Her Five Dollar Radio

Let's try this again...

2012-02-01T08:53:00.000-06:00

A few weeks ago, I dashed a short post about men in feminist spaces, specifically men's authority in feminist spaces. I wasn't as clear as I would have liked, but a lot of times I figure out where I stand on certain things by writing about them. I still stand by most of what I said, though: I don't think men should be given positions of authority in the feminist blogosphere. Obviously, there is no formal leadership structure in the feminist blog world, but what it comes down to influence, and those with the most privilege have the most influence.

Grace's piece for Global Comment does a really good job breaking down the latest example of a man privileged on pretty much every axis given a position of authority within the feminist blogosphere (and the aftermath after some disturbing information about his past became known):

A man of color with years of illegal drug use and the attempted murder of a woman on his record would quite possibly be in jail, and certainly not as feted as Schwyzer is by certain white feminists. It’s further doubtful that, say, a black man could have his status as feminist ally defended while blaming an ex for making him an “accidental rapist,” soft-pedaling his predatory behavior towards female students, or writing that cisgender men are aroused by ejaculating on women’s faces because it makes them feel their penises are “clean.” Indeed, it’s difficult to imagine even a man of color with no history of abusing women attaining the status Schwyzer has in feminist spaces, given that the male allies recognized and promoted in mainstream feminist outlets are overwhelmingly white.

I haven't said much about Hugo. There isn't much I can add -- aside outright condemnation -- that hasn't already been said and better than I ever could. Granted, his is an extreme example, but one positive that came from it was the questioning of men's roles in feminist spaces.

The truth? When men call themselves feminists, my suspicious are automatically raised. A lot of times "I'm a feminist" is shorthand for "I'm not an asshole." Not being an asshole should be the default and not something you get a cookie for. It's okay to ask, "Really, what have you done for women lately?"

Rewind: Jeff Buckley - Grace

2012-01-31T08:53:00.001-06:00

Going though some old cds the other day, I came across Jeff Buckley's Grace , one I'd almost forgotten I still owned and one I cannot divorce this record from my early college days lolling around between classes. It's striped hoodies and hackey-sack on the quad.

I have a well-documented love/hate relationship with everything 90s, mostly having to do with the whitewashing of nostalgia. Though not limited to the Clinton era, 90s nostalgia seems to exist in a world that begins with Nirvana and ends with Britney. I don't want to pretend Grace was the record that changed my life. It was a good debut record whose hype outlived its singer. But I'd be lying if I said he didn't have one of the best voices of an era marked with battered rasps and bored hipsters. Here's a good video that showcases his upper range.

And one of my favorites from Grace, his cover of "Lilac Wine."

Mansplaining, Privilege and Aging Rock Critics

2012-01-30T08:57:00.000-06:00

Last.fm

(link via Sick Mouthy)

Critic Chuck Klosterman has plenty of opinions on tUnE-yArDs' album, w h o k i l l, which topped the Pazz and Jop poll, despite not listening to it prior to the poll's results, and admittedly knowing very little about its progenitor, Merrill Garbus. The Guardian's Charlotte Richardson Andrews writes:

You could say Chuck Klosterman "mansplained" Tune-Yards on Wednesday, when he wrote in Grantland about her second album, Whokill, topping the Village Voice's annual Pazz and Jop poll of pop writers. Mansplaining is the phenomenon of a man explaining a subject to a woman, despite her being the one with the relevant knowlege and experience. Although Klosterman admitted to having "no idea what these songs are supposed to be about", he flippantly labelled Merrill Garbus as an "androgynous American woman … I get the sense that asexuality is part of her hippie aesthetic". This kind of clumsy conjecture is a major disservice to an artist who queers indie in a way this privileged male writer clearly has no language for. That Klosterman could overlook the bold, politically charged sexuality bursting our of Whokill is astounding.

Or maybe he's just turning into the Andy Rooney of rock criticism.

Sydney Brownstone for The L Magazine, I think, made one of the best observations, pointing to Klosterman's privilege as part of the "old guard" of rock critics:

In some ways, this could be because Chuck Klosterman represents a slightly older guard of music critics, the ones stuck firmly in a mostly male-dominated High Fidelity kind of indie-verse. Maura Johnston, music editor of the Village Voice, rightly labeled his position on Garbus as “Old Man Yells At Cloud That He Seems To Find Gender-Ambiguous ,” but Klosterman's piece seems more deliberately irresponsible and misleading than that. Perhaps, “Old Man Attempts to Discredit Artist Who Challenges Gender Binary by Calling Her ‘Asexual' ” would be more apt. Thing is, it's been over a decade since High Fidelity came out. Indie rock is no longer fairly represented by the slightly greasy, slightly antisocial Rob Gordons of the world. Time to get with the times, Mr. Klosterman.

I can't help but feel a sense of schadenfreude at this mini-takedown. For years Klosterman's work has relied on an outdated gender essentialism that shuts out anyone who isn't like him: the quintessential white, middle-class, male rock fan. If that accusation seems a little harsh, in his book, Fargo Rock City, he wrote: "I am a little uncomfortable making these statements [about male and female music fans] because -- as I said before -- it seems to indicate that guys somehow like music "better" than women. it suggests that a male listener can appreciate the visceral sound of a Van Halen record, but he can hold a high-minded discussion about why it's aesthetically superior, Meanwhile, a female can only sustain some kind of mindless fleeting obsession [...] that has no regard for intellect or taste. It preys upon the classic stereotype that men are more fundamentally analytical and women are more fundamentally emotional. All of which is true."

Even though it was written tongue-firmly-implanted-in-cheek, that attitude is pretty pervasive among critics and fans as well, although it doesn't directly have anything to do with this recent piece But to be honest, I'm still unsure what his greatest crime is: being flummoxed by an artist not so easily categorized or plain ol' journalistic laziness?

Indie and Authenticity: Yes, Another Lana Del Rey Post

2012-01-29T08:31:00.001-06:00

Sasha Frere Jones has a great piece about Lana Del Rey and her long-awaited album, Born To Die, in the New York Times this week. I think he makes some pretty salient points about indie music, authenticity, and marketing, and why so many people continue to feel "duped" by this woman:

"The weirder strain of criticism concerns authenticity. People seem to feel that Del Rey is trying to trick us, though it’s impossible to figure out exactly what that trick would be, as we are dealing with an entertainer and her audience, not a naturally fractious relationship. Detractors cite a variety of presumed conspiracies, some involving the influence of her father, Rob Grant, who is a successful Internet entrepreneur; the rumor of manipulative managers guiding her; the reality of professional songwriters working with her; the question of who paid for the cartoons and the paparazzi footage of the actress Paz de la Huerta that appear in the “Video Games” clip; and how Grant’s top lip got so big so fast. (Grant says she’s undergone no surgical procedures.) Surely no equivalent male star would be subject to the same level of examination." (bolded by me)

This is what I find so frustrating about her critics. Not that I think any artist is above criticism, or that summarily denouncing a female artist is bad for the sisterhood or something, but because I can't think of an example where a male performer has had to undergo the same kind of scrutiny or had his authenticity questioned. There are a handful of stars who still managed to maintain some shred of "realness" while basically transforming into a cartoon character. I'm 150-years-old remember? Let's say Marilyn Manson -- or hell, Alice Cooper. (Or Bowie, mentioned here .) Granted, comparing the two is like comparing apples to... a tire fire, but women's authenticity so often comes under review that it's almost a given.

Further Reading:
Why Do You Hate Lana Del Rey? I Do Not Know Why I Hate Lana Del Rey (Jezebel)

The Benefits (and Disadvantages) of Using an Online Pseudonym

2012-01-28T08:30:00.000-06:00

Question Mark by Marco Bellucci on Flickr

Reading the responses to Twisty's question , "Do you ever use a dudely nom de blog when you flit about the matrix?" I'm a little disheartened, I'm not at all shocked.

During my inchoate blog years, I always went by a gender-neutral user name. Not because I thought entering online discussion would be easier if I were a man, but because that's what I assumed one did: it was terribly uncool to blog under one's own name, or so I thought. I usually went with some obscure passage from a book, or lyrics from a song (again with the coolness factor), but often I lazily used my initials. And I was always guessed to be male. Because male is the default human.

As I moved into mostly female spaces, I started using my own name, or some version of it. I try to be as transparent as possible without sacrificing my own safety. Granted, I have a ridiculously common, but unmistakably feminine, first name. Outside of feminist circles, I would probably go back to something less likely to mark me as "woman. talking."

If this sounds a little panicked, think of someone like Kathy Sierra, who dared to be a female tech blogger and faced hate mail and death threats. Transparency is admirable, but with the vitriol leveled at female bloggers in particular, I'd never underestimate the value of a good pseudonym.

One question that was raised in the blog I linked to that I hadn't given much though although I blog under my real name now: are bloggers who use their real names less likely to delve deeply into big, important topics for fear of reprisal? Are pseudonymous bloggers more likely to personal details? I think the answer is pretty obvious. As someone who's been online long enough to remember Usenet, I can say with certainty it feels no better being called a "bitch" when you're Kathy than when you're pixiegrrrl73, but I know I've said enough under my real name that I could probably never run for office either. My personal life and my family is off-limits, though I was never good at diary-type blogging in the first place. The truth is, I no more apprehensive using my own name than a made-up one, but I tend to stay away from the dudliest of online spaces.

Links & Bits: 1/27/12

2012-01-27T08:54:00.000-06:00

SaraB from Persephone Magazine asks who gets to to call oneself an artist.

Arwyn from Raising My Boychick explores the "healthy food" myth.

xoJane's ohall writes about her conversion to Islam.

