll and I’m writing this blog while wearing high heels and a push up bra (I also have clothing on, don’t be alarmed). Clearly both of us have given in to gender roles a little bit.
Is that from how we play as children?
For me, the answer is yes. Every time I put on a pair of heels, I remember back to those tiny Barbie high heels. Every time I put on a pair of flats, I think of poor Skipper and her flat feet.
“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance” — Title IX
Every semester I suggest Title IX as a possible research paper topic for my Gender and Society class. My students have come to age during a time where the passage of laws like Title IX feel like ancient history to them. Many of my students have had the good fortune to be born into white, upper middle class families and for them, inequality is something that is rarely felt.
And yet, every year a group of students chooses to examine Title IX and at the end of the semester presents lots of interesting and compelling information dealing with the history of the legislation and it’s impact today.
There are commonalities in the presentations:
Female athletes often discuss the positive impact of Title IX at our school – the funding for their teams, the financial support offered to them for good grades and athletic prowess, and the positive message sent that all sports are equal. (Well, except for hockey. We have a really outstanding male hockey team.)
Female students in science and engineering fields generally talk about the expanded opportunities for female studies in the STEM majors – the outreach in high school for female scholars, the opportunities available at the college level, and the mentoring circles that have developed for girls in STEM fields.
And finally, male athletes usually take a look at gender and professional sports. With equality happening at the college level, they examine the seeming inequality at the professional level. Often, they are unable to come up with answers – why does the playing field seem to remain unequal at the professional level?
The message that most student groups convey at the end of their research is how powerful the legacy of Title IX has been.
For these students, for most students, being unaware of the law is the biggest triumph of Title IX.
By now, most of you have read and made horrified comments about the Times article Bridal Hunger Games: Losing Weight in Time for the Wedding. The article talks about Dr. Oliver R. Di Pietro’s K E Diet where dieters have a tube shoved through their nose, down their esophagus and into their intestine. The tube remains in place for 10 days and dieters are “fed” through the tube. People are paying upwards of $1,500.00 for the ultimate in diet fashion, a trendy NG tube.
Say WHAT?
I’m not going to talk about the health repercussions of such drastic dieting or about the likelihood of gaining the weight back. I won’t ramble on about how sensible eating and working up a sweat might be a better way to shed unhealthy excess weight.
Why not? Because you actually already know all of this. And, like me, you would just really rather be able to have a cheeseburger for breakfast, spinach dip for lunch, M&M’s for dinner,a bajillion “Light” beers throughout the day for hydration and look like Britney Spears in the Slave 4 U video without having to do anything particularly taxing to look that way. But, deep down you know you have to work out. And you know you have to eat some broccoli. So we won’t dwell on that.
What we will dwell on is how skewed society’s images of beauty have become and the lengths people will go to to get to them. Women’s bodies have always been an area of societal contention and over the years, as women’s lives became more complex and we watched ourselves lose control over the way we live our lives, society began to encourage women to focus on controlling their bodies. And in our consumer-driven culture, companies and the media saw how lucrative it could be to offer ways to control our bodies and how incredibly lucrative it could be to offer ideals that are impossible to achieve.
Like this lady who boasts a 20-inch waist:
Obviously, women who are insecure about their bodies are more likely to buy beauty products, new clothes, and diet aids. As a result, it is estimated that the diet industry alone makes anywhere between 40 to 100 billion (U.S.) a year selling temporary weight loss (defined as weight loss in which 90 to 95% of dieters regain the lost weight). These products don’t offer real solutions, don’t help women get healthy or into shape, and definitely don’t encourage positive body images.
A scary trickle down results. In 2003, Teen magazine reported that 35 per cent of girls 6 to 12 years old have been on at least one diet, and that 50 to 70 per cent of normal weight girls believe they are overweight. Remember the horror you felt when you read that Vogue article about the mom who put her daughter on a diet? Would you feel the same if the daughter put herself on the diet?
But we continue to sell (and buy!) quick fixes to reach unattainable goals. The demand for images of beauty and weight loss tips is so high that it pops up in the most unlikely of places. Take Pinterest, for example, the online pin board used to bookmark recipes and home remodeling ideas. The website recently banned images promoting self-harm after users began creating “thinspiration” boards to trigger unhealthy behaviors.
So how do we stop all of this incredibly unhealthy behavior? How do we promote healthy bodies and sound minds? How do we stop society from crafting images of beauty that are unrealistic and unattainable?