Anurag Lahiri talks about desi women on primetime TV.

Cynthia Nixon Says Being Gay Is "Her" Choice

2012-01-25T09:14:00.001-06:00

InStyle

I'm not sure what Jezebel was thinking with the misleading headline "Cynthia Nixon Says Being Gay 'Is a Choice.'" Were they trying to be controversial, or are they just that careless?

What Nixon said in an interview with The New York Times , which was accurately quoted in the Jez article -- confusing headline aside -- was that being gay is HER choice, and no one gets to define HER sexuality:

I gave a speech recently, an empowerment speech to a gay audience, and it included the line "I've been straight and I've been gay, and gay is better.'" And they tried to get me to change it, because they said it implies that homosexuality can be a choice. And for me, it is a choice. I understand that for many people it's not, but for me it's a choice, and you don't get to define my gayness for me. (bolded by me)

I'm glad to see a nuanced discussion of sexuality -- no matter how clumsily stated its impetus might be -- but ultimately disappointed at the number of commenters (here and here too) who insist Nixon must be bisexual, closeted in her former relationships with men, or that she's a "fake" lesbian. I get that the "born this way" argument is the best leverage the LGBT community has against bigotry, but it also erases the identities of people who fall somewhere outside the gay-straight-bi spectrum and leaves little room for conversations about fluidity -- particularly in women -- which is different from simply being bisexual. Lisa Diamond explains it in her book Sexual Fluidity (via Tracy Clark-Flory of Salon ):

Women’s sexuality is fundamentally more fluid than men’s, permitting greater variability in its development and expression over the life course.” Based on her research, she describes three main ways that sexual fluidity is expressed: “nonexclusivity in attractions” (i.e., the capacity to find all genders sexually attractive), “changes in attractions” (i.e., suddenly becoming romantically involved with a woman after a lifetime dating men) and the capacity to become attracted to ‘the person and not the gender’” (i.e., a partner’s sex is irrelevant).

But I really like Dorothy Snarker's analogy :

I tend to look at the LGBT community as a big umbrella of sexual otherness. And I don’t care if you like to stand directly in the center of the umbrella or on the outskirts so your shoulder gets wet – as long as you’re happy and proud to be under the umbrella with the rest of us I’m happy to have you there.

Overall, it's probably a good thing this happened, though the heat that Nixon is getting from the LGBT community is a little uncalled for. Maybe we're just not ready for nuanced discussions about sexual identity.

Earworm of the Day: Lucinda Williams - World Without Tears

2012-01-24T08:58:00.000-06:00

I wrote about World Without Tears, the album, once already, and anyone who reads this site on a semi-regular basis knows it's very Lucinda-friendly in here. I like to say that during the 90s, when every other girl had a Liz Phair or a Courtney Love, I had a Lucinda Williams. "World Without Tears" was actually released in 2003, and is still one of my favorite songs from the 00s, though it's overshadowed by some of her other releases like Car Wheels on a Gravel Road, which nabbed her a grammy for best contemporary folk album. WWT is still up there with her best, and this version of the title song is lovely.

Although she's generally labeled a contemporary singer-songwriter, her sound is heavily steeped in country. I grew up with country music, something I'm often loathe to admit when bands take their names from the antebellum south, or that country music, in general, is thought to be the domain of the mudflaps-and-confederate-flag crowd. (There's some underlying classism in those assumptions, too, which I've already explored quite a while back.) Lucinda made it okay to like country music.

Some Thoughts on Complacency and Silence

2012-01-23T09:04:00.001-06:00

It feels weirdly hypocritical to write about not participating in blog discussions, when I actually did leave a fairly lengthy comment on the one from which this quote was taken:

"When I look at my blog stats, I notice that the vast majority of people who read don’t comment, and it just always leaves me wondering what they get out of it or how, if at all, it affects them."

fannie from Alas, a Blog

If I'm unfamiliar with what's being discussed, I don't comment. That doesn't mean I don't get anything out of reading blogs. To the contrary, I get quite a bit, especially when I don't have other resources. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone here. Also I'm bad at expressing anger effectively online, and I don't want that to come across as complacency, though not responding at all, I guess, is pretty complacent. Only recently have I begun to consider that being able to walk away from a discussion is a form of privilege. This, from La Lubu, was pretty eye-opening: "The power to ignore others is a very effective means for shutting them down."

Granted being a small-time blogger with an audience you can count one hand is a lot different than being an editor of a big-time blog with a large and diverse community, and ignoring your readers when they saying "Hey, something isn't right here," or "I feel threatened/silenced/ignored" is far, far different from being a reader who opts of active participation, but does it, at some point, become disingenuous?

I think I'm still figuring out -- at least within the activist blog world -- when I should and shouldn't talk. A few months ago, a blogger I respect was taking crap from a commentariat unwilling to listen. I wanted to jump in, but I didn't want it to look like I was "coming to her rescue." I hate when people -- especially those privileged on axes I'm not -- "defend" me. My voice is pretty insignificant. And I don't say that in a self-defeating way, it's just the truth and a sad reality even in spaces that are supposed to be progressive.

Club Kids on Daytime Television (90s Redux)

2012-01-22T08:32:00.000-06:00

I'm pretty sure I stayed home that day, not necessarily to watch this, but a fun surprise considering I was the most boring school-skipper every, staying home to watch daytime TV.

Michael Alig, James St. James, Amanda Lapore, Leigh Bowry, and Ernie Glam on the Joan Rivers Show, early 90s.

Etta James, R.I.P.

2012-01-21T08:36:00.000-06:00

Soul singer Etta James died yesterday from complications from Leukemia. She was 73-years-old. From the New York Times:

Ms. James was not easy to pigeonhole. She is most often referred to as a rhythm and blues singer, and that is how she made her name in the 1950s with records like “Good Rockin’ Daddy.” She is in both the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and the Blues Hall of Fame. [...] Regardless of how she was categorized, she was admired. Expressing a common sentiment, Jon Pareles of The New York Times wrote in 1990 that she had “one of the great voices in American popular music, with a huge range, a multiplicity of tones and vast reserves of volume.”

Links & Bits: 1/19/12

2012-01-20T08:56:00.000-06:00

The Pazz and Jop results are in. Adele, Beyonce and Nicki Minaj round out the top three singles of the year.

Natalie Dzerins from The F-Word introduces you to some current female-fronted punk bands.

Latoya Peterson explores the "shit people say" meme,

Shelving: Blue Nights

2012-01-19T08:52:00.000-06:00

It might sound presumptuous, but Joan Didion was the sole reason I got into writing, specifically her essay "On Keeping a Notebook." Writers on writing can be vainglorious, peering into their own navels a little too much, but she wrote so beautifully and sparsely about the craft of writing -- the prickly little bits that are often unglamourous -- that it chipped away some of those grand notions I'd previously had about writing. And I'm forever grateful for it.

In the spate of a few years, Didion lost both her husband and her only daughter, Quintana Roo. The Year of Magical Thinking, which was published in 2006, was written about her husband, John Gregory Dunne's sudden death, and Blue Nights is a companion piece of sorts about her daughter's. I hesitate to call this a eulogy, since she leaves so many questions unanswered (more about that later). In the elegantly spare prose she is famous for, memories of her daughter are interspersed with musings on aging and Didion's own mortality . It's not so much about loss as it is haunted by it.

How Quintana actually died is something of a mystery. All we're really given is that she'd been hospitalized with a long illness, and it's caused some controversy:

Everyone's clear that she died. But was it pneumonia, septicemia, a virus, an infection, a viral infection, a cerebral hemorrhage, or acute pancreatitis? A certain amount of confusion is probably inevitable: Quintana was ill for nine months, and was hospitalized numerous times for various conditions, from which complications then arose. And the book is a memoir, not a medical play-by-play. But Didion doesn't help matters by being herself extremely vague. The words "acute pancreatitis" do not appear in Blue Nights. Neither does "pancreatitis" alone. Nor does "septicemia," "septic," or "sepsis." There are no search results for "pneumonia." The words "cerebral hemorrhage" do appear, once — in reference not to Quintana, but to Didion's grandmother, who died of one at age 75. (source)

In the end, I don't think it matters much that Didion isn't being as transparent as some would like. It doesn't take away from the beauty of the book which, first and foremost, was written by a grieving mother. I don't think she "owes" it to the reader to spill her guts when she is clearly still processing her daughter's death.

On Lana Del Rey's Now Infamous SNL Performance

2012-01-18T08:56:00.001-06:00

I don't usually follow internet phenoms, but if Lana Del Rey's name has been unavoidable the past few months, her performance on Saturday Night Live made her infamous.

I'm not going to lie. It was... not good. I don't think it was the worst SNL performance ever (if anything, it reminded me of Marianne Faithfull's narcoleptic Saturday Night Live appearance more than thirty years ago), but critics really want it to be THE WORST.

I think lookuplookup had one of the most nuanced takes on the whole mess, and especially the aftermath:

[...] the whole critical gaze on Lana is much heavier than it would be if she were a straight-up pop singer and I agree. It’s interesting to me that people who are usually so into “real women don’t have to be” rhetoric (WHICH IS GARBAGE ANYWAY) are really eager to police someone like Lana Del Rey & critique her for being “inauthentic” (which, like that even means anything, like being “authentic” is some category that you just get to assign to someone’s art/performance/public persona/whatever.)

Lana Del Rey has been marketed as a singer-songwriter replete with highly stylized videos and a "gangster Nancy Sinatra" image (I didn't make that up, I swear). As in all things indie, a term that''s been divorced from its original meaning for at least a decade now, she's supposed to be genuine, "the real thing," and possess "real talent." And I'm not saying she doesn't have those things even if her image is heavily manufactured -- these things aren't as mutually exclusive as some music fans would like to believe -- but I think her lackluster performance says more about pushing artists into the spotlight before they're ready, and that making a pretty good youtube video doesn't mean it can be reproduced at will. The sheen simply wore off and what we're left with is a young artist not yet ready for prime time.

That women in the music industry are under more scrutiny than men is a given. Because I am approximately 150-years-old, and having this reference at my disposal, I'm also reminded of the Replacements SNL performance in 1986, which was pretty stinky as well. Now I am a huge fan of the Replacements, but with enough historical distance, it's become part of the band's legendary pathos. I still don't image a female artists being granted the same. (See Marianne Faithfull.)

Bad Feminist(s)

2012-01-17T09:01:00.002-06:00

Although this was written tongue firmly in cheek, but gleefully labeling yourself a "bad feminist " because you indulge in certain problematic behaviors -- without really examining why they're considered problematic -- annoys me to no end. But using feminism as something to lord over other women annoys me too.

I do believe in feminism as an ideology, but it's impossible to be ideologically perfect. Does that mean we're all bad feminists? I don't know. I'm not sure I even know what that word means anymore. Supporting anti-choice legislation is bad for women, but the kind of cheeky "I shave my legs and wear makeup" gender essentialism only makes one a bad feminist if you think those things are of lesser value than watching football and playing video games.

Lately I just feel like I'm too old for the brand of feminism advertised by the ladyblogs. I've said this before, but that there now seems to be two different camps at war with each other -- liberal, sex-pozzie feminists, and their older, more radical counterparts -- makes me want to eschew the label altogether The younger, progressive feminists are incapable of looking at their actions within a larger social context, and the older radfems are out-of-touch and inherently transphobic? Can I get some nuance here?

Shelving: The Revolution Starts at Home

2012-01-16T08:52:00.000-06:00

Ms. Magazine

The Revolution Starts at Home, edited by Ching-In Chen, Jai Dulani and Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha, takes a much-needed and unexplored look at domestic violence that exists within activist communities. The resources included are invaluable as is the detailed information on transformative justice and accountability that doesn't require a christian framework.

The latter is extremely important: I'm not a christian, but stories of redemption are so tightly woven into US culture they're inescapable , even within progressive communities that have "done the work." It's also pretty timely given the rash of posts on accountability. In the preface, Andrea Smith writes:

What we see in this book is the work of many groups doing precisely that. they do not seek a band-aid, quick fix approach to ending gender violence. Instead they seek to end structures of violence. Their models are experimentations in trying to do more than just crisis intervention, and are easily structured around creating the society we would like to live in.

Reading through the first-person accounts interspersed with practical advice, I can't help but wonder how transformative justice could work in society at large, outside activist circles where distrust of traditional systems of justice is understood and frequently dissected.

Earworm of the Day: Pete Shelley - Homosapien

2012-01-15T08:37:00.000-06:00

In the pre-YouTube 90s, CD comps were a relatively cheap way to sample lots of music one wouldn't hear otherwise lacking a good college or community radio station. Rhino put out some of the best punk and post-punk comps of the decade. Just as alternative rock was becoming less and less "alternative, the hunger for underground music increased and Rhino stepped up to the plate with their DIY series. I think I still have one, somewhere, featuring Pete Shelley's "Homosapien," which isn't all that rare or unheard, at least in its day, but did manage to get banned from British radio for "explicit references to gay sex." (source ) Shelley was one of punks first openly bisexual stars, though his sexuality was only hinted at in his Buzzcocks singles.

Outing Someone Is Never Cool

2012-01-14T08:42:00.000-06:00

Even if that someone is a celebrity who's sexuality has been the source of gossip for years it's still not cool:

[...] singer/DJ Syd the Kid [of Odd Future], in an interview for L.A. Weekly, spoke about the sexual orientation of some of very big pop stars — like she was Wendy Williams or something — as though they were foregone conclusions rather than speculation. But let's be real: She just said what we're all thinking anyway. (source)

I may be in the minority here, but I can't think of an instance where outing someone is okay, except maybe in the case of a lawmaker who supports homophobic legislation, but outing celebrities just because you think they need to be outed smacks of ownership of someone else's sexuality.

Links & Bits: 1/13/12

2012-01-13T08:55:00.000-06:00

Renee from Womanist Musing s explains why calling someone a feminist isn't always a compliment.

Women in Jerusalem's Beit Shemesh neighborhood fight religious fanaticism with dance . (Via Becky Sharper from The Pursuit of Harpyness)

Stephanie Zvan writes about sexism in the atheist community.

If you don't like it you're too young, or the ballad of the aging rock fan

2012-01-12T08:55:00.000-06:00

The Minutemen: real punks

I spent half-a-decade on a music forum for the fans of a semi-reclusive 80s "cult" icon. I left about the time I started this blog, but I still read it because it's one of the few music blogs where the commentariat skews 35-and-up; however, every once and a while someone posts a long-winded screed on how "music just ain't the same anymore" since Gaga, Bieber, Coldplay, Beyonce, etc. sullied this whole thing up.

Please let me never become that fan. Please don't let ramble incoherently about how music "these days" is less organic, less "real" than in mine, and "these kids" listening to "this music" don't know a thing about "good music." I probably already do that, but at least I'm not so old that I don't recognize the signs.

The truth? I'm well into my thirties and most days I'd rather not listen to music made by twenty-year-olds. I think that's... okay. Healthy, even. But vilifying and entire generation or genre of music, and it's fans, isn't. And it's impossible to deny the message here: pop isn't real music. Pop music is commerce; it's disposable, ephemeral. "Real" music (that which isn't "pop" music) is raw, organic, unconcerned with image. I used to grind my teeth each time this tired old trope was rehashed. The intrinsic sexism is hard to miss, though often conveniently ignored, when you consider that pop music is thought of as the domain of women and girls, and rock music is white-guy-plus-guitar. Look at any critic's list and see who gets the accolades.

Indie's Nice Guy Problem

2012-01-11T08:54:00.000-06:00

Matt Perpetua posted this to his Tumblr the other day, and I think it's long overdue:

"I think there’s this assumption that the indie world is full of nice guys who have evolved beyond sexism, which is anything but true. I realized a long time ago that any indie-centric show I went to in NYC, any bar, whatever, was likely to have these very same anonymous commenters [on indie blogs] lurking around somewhere. It’s easy to pretend they’re not, that they’re part of someone else’s life or social circle, but these creeps are everywhere and need to be shamed."

I'm old. My club days are long over, but yeah, I know this type well: the kind of liberal-minded guy who'd never cop to sexism or misogyny because that "that's just not cool," but also wouldn't challenge lewd and anonymous blog comments.

Here's the thing: not being a misogynistic ass should be the default; you don't get a cookie simply because you're not overtly sexist. Participating in a culture that allows it without openly challenging or changing it is a large part of the problem.

Rewind: Punk Planet

2012-01-10T08:55:00.000-06:00

ZineWiki

I kind of wish I'd discovered Punk Planet earlier, when I was still slogging through back issues of Spin and Cream in an era glutted with teen junk magazines and corporate rags better suited to baby boomers than punk rock dilettantes. It debuted as a zine in 1994 and ran through 2007. Two years later its website, the place where I experienced my first taste of "online community" closed its doors. Although I did regularly read the magazine, my main exposure to Punk Planet, as subsequently the zine world, was though the website, so I'd like to focus on that.

I bought my first "real" computer belatedly, in my mid-twenties and still viewed the world through the eyes of AOL. PP was one of the first sites I found independently and I quickly latched on to its like-minded community of miscreants. The running joke was that there were no "real punks" on Punk Planet, but a lot of overeducated, underpaid twenty-somethings with too much time to kill. I never considered myself a punk and physically cringed at writing down the zine's moniker (sorry, more than a decade later I still think the name hasn't aged well), but neither did the brunt of the community. Most of the regulars were fellow music nerds of all stripes and I liked having a space to talk about music, something I rarely got in my moderately conservative, scene-free town.

As antithetical as it seems, their website was also my introduction to zine culture. I still maintain that zine aren't the great equalizer they set out to be: in the pre-internet days you had to live in a place with even a modicum of counterculture awareness and zine-making can be a colossal time-and-money suck. But PP's site led me to a world I didn't know existed, or didn't know could exist on a relatively large scale while retaining most of its street cred.

In the past few years so many great magazines have faltered: No Depression, Paste, Harp, and Venus among them. So retain an internet presence, some just went the way of the dodo. I don't want to turn this into a long-winded screed on "the death of print," but it's easy to forget a time when you couldn't just drop by a band's Facebook page or Google tour dates. And for those of us stuck in the middle of the country, independently produced magazines were indispensable. Punk Planet may have not been the hippest, nor the most underground, but it was a gateway drug for a lot of young music fans.

Carrie, Fred, and Theo -- Oh My!

2012-01-09T08:55:00.000-06:00

This video of Fred Armisen and Carrie Brownstein of Portlandia with Thao Nguyen on vocals doing a rendition of Salt n' Pepa's "Push It" is the coolest thing I've seen in a good while.

Gay icons and Gay Stereotypes

2012-01-08T08:36:00.001-06:00

Last.fm

I'm trying to find a way to tie together two posts I've been pouring over for the past two days: from xoJane Eliot Glazer's The Trouble With Gay Icons and Gawker's Brian Moylan's The Secrets Gay Men Don't Want Straight People to Know.

One of these things is not like the other: the former expresses frustration with straight "gay icons," and the latter plays with a handful of timeworn stereotypes about gay men (some straight out of 1996 -- poppers anyone?).

There's a lot about Glazer's post I was secretly cheering: I hate when celebrities refers to their LGBT fans as "their gays." It's patronizing, infantilizing and forces them into the role of cute pet or fashionable handbag -- a trendy accessory. Unfortunately some of the biggest offenders are often the staunchest allies. He says:

"But the differentiation between representation of and for gay people is a significant one. It’s a problem when entertainers seem to think that allying themselves with the gay community means that they can be excused for nominating themselves as a figurehead for “their gays,” who will be subsequently used as targeted consumers/safety audiences for one-liners about Lindsay Lohan.

This lumps us all together as shrieking gossips who apparently care what other people have to say about Lindsay Lohan. It doesn’t matter how much money you give to GLAAD if you’re targeting and marginalizing the same who pay for your DVDs (and those of them who don’t)."

I'm not entirely comfortable criticizing Moylan's Gawker post. I'm not a gay man, and it was obviously written tongue firmly in cheek. To be honest, I think it fails in the same way a lot of Gawker articles do: assuming everyone in their reading audience is young, single, fairly well-off economically, and preferably coastal, but it's really late in the game for overused stereotypes.

In praise of (sort of) girly girls

2012-01-07T08:32:00.000-06:00

Whenever I read something new about girls and "princess play" or the gendering of toys in general, I keeping coming back to this quote from Lynda Barry's One Hundred Demon's:

On my street there were a lot of girls, but girlish girls were few. Mostly we were tomboys.

That's my experience in a nutshell, and it seems to match that of loads of other women . Were we all tomboys, or do we just remember ourselves as tomboys? As much as I'm loathe to admit it, I'd put my bets on the latter.

To my credit, my childhood happened long before the advent of the whole Disney princess phenomenon. I didn't have princess aspirations; I never thought it was really an option. I wanted to be a rock star, or a talk show host (this was during the Phil Donahue/Sally Jesse Raphael era), or the completely unrealistic, a dinosaur. On "career" day I said I wanted to be a vet mostly because my best friend said the same thing. When we played dress-up, the aforementioned friend and I dressed up as hippies. I had Barbies and Hot Wheels, but the dolls definitely outnumbered the cars. The brunt of my childhood play was neither girlish or tomboyish, but had you walked into my ten-year-old bedroom, you'd absolutely think "girl's room".

As much as it pleases me to see the little girl in the video linked above rallying against the gender essentialism of the toy isle (whether she was coached or not), we shouldn't shame girls for liking Barbies, and pink and all things princess-y. Our shame ourselves for that matter.

Links & Bits: 1/6/12

2012-01-06T08:53:00.000-06:00

Racialicious gets a Tumblr.

Melissa Harris-Perry gets a show on MSNBC.

Lesley from xoJane has a problem with Tim Gunn.

The F-Word talks about influential women in punk , while Alice Bag explains punk feminism.

When the other is the reader: class bias in the liberal blogosphere

2012-01-05T08:55:00.000-06:00

I feel like I've been writing the same post over and over for the past year, but I can't seem to repeat this enough, especially when I see headlines like this one from Jezebel: When We Talk About Single Ladies, Let’s Not Forget The Working Class. When "we" talk about the working class. Um, the working class is part of that "we." It's pretty sad when class bias permeates a piece about class bias, but in liberal spaces classism is acceptable -- even encouraged.

Also, I think we need to make the distinction between the long-standing, multi-generational class oppression and the temporary kind that comes with being new to the workforce and heavy in debt with student loans. I'm not saying those things aren't important -- and as the occupy movement has show, that line is becoming thinner and thinner -- but the face of the feminist blogosphere in particular is white, middle-class and college educated.

I've largely stayed away from the discussion at hand, but I really wanted to highlight this comment from Feministe commenter Shelly:

It seems this site is a community only for educated, white, urban, coastal women in the USA and a handful of women in other countries who are similarly situated. Also they have to know feminist theory and the proper lingo. If not, their voices don’t matter.

Granted, I hit a few of these markers myself, but I’m not coastal (I live in a conservative part of the country), I’m not middle-class, and what feminist theory I have has been acquired piecemeal — as in I’ve never taken a formal women’s or gender studies course — but I’m pretty well-read. It’s not like I don’t know this stuff. and frankly, I find it a little insulting that the only way to familiarize oneself with feminist theory and the “proper” lingo is to take a class, but I think it's sometimes easy to forget that not everyone has access to the same resources. I rarely comment, not necessarily for those reasons, but that the minute I identify myself as working-class, my words will be interpreted as less than sophisticated.

So where's the solution when class bias is so deeply woven into progressive circles -- the kind of bias that says "thank goodness they aren't me?" We might not be you, but we're reading you.

Ewa Podle's Otherworldly Voice

2012-01-04T08:58:00.000-06:00

Ewa Podles is a Polish coloratura contralto with an unbelievably wide rage, capable of singing baritone as well as soprano notes.

I know youtube voice breakdowns are only as good as the person making it, but I can't stop listening to this -- just depth and richness of her lower range blows me away.

Cee-Lo changes lyrics to John Lennon's "Imagine;" misses point

2012-01-03T08:55:00.000-06:00

(link via DaisyDeadhead )

On NBC's New Years Eve show, singer Cee-Lo covering John Lennon's classic "Imagine" changed its most noted line, ""Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too" to "Nothing to kill or die for, And all religion's true." Lennon fans were not happy.

And to be honest, I'm not either. Not because I think anyone's art is so untouchable, or any one artist (even Lennon) should be held to such idolatrous standards, but because nullifies the original meaning. Cee-Lo missed the point. Injecting religion into things that specifically call-out religion's hold on society, and the problems created in its name, makes me extremely uncomfortable. Yeah, he twitter-apologized (which has since been removed), and he probably thought his intentions were good, but ugh. No.

Craftsmen and Dancing Pixies

2012-01-02T09:00:00.002-06:00

last.fm

Check out Emily Manuel's brilliant post for Tiger Beatdown, "The Ten Objectively Best Songs of 2011." When I initially read it through my newsreader, I didn't see the addendum and took it for another year-end best-of list, but something about the reviews was as little askew:

So basically, I used a lot of small cut n pastes from actual reviews – using the reviews of men for the women, and vice versa – then finessed to make them artist-appropriate. I wanted to spotlight the way that music criticism minimises women’s achievements through using ”objective” aesthetic criteria that work to privilege male artists as a whole.

The two that really stood out to me were Nicki Minaj's "Super Bass": "Minaj’s consummate craftsmanship as an artist—in image, flow and production choices—makes her nearly anachronistic among contemporary hiphop acts," and Manuel's rework of Radiohead's "Lotus Flower": "Thom Yorke is not a very talented singer, but the clear tone of his voice works well enough for his indie-electro records. Over a soundscape clever crafted by his producer, Yorke dances through the videoclip like an ethereal, beguiling pixie." When has a review ever alluded to a woman's sense of crafsmanship? Or described a man's dances moves as beguiling and pixie-like? (Though watching Yorke dance through the video for "Lotus Flower," that's pretty accurate.)

It perfectly illustrates the kind of invisible bias that's deeply woven into music criticism. Even when women have control over image, production and creating, they're still perceived as having less agency.

Happy 2012!

2012-01-01T08:31:00.000-06:00

Random Thoughts on Gender, Writing and Activism

2011-12-31T08:37:00.000-06:00

Bulleted posts are the lazy woman's blogging, but right now I have too many thoughts bouncing around neither time nor the motivation to write a proper post. However, the first thing is a pretty important one.

Reducing feminist community to binary terms like male and female when not all its members define themselves along those axes is cissexist, and I'm sorry. I should have specified cisgendered men. My original posts still stands, though with a few caveats now that I've had time to mull over it. There are a few feminist men (Jay Smooth comes to mind) whose work is invaluable, but I'm still suspicious of men who call themselves feminists without actually doing anything to break down gender stereotypes or fight for women's equality, and I surely don't think their voices should be privileged over women's, especially when the feminist blogosphere itself has a pretty contentious history with including WOC, trans women, working-class women, and anyone else who doesn't fit somewhere along the straight, white, middle-class, cis spectrum.
That being said, I'm really frustrated with discussions devolving into a competition of "My feminism is better than yours." All radfems are inherently transphobic and all sex-positive feminists are incapable of viewing their actions within a larger social context? And these are my only choices? Where's the nuance here?
I already linked to Autostraddle's pretty meaty review of Jeffrey Eugenides's book, The Marriage Plot, which has been on a lot of year-end lists. I just started reading it, and yeah, it fails the Bechdel Test miserably, but overall I am enjoying it. My biggest issue is finding some of the the secondary male characters far more relatable than the female protagonist, not because of some long-standing internalized misogyny, but because they're much better written. I had the same reaction to Jonathan Franzen's Freedom last year, another book that was as problematic as it was praised. Are most men just incapable of writing good, strong female characters?

Links & Bits: 12/30/11

2011-12-30T08:53:00.000-06:00

Rose from Autostraddle reviews Jeffrey Eugenides's new book, The Marriage Plot.

xoJane's Jessica deals with conflict by responding to hate mail.

Maia from Alas, a Blog writes about change and accountability for real.

Not so much a year-end wrap-up

2011-12-29T08:53:00.000-06:00

... as a year-end fizzle.

I feel like I've written this before -- nay, I'm sure I've written this before -- but I don't know where this blog is heading. I started out with a singular focus -- a music blog primarily about female musicians -- that sort of devolved into a generalized pop culture blog with vaguely polemic leanings. Yep, that's going on the ol' resume.

But seriously, I'm not sure what kind of blog, or even what kind of blogger I am anymore. I actually have written a few posts I'm proud of (like this one , this one , and this one ), but I know I could be better. I guess that's as much as anyone can ask for.

Earworm of the day Anna Calvi: I'll Be Your Man

2011-12-28T08:55:00.000-06:00

Regrettably, Anna Calvi has only been on my radar since the Mercury Prize announced its shortlist earlier this year. The PJ Harvey (who won the prize) comparisons were inevitable... and unfortunate. Not because I don't hear Harvey's influence, but it's such an easy "go-to" reference for music critics. I hear more Nick Cave and later-era Cohen, and her use of negative space makes me think of Tom Verlaine's guitar work.

Men in Feminist Spaces

2011-12-27T09:08:00.001-06:00

(In the spirit of disclosure, parts of this were definitely inspired by the BIG thing that happened in the feminist blog world last week. I'd rather not link to it because a) I don't want to give its subject any more traffic or publicity, and b) I truly don't have a dog in this fight, but men's roles in the feminist blogosphere is something I have been thinking about a lot lately.)

Can a man be a feminist? I'd say in most cases, no, a man cannot be a feminist as men don't benefit from feminism unless they are willing to reject the advantages that come with being a man in a society that rewards maleness, and I don't see a lot of men actually doing that. So under the circumstances, should a man have access to feminist spaces, specifically online spaces? The short answer? I don't know.

Had you asked me this a year ago, my answer would have been entirely different. I don't like telling someone what his "place" is anymore than I like being told to stay in mine, but watching this latest mess unfold, I'm not sure anymore. Without a big banner that says "Do Not Enter," you can't really prevent someone from participating in any public forum except with very draconian comment moderation, something I'm not entirely comfortable with either. And how does community happen in the first place when not all its members are in the same headspace, or have the same set of tools and vocabulary? As one commenter put it, "We’re in a weird place when we can’t accept that all participants are on different areas of the learning curve." Of course, after just writing a post arguing that it's not the community's place to educate, I feel like a complete hypocrite.

The only answer I can give is the same one for anybody entering a space created for marginalized groups, and is what I try to follow myself: their voices and experiences are privileged over yours. Educate yourself as much as you can, and by educating yourself, I mean listening to the voices of the community.

I'm writing this with great trepidation, and I'm curious what other people think. As a commenter myself I'm only a fringe-dweller, so my outsider position limits my perspective.

(Edit 1/1/12: I removed a link that was no longer active. Out of respect for the blogger's privacy, I probably shouldn't have in the first place, though at the time the link was public and I wanted to acknowledge that some of the things mentioned in this post were inspired by others.)

Is it the media's responsibility to educate?

2011-12-26T08:59:00.000-06:00

Last.fm

(TW for transphobic slurs)

When I read Lance Bass's apology for his using the slur "trannies" on Access Hollywood, and his subsequent HuffPo post (via Queerty), I was a little put off by this:

I am disappointed that the media outlets don't reach out to me, or Neil, or Kelly, when something like this happens, but instead post their headlines first, excited that it will mean that they will get more traffic and possibly even picked up by a nightly entertainment news show. I am disappointed that our community isn't ever able to come together and educate each other and educate everyone else in the process from a constructive place, always coming instead from a defensive place. No matter what I say or do now, it will look as though I am trying to spin the situation and save face, when had we worked together, we could have put up a united front and shown that we make mistakes, but that we are in fact a community that supports its own.

One of the cardinal rules of activist work is that it isn't the community's responsibility to teach. Lance Bass has access to plenty of information to why the word "tranny" is grossly unacceptable. This is transphobia 101 stuff, and yet celebrities keep making the same mistakes. Calling on the gay community to "educate" still smacks of privilege: "How do I know unless someone tells me it's wrong?"

However, the part of the community he's referring to is the media: The Advocate, Out, etc. Now to be honest, I didn't this as an "attack," but does the privilege that comes with having a platform that's wide-reaching mean the LGBT media should educate?

Patti Smith On Gender and Rock Music

2011-12-24T08:38:00.000-06:00

I found this 2002 video of Patti Smith talking about gender and performance when I was poking around on YouTube the other day. I've had issues in the past with Patti Smith's aligning herself with men and her denouncement of feminism. I do largely admire her, and her influence on music in general, which is why it's so disappointing. Saying "I don't see gender" is akin to saying "I don't see race." It's always wrought with failure.

I get that in for her generation, there really weren't many examples of women playing guitar, playing rock music, which itself was still in its, if not infancy than adolescence. For a woman wanting to gain entrance into that club, it would make sense to align oneself with men. But what she's saying here is a little simplistic -- and at the same time coming from a woman who has a great deal of agency and respect in her field, though I don't entirely disagree with her. I do wish she had acknowledged that the reason why critics and fans alike prefix women artists with, er, the prefix is that male is the default.

Yeah, maybe there are more women now playing guitar, writing their own songs, but women are generally still thought of as pop stars while men are "artists."

Links & Bits: 12/23/12

2011-12-23T09:00:00.001-06:00

Avital Norman Nathan from Bitch Magazine finds some kid appropriate, but cool-enough-for-the-adults music.

Global Comment's Emily Manuel asks "Why does the media still refer to 'Bradley" Manning? The curious silence around a transgender Hero."

Anita from Feminist Frequency lists her top ten creepy christmas songs.

Happy Whatever-You-Celebrate-Or-Not Day! This is my favorite holiday song -- yes, I have a favorite holiday song -- courtesy of the Replacements:

Writes like a...

2011-12-22T08:55:00.000-06:00

wikipedia

Years ago on some long-forgotten online message board, someone posted a link to this thing called "The Gender Genie ." You paste in a block of text and it tells you if the author is a man or a woman.

Guess what? I wrote like a dude. Every stinking time. For every blog post, journal entry, piece of half-assed fiction I submitted, the genie in its infinite wisdom predicted that "the author of piece is male." I pasted in yesterday's blog post and... I'm still a dude-writer. Critic Ellen Willis also reads as "male," at least with this quote from a thirty-year-old article about Bob Dylan. Short pieces from Dorothy Allison, Audre Lorde and Gloria Anzaldua were also guess as having been written by men.

Granted my methodology is laughably far from scientific -- I pulled a handful of quotes I'd jotted down over the past few months, and the genie claims to work best on texts with more than 500 words. My own pithy blog post clocked in at just over three-hundred words, and, yes, I know it' supposed to be just for fun. But it's kind of odd, right? Without the tools to break down the algorithm, these were the "masculine keywords" that led the genie to think my post was penned by man:

what
more
are
who
is
the
a
at
it
to

The "feminine keywords" were, if, not, be and and me, and a handful of others that didn't show up in the samples I submitted. The only logical conclusion is men's writing (according to the gender genie) is more active and less self-directed than women's. Most nonfiction save for memoir is less self-directed in the first place, so isn't this more about the words than the person writing them? Ignoring the inherent danger in assigning gender roles to something as personal as writing (and oversimplifying with keywords), isn't this just a rather obvious timeworn trope of men = active, women = passive?

When Writing and Ethics Collide

2011-12-21T09:03:00.000-06:00

I almost titled this post "Blogging Has Made Me a Shitty Writer."

For the past half-decade, the majority of my writing has been of the online variety. Don't get me wrong, I love having a platform, no matter how small, and never in my wildest dreams did I think I -- the kid who blew off every grade school writing assignment -- would be throwing my words out there for the world to see. But my writing has become invariable crappy since I started blogging.

A lot of my posts here are riffs off other posts. I make sure I cite and link everyone, but I'm starting to wonder if this "style" is a little unethical in addition to being intellectually lazy. Granted, most bloggers take inspiration from other bloggers, but some -- nay, most -- of my best work is, essential, extended riffs.

Part of the reason I do this is I often have more to say on a subject than a comment field will allow, and it's easier (and freeing) to say what I want on my own site than on someone else's, but there's also that sense of "Ooh, I wish I'd written that." Oh wait, I can write that. Or at least add to that.

There have been several well-publicized incidents of appropriation in the feminist blogosphere, that laying claim to anything is dishonorable, at best. This , however is seriously unethical. . (The discussion going on over at Aunt B.'s blog provides more insight than I can.) I'm not in academia, so I can't vouch for the legality of it, but given the problems the feminist blogosphere has had over the years routinely silencing voices that weren't part of the young, white, cis, middle-class mainstream, I'm surprised anyone who claims to be part of it would do this.

FEM 101: Not All Women Benefit from Feminism

2011-12-20T08:54:00.000-06:00

I think the title is a bit misleading, but I'm glad to see a big, mainstream site like Jezebel addressing feminism's problems of meeting the needs of all women, not just white, middle-and-upper-class ones; however, this is far from new information. Women are disproportionately poor, and feminism has always benefited already privileged women.

This is from bell hooks's book, Where We Stand: Class Matters, a full decade old. And even though she was talking about the early second-wave feminists of Friedan's era, it's as relevant today. And it's pretty disheartening:

It was not gender discrimination or sexist oppression that kept privileged women from working outside the home; it was the fact that work open to them would have been the same low-paid unskilled labor open to all women. This elite group of highly educated females stayed at the home rather than do the type of work large numbers of middle-income and working-class women were doing.

It's also disheartening to see so many commenters willing to defend feminism without looking at its history of exclusion.

Earworm of the Day: John Lennon - Happy Xmas (War is Over)

2011-12-19T08:53:00.000-06:00

I generally don't "do" Christmas songs. I don't celebrate, nor do I assume everyone reading this is a christian (or even a secular fan of yule); however, I think this song is on a lot of people's minds today.

Christopher Hitchens - R.I.P.

2011-12-18T08:49:00.000-06:00

Famously polemic essayist Christopher Hitchens died earlier this week from complications from cancer. He was 62-years-old.

To be honest, I'm not as familiar with his work as I wish I was (in a move that to me always feels like carving up the dead and serving the flesh on toast points -- that rush to consume so soon in death everything a writer has published -- I added a couple of his books to my library queue). His Vanity Fair article "Why Women Aren't Funny " was one of the first things I read as I was trying to wedge myself into the blogging community, and while I abhor gender essentialism, I wasn't particularly insulted. (Being thought of as funny is actually fairly low on my list of priorities.) Even when I disagreed with him, I couldn't deny that he was great writer.

There's been a lot written recently about liking "problematic" things, especially for those of us who pride ourselves on being aware of every single injustice. Hitchen's writing was the epitome of that: problematic. Deeply flawed and often coming from a place of utmost privilege. It's okay to acknowledge that in death as much as in life. His politics weren't perfect, and he wasn't always consistent NPR's Scott Simon says:

He called himself a Trotskyite-Marxist in the 1970s, though he seemed much funnier to me than whatever I ever imagined a Trotskyite-Marxist to be. A number of years ago, after his falling out with The Nation magazine, people stopped referring to him as liberal. A little after that, as he became outspoken about his atheism, they stopped referring to him as a conservative. By the time he died, no label applied to Christopher Hitchens. I think he worked hard to achieve that.

We often seem to treat consistency of thought as a sign of character. Politicians and pundits are applauded for repeating themselves. Observers and activists say, "Aha!" if they discover a distance between what some public figure believed five years or five months ago, and what they say today. Compromise is difficult when changing your beliefs is taken to be a moral cave-in instead of the sign of a curious, lively mind.

I spent the better part of the week reading a lot of the tributes to Hitchens, and it's as unfair (not to mention ludicrous considering he was probably the media's most visible atheist) to canonize him as it is to demonize him. His support of the war, his could-be-interpreted-as-hypocritical views of abortion, his support of women's rights when his own writing was at times misogynistic, adds to the difficulty of giving him a proper -- and appropriate -- tribute. Goodbye Hitch.

Shit Girls Say: Funny or Tired Old Stereotype

2011-12-17T08:25:00.000-06:00

I'm not overly familiar with the Shit Girls Say Twitter feed, so like a lot of bloggers I'm not really sure what to make of the first installment on YouTube.

I don't doubt that some girls say things like "Twinsies!" and "Does this make me look like a doily," but honestly very few of these are gendered beyond the inflection and mannerisms. (Men don't question whether they left the door unlocked?) I guess you could make the case that women tend to politely ask for things rather than make demands "Could you get this for me?" "Could you do me a huge favor" According to the Huffington Post's Emma Gray :

And some of the inanities Shit Girls Say considers womanspeak don’t seem very female-specific, even for that tiny sliver of the population — or very funny. Examples include: “I hope I’m not getting sick,” “I have the hiccups,” “True story” and “Are you busy tonight?” Somehow I suspect that men also get sick and make plans with their peers, and do so in pretty similar terms. What makes these innocuous sentences funny seems to be the fact that they’re framed as stereotypically feminine (read: ditzy). To make the phrases seem even more ridiculous, the web series has them articulated in a whiny, sing-songy voice by a man in drag. The whole thing feels like an elaborate, slightly sophisticated take on the dumb blond joke.

I devised a Bechdel test of sorts to see how truly gendered some of these statements are. It's a little unsophisticated, but just prefix everything in the video with "dude":

"Dude, can you do me a huge favor?"

"Dude, what's wrong with my computer?"

"Dude, I had to get up at like, six, this morning?"

"Dude, what's my password?"

Granted, most men don't say "Shut up!" or squeal when seeing someone they haven't for a long time, but neither do most women outside of bad sitcoms, and I think it's fair to say that Shit Girls Say is really poking fun at a certain kind of woman: typically a young, white, upwardly mobile one. What bothers me is not that it's inherently sexist, but that it's obvious and hedges its bets on timeworn tropes of women being scatterbrained, shrill, nagging and incompetent.

And oh yeah, dude, you totally look like a doily.

Links & Bits: 12/16/11

2011-12-16T08:52:00.000-06:00

Jorge Rivas from Colorlines on the problematic Diane Sawyer special on Native American children

Shakesville talks about the lack of women in Time's Person of the Year features.

Bitch Magazine's Gretchen Sisson on the classing of voice on America's Next Top Model

Shelving: Chuck Eddy - Rock and Roll Always Forgets

2011-12-15T08:53:00.000-06:00

"My writing and thinking about music isn't as dogmatic or hotheaded as it was 25 years ago, but it's smarter. And I'm still somehow making a living at it, long after lots of colleagues, including plenty of great ones, have packed it in. I can't explain that, though it probably helps that I've never not been a curmudgeon -- sort of like how ZZ Top didn't seem unduly old in the '80s because having beards was always their schtick." Chuck Eddy from Rock and Roll Always Forgets.

So much music criticism (nearly all of it), is white guys writing about white guys for other white guys to read, I almost didn't want to mention the new Chuck Eddy anthology, but I have to admire the sort of warts-and-all approach to editing twenty-five years of Eddy's work. Not all of it has aged well, in fact, some of artists he's written about over the years are practically encased in amber they're so specific to their era. Plus it's organized by theme rather than year, which is a tad confusing, sometimes jumping from the late 70s to the early 00s, the Spice Girls sharing space with the Village People (though that makes perfect sense, really).

Eddy's a champion of the stuff critics are supposed to hate -- disposable pop stars, one-hit rappers -- and he deconstructs a lot of the myths about music writing and music critics. His two excellent pieces on Eminem are here, as well as excerpts from his Pazz and Jop ballots. One caveat though: I found myself liking the introductory essays more than some of the originals. Overall, I think it's a good anthology, and it's not another indie-rock fantasy, which is a great thing.

But I'm biased: I like my critics on the curmudgeonly side.

Earworm of the Day: Monkees - Sweet Young Thing

2011-12-14T08:54:00.000-06:00

I have a weird relationship to 60s rock. I found the Monkees long before I'd ever heard of the Beatles via late-night reruns. This was twenty years after the fact, but the boy bands of my generation didn't quite exist yet (it would be another three years before New Kids on the Block hit the scene, and by then I was too old for 'tween bands). My first official concert was a Monkees reunion show (with Weird Al opening) minus Mike Nesmith who was clearly the brains of the outfit, and the only true songwriter.

Granted, Peter will always my sentimental favorite (and I spent far too much of my high school years pining after sweet-faced hippy boys to prove it), but Mike is my intellectual favorite, and here's one of his long-forgotten songs that never seems to show up on 60s comps or nostalgia shows.

What Is Vocal Fry?

2011-12-13T08:53:00.000-06:00

Since I know a little bit about the phenomenon known as "vocal fry" (or fry register), I thought I'd comment on the rash of articles published this week on the "trend" of young women talking with creaky, growly voices.

To clear up a few misconceptions, it's not a speech impediment. Science Now describes it as:

[...] a low, staccato vibration during speech, produced by a slow fluttering of the vocal cords (listen here). Since the 1960s, vocal fry has been recognized as the lowest of the three vocal registers, which also include falsetto and modal—the usual speaking register. Speakers creak differently according to their gender, although whether it is more common in males or females varies among languages. In American English, anecdotal reports suggest that the behavior is much more common in women. (In British English, the pattern is the opposite.) Historically, continual use of vocal fry was classified as part of a voice disorder that was believed to lead to vocal cord damage. However, in recent years, researchers have noted occasional use of the creak in speakers with normal voice quality.

The best example I can provide is Marge Simpson's exasperated creak, "Oh, Homer!"

Some people say it sounds like burping, which I guess it sort of does at its extremes. J.D. Sumner, bass singer for Elvis's backing band, used fry register to hit his lowest notes.

Depending on who you ask, it's either a terrible thing that will wreck your voice for ever, or perfectly acceptable if taught properly. (YouTube has plenty of clips -- just google vocal fry or fry register). Joanna Newsom periodically dips into fry, but the most cited example in pop singing is Britney's growly "Baby, Baby," in "Baby Hit Me One More Time."

I'm not all that familiar with vocal fry as a trend among young woman other than as a possible counterpoint to the "baby speak" of Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian. Frankly, I haven't noticed any more than usual, but I haven't set foot on a college campus in more than a decade. Frankly, I think too much has been made of women's speech just in general: our voices are too high and "shrill," therefore, our bosses do not take us seriously enough; or our voices are falsely low and gravelly, hence, manlike. We really can't win, can we?

Lupercalia's Underrated Genius

2011-12-12T08:55:00.000-06:00

I have a love/hate relationship with all things listical. I'm weirdly addicted to categorizing and cataloging the best of the best, but as the cries of "Hey, you left out my favorite (book, movie, album, insert-you-own-medium here) get louder, I tune out.

Yeah, I wasn't planning on counting down my favorite albums. For one thing, as I get older, more things fly under my radar. I'm okay with that, really. I'm okay with irrelevance in general. Plus I see nothing wrong with being a person in her late-thirties who has the taste of someone in her late thirties. The Keshas, the Katys and the Gucci Guccis mean nothing to me. However, there were a handful of good -- nay great -- records that held my short attention span for most of the year. Since it was one of my most anticipated, I'll start with Patrick Wolf's Lupercalia.

I've been pretty surprised at the lack of attention Lupercalia has gotten. Wolf's been a bit of a critic's darling in the past, but his latest record was pretty much ignored by critics and the music listening public at large. Admittedly, Patrick's music was a hard sell for me at first, and I stand by what I said earlier this year:

If you were to described Patrick Wolf's music to me -- a mix of electronic, pop, and folk paired with earnest, sometimes brutally earnest, lyrics and a predilection for the flotsam of 80s glam -- I'd say, "No thanks. I think I'll pass,"

But that's the beauty his music, Lupercalia in particular. It's redolent of the pop music I grew up with in the 80s, but without a trace of irony. In theory, I shouldn't like it. The shimmery pop/glam sound mixed with the earnest lyrics shouldn't work, but it does, perfectly.

Technical Difficulties

2011-12-11T08:27:00.000-06:00

Blogger's been a bear for me lately. I've uninstalled most of the third-party apps and defaulted back to the old-school dashboard and it seems to be moving along a little faster, but please tell me if you have a problem commenting or anything else is amiss.

Until this gets straightened out (Google is providing few answers) I'll be at Tumblr and Twitter.

Fun Feminism and the Politics of Choice

2011-12-10T08:47:00.000-06:00

I first came across the terms "fun feminism" and "choice feminism" during my inchoate blogging years, not quite part of a feminist community but clinging to the fringes of a few "cool girl" bloggers whose daily life was as much informed by politics as it was the monthly free gift codes as sephora.com.Still, it held a certain degree of derision. It wasn't until Jill's Feministe post that I saw it fully explained:

Some of the trappings and rituals of femininity bring me pleasure. That pleasure comes with strings attached, and the social benefits that I receive from acting out femininity are largely where that pleasure springs from. But, like most other human beings, I’m a rational actor, and I’m doing what makes sense for me to get by, given my circumstances. I might even like some of the things that I do to get by. For me, that means make-up and fashion and hair removal. For other women it might be sex work or stripping or marriage or stay-at-home-mothering. It doesn’t make sense for us to sit around wringing our hands about what bad, bad feminists we are for slapping on some lipgloss or taking off our clothes for money or having a big white wedding — but it also doesn’t make sense for us to try and sell these things as feminism, or to pretend that they aren’t relevant to feminist discourse.

I suggest reading the entire post and its comments though it's several old. It lays out in detail not only the problems with "choice feminism," but why regarding all that is feminine as silly and superfluous equally problematic.

The biggest problem I have with "choice feminism" is parsing feminism to fit your own personal experience without looking at the larger social context that effects those choices. Wearing lipstick and short skirts may be a "choice: and it may make one feel good but why? I wear makeup. Not much -- unobservant people would call me a non-makeup wearer -- but enough to cover the "imperfections" and make my lips and cheeks a bit more rosier than they were when I woke up? Why do I do this? Generally I'm treated better when I look "prettier" in society's eyes. Conversely, I have the choice of going barefaced, which I have on occasion. But that choice comes with the baggage of being labeled "unfeminine," "unkempt" or "unprofessional." Recently XO Jane's Jess broke it down:

But the same basic principles pertain: If there are only a handful of options available to you, then it’s damn fortunate if you like one, but that doesn’t make it OK that there aren’t more. If your favorite pastimes are dieting, getting shiny hair, and having your legs looked at, hallelujah: You will receive plenty of support in doing the things you like best. But liking your limited options doesn’t mean your choice is free. It’s still constrained -- you just happen to be lucky.

What's all-too ignored is the concept of what's feminine or acceptable is often rooted in middle-class mores, and it's damn expensive to maintain one's femininity.

Links & Bits: 12/8/11

2011-12-09T08:54:00.000-06:00

Rich's post on the America's Next Top Model All-Star controversy . I spent an inordinate amount of time yesterday reading about this, and his one of the most lucid takes on the whole mess.

s.e. smith talks about failing at NaNoWriMo -- and why it was a good thing.

Epic Jez thread: What Ridiculous Things Did Your Believe In When You Were a Kid? I'm only a part-time Jezzie these days (I think I aged out of their demographic years ago), but every once in a while they hit on something that will entertain you for an entire afternoon (or three).

Laura Nyro, Only Woman Among 2012 Rock Hall Inductees

2011-12-08T08:55:00.000-06:00

So, the dominant narrative in the music blogosphere is that both the Beastie Boys, Guns 'n' Roses, and the Red Hot Chili Peppers were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame's Class of 2012. Also inducted (belatedly -- her first record was released in the late-60s) but mostly ignored by the media was singer-songwriter, Laura Nyro, the only woman in the class of 2012.

Rock Critics and Dylan

2011-12-07T08:58:00.000-06:00

Since I've already written about Dylan before and it would be incredibly lazy to rehash the myriad reasons why I've never been able to embrace someone who's been called the greatest singer-songwriter of the past fifty years, can I just say that I heave an exasperated sigh whenever I see his name topping yet another "bests" lists?

Yes, I do in fact get it, even if I don't exactly agree. His influence is phenomenally wide-reaching to the point that there isn't a singer-songwriter today who hasn't felt it. But I also see Dylan-worship as fanboy shorthand: yes, I studied the "classics" and I have taste. My opinion has weight. About the whole "rock snobbery/superiority" thing, Village Voiced editor, Maura Johnston, had this to say on her Tumblr:

[...]if you’re liking music because you feel that it’s the right thing to like, maybe it’s time to step back and figure out your aesthetic pleasures and how they fit into those ideals. They might match exactly! They might not! But the point is, saying “I listen to Bob Marley and Led Zeppelin and therefore I am better than people who like Ke$ha because I just am” is a complete fallacy.

To be completely honest, I don't have a problem with artists being labeled canonical as much as I have a problem with who gets to decide what gets accepted into the canon. I actually really like quite a few bands dudes have been known to salivate over (watch me prattle on about the Replacements), but I fail to see how it's impossible to notice the lack of diversity here, and here.

Those are just two ready examples. I think it's interesting to note that Paste's reader's list was less "white guy-acoustic guitar" than their critics' list. And to be fair, I don't think this is an overt case of sexism that says "Well you with the pair of ovaries, put down that guitar," as much as it is the kind of covert, deeply ingrained sexism that is part and parcel of rock critic society. If Dylan (qua sincere white boy with an acoustic guitar) is the prototype, then not-Dylan is shut out.

Break It Down: Not Pretty Enough

2011-12-06T08:58:00.000-06:00

I usually try not to make these things personal, but "Not Pretty Enough" was ruined for me by a badly-sequenced mixtape from a man who turned out to be kind of a douche.
I'd never heard this song until it an online "friend" threw it on a mix for me during a holiday CD exchange. Due to circumstances I'd rather not go into, I interpreted as "See how enlightened and understanding I am of the female condition." I'm pretty sure I'm not the only woman who was "gifted"this song.

Minus the history, the song itself is fine, but even under the best circumstances, it makes me cringe slightly. Yes I know this is due to a lot of internalized misogyny and archaic ideas about how an adult woman is supposed to sing, but the childlike voice plus the pleading lyrics, "Am I not pretty enough?" makes me more than a little uncomfortable. I welcome vulnerability, but why does women's vulnerabily always have to be expressed through insecurity?

Criticism and Ostracism

2011-12-05T08:54:00.000-06:00

I was telling someone who knows little of what I write online that I don't fear criticism, but I do fear being ostracized by the community.

Maybe fear is a too strong a word. Let's just say there are a few times when I've sweated mightily over something I've written, sure I'm going to piss off the wrong person.

I don't pretend to have a huge presence within the activist blogging community. It's not what my site is primarily about, but a handful of recent posts have been born out of frustration with the SJ/feminist blogosphere and who gets to have a voice in it.

Then I go and comment on the exact same sites I criticize. (Or I bury my most contentious thoughts on Tumblr -- whichever works.) Is this hypocritical?

While all this might seem unduly paranoid, I've seen it happen, and we do have the power to ruin each other's reputations. The archival nature of the internet allows everything to be cataloged and called up at a moments notice. I cringe at some of my earlier posts some of which are chockablock of problematic language. I haven't taken them down, but I conveniently pretend they don't exist. I've seen this happen too, on a BIG IMPORTANT BLOG I sometimes comment. One member pulled another's past comments to "prove" that she was a clueless, entitled twit. Those things may be true, but at what point do we get to learn from our mistakes?

Self-Protection or Victim Blaming?

2011-12-04T08:40:00.000-06:00

A few weeks ago, someone posted to Tumblr a list of safety tips for women by actual attackers -- don't wear a bun or ponytail that could be grabbed, attackers generally don't go after women carrying something that can be used to thwart an attack, like an umbrella, etc. It was pulled almost as soon as it was posted for being too "victim blamey."

Maybe I'm very, very out-of-touch, but I don't think teaching basic safety is akin to victim blaming. Victim blaming is insinuating that the victim somehow caused or contributed to the attack: you looked to "sexy," you drank too much, you "led him on." Now maybe if you had said, "You know what, if you'd just not worn that swingy ponytail, maybe that guy wouldn't have had something to grab onto and maybe he wouldn't have shoved you into the trunk of his car," that would be victim blaming. The idea that if an attack or rape is going to happen, it's going to happen leaves me with no sense of agency, and I don't think many potential rapists have taken many feminist theory courses. If that makes me a bad feminist, so be it. I think there needs to be a definite distinction. More importantly, I think we need to change the way we talk about rape, shifting the onus from victim to perpetrator.

Though the original post didn't exclusively focus on rape, "staying safe" is usually code for "avoiding rape." When I was in college, self-defense courses were offered as gym credits, and the focus was solely on ways women could "prevent rape." This wasn't questioned. And at the risk of sounding hypocritical -- because I do see value in self-defense classes in giving women a sense of agency -- I looked up rape statics prior to writing this post. The one-in-four number kept popping up, but nowhere did I find any statistics on how many men rape. The language of rape is undeniably passive.

Break It Down: Who's That Girl?

2011-12-03T08:29:00.000-06:00

last.fm

As if I don't sing the praises of this woman enough, Robyn has been making stealthily feminist (or at least not anti-feminist) music for about a decade now, yet doesn't get nearly the attention other pop stars do. And I hate to pigeonhole her as a "pop" star, given the negative connotations that come with the word, pop: light, unsophisticated, disposable music. Robyn has always been smarted than that.

"Who's That Girl?" (which you can watch here as the embedding has been disabled) borrows a title from both Madonna and Annie Lennox, but the similarities end there. Robyn's "Who's That Girl" is a third-wave feminist anthem of sorts for women raised on the media's idea of airbrushed perfection, the "bad girl/good girl" dichotomy, and how impossible it is to live up to those standards: be sexy, but not sexual; don't complain too much; and above all don't show any signs of resentment toward society for forcing its unrealistic standards:

Good girls are pretty like all the time

I'm just pretty some of the time

Good girls are happy and satisfied

I won't stop asking until I die

Good girls don't say no or ask you why

I won't let you love me until you really try

Good girls are sexy like everyday

I'm only sexy when I say it's okay

The overall message is a bit "hit-you-over-the-head" obvious, and granted, it's coming from a woman who's fairly privileged herself -- conventionally attractive, young, white, cisgendered. What's great is that this is a mainstream pop song that basically updates the "girl power" trope of the 90s making it something smarter, naughtier (draw your own conclusions about the line that says "you be the girl and I'll be the guy") and less treacly.

Links & Bits: 12/2/11

2011-12-02T08:53:00.000-06:00

s.e. smith asks, "Does Pop Culture Have Social Responsibility?"

LT from My American Melting Pot has a beef with the movie Bridesmaids.

Nicole Cunningham Zaghia from Racialicious offers an alternative t o TLC's All-American Muslim: Me, the Muslim Next Door.

Youtube Find of the Day: Odetta and Johnny Cash

2011-12-01T08:55:00.000-06:00

I usually find some of the greatest stuff on YouTube by coincidence. I was looking for some older Odetta clips, which are few and far between even in today's archival culture. I did, however, stumble upon this old clip of Odetta on the Johnny Cash show from 1969. Here's the info provided:

Odetta on "The Johnny Cash Show," August 30, 1969. The first song she performs is based on a Negro "field blues" song known simply as "Black Woman," then duets with Cash on "Shame And Scandal In The Family," which was written by a calypso artist who went by Sir Lancelot, in the 40s.

Blue Dot in a Red State

2011-11-30T09:08:00.000-06:00

I’ve wanted to write something about how class privilege factors into the liberal blogosphere without falling into the trap of “it’s the last acceptable prejudice”, but class bias is expected, overt, and even encouraged.

I'm a minor player in the feminist/SJ blogging community. Mine own is less about politics than pop culture, but I read and comment on quite a few progressive sites, and it infuriates me that "dumb rednecks" is and acceptable response to a story about the goings on in conservative parts of the county. How does class play into this? Area of the county where working-class and rural poor -- even extreme pockets of poverty -- out number middle-class and wealthier people overlap conservative areas of the US Even if this isn't entirely true, the perception is still there, and even without the class bias, condemning an entire swath of the county as "stupid rednecks" is really unfair, but this comment from Feministe's Capertopn is one of the few where I've seen it explicitly addressed:

Okay, this is not going to devolve into the usual volley of how backward and stupid and ignorant and racist/sexist/whateverist and worthless and unsalvageable the South is. As regions go, it’s a nice one to beat up on and feel superior to. I get it. It’s a classic. But it’s made up of people, and that’s what you’re calling worthless and ignorant. The number of Southerners on this very blog should be evidence enough that no, it’s not beyond help, it’s not beyond salvaging, and there are people working to actually effect change while you sit and sneer. If you have a worthwhile comment, by all means make it. But I’m not going to hear an entire region of people, including Feministe regulars, getting slagged off for an entire thread.

Usually this happens when there's a post about a state's restrictions on abortion, or gay marriage. As someone who actually lives in a state with a poor track record of providing safe, legal abortion without question, and one with no chance of gay marriage become legal anytime soon, I get it. It needs to be discussed. But I also know that there is a vocal minority trying to change those laws.

You know what I'd like to see? A story about abortion restrictions in red states written by a woman who actually lives in one. I'd like to see more stories about working-class women -- women are disproportionately poor -- written by actual, working-class women. But most importantly I'd like to see the larger sites at least acknowledge that some of those women are a part of their readership.

Break It Down: Ballad of Bitter Honey

2011-11-29T08:58:00.000-06:00

Eef Barzelay's "Ballad of Bitter Honey," a bittersweet song about a dancer in hip-hip videos, isn't particularly well-known, but raises a few needed questions about race and narrative.

First off, I like this song. Its subject isn't one that's exactly heard from in pop (even quirky indie pop) music; however, hearing to a white man narrating the experience of a (presumably) WOC, and one decidedly less privileged than he is, makes me uncomfortable.

This dovetails nicely with the Fugazi post I wrote about a week ago, because as a music fan, I abhor censorship in any form, but as a feminist, I don't think everything should be there for the taking, especially the experiences of marginalized groups.

I tried in vain to find this song's backstory, so I have no idea if there's a real person behind the lyrics. Despite the nuance -- and I do think it's lyrically well-written -- it begs the question, "When is it appropriation, and when is it just a good story to tell?"

Where are all the angry women in other musical genres?

2011-11-28T08:55:00.000-06:00

Cazz Blaze wrote a great post for the F-Word about the perceived lack of "angry young women" in genres other than rock or punk. She says:

[...] there is the basic assumption that angry women only exist, music wise, in the area of rock music - we presumably don't have angry pop stars because there is a credibility issue that goes with being mainstream and angry (ie people would assume you aren't really meaning it, see Alanis Morrisette as a case in point) but also people don't talk of angry dance music, angry urban music, angry folk music... Why is that? Why must anger be equated with an electric guitar?

As much as riot grrrl brought feminism and the inequality of being a woman in society to the forefront, this is one of my biggest pet peeves, too: its claim to the anger and righteousness that comes with that awareness, almost exclusive to other styles of music. Riot grrrl suffered from its own internalized misogyny, pitting pop against punk -- good girl (quite, complacent, well-behaved) against bad girl (outspoken, polemic.)

One of my favorite "angry woman" songs of the last half-decade or so is Martha Wainwright's "Bloody Mother Fucking Asshole." Along with the examples provided in the original post, there are quite a few angry folk (or folk-rock) songs penned by women. Hip-Hop has produced its share of stealthily feminist righteous anger also:

Salvation Army Alternatives

2011-11-27T08:27:00.002-06:00

This is fairly old news, but I'm still surprised how many people don't know about The Salvation Army's history of discrimination against the LGBT community. Bill Browning from the website The Bilerico Project:

The Salvation Army has a history of active discrimination against gays and lesbians. While you might think you're helping the hungry and homeless by dropping a few dollars in the bright red buckets, not everyone can share in the donations. Many LGBT people are rejected by the evangelical church charity because they're "sexually impure."

The church claims it holds "a positive view of human sexuality," but then clarifies that "sexual intimacy is understood as a gift of God to be enjoyed within the context of heterosexual marriage." The Salvation Army doesn't believe that gays and lesbians should ever know the intimacy of any loving relationship, instead teaching that "Christians whose sexual orientation is primarily or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life."

The ubiquity of those bell ringers makes it all too easy to give to a charity with little effort, but I know (I hope) most people would rather not give to a charity that openly discriminates. Both Bilerico and the Huffington Post have provided a list of alternatives:

Goodwill
The Red Cross
Doctors Without Borders
Habitat for Humanity
The Trevor Project
Howard Brown Health Center

Exploring Goodreads Listopia Lists: Rewarding; Frustrating

2011-11-26T08:28:00.000-06:00

Yes, I rail all too often about user-generated (or critic-generated) lists being too canonical, not diverse enough, and too representative of the privilege of the list-makers; however outside a gender studies class, it's incredibly hard to find feminist reading. (Or just lefty-political reading in general when you live in a conservative part of the country where Glenn Beck's books are given prime real estate.) In that case, Goodreads listopia lists are a godsend.

Kind of.

Yeah, they suffer from all the aforementioned problems, but for a starter course in feminist or activist lit, there are some good choices. And you can add your own or vote books up and down:

Social Justice: Books on racism, sexism, and class

Science Fiction Books By Female Authors

Best Feminist Young Adult Books

Best Feminist Books

Links & Bits: 11/25/11

2011-11-25T08:53:00.000-06:00

Colorlines gives advice for talking about race at the holiday table.

Paste Magazine details a day in the life of Me'Shell NdegeOcello.

Baseball's new bargaining agreement prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Bitch Magazine recently featured artist Francesca Woodman.

Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Guitarists: Guess What's Missing?

2011-11-24T08:56:00.000-06:00

Maura put best with this headline that came across my Tumblr yesterday afternoon: "Breaking: panel overwhelmingly made up of white men is really into the artistic output of other men."

Rolling Stone published their list of the 100 Greatest Guitarists of All-Time . At this point, do I even need to say it? Two. Two of the hundred legends and icons great enough to be called "the greatest" are women: Bonnie Raitt and Joni Mitchell, respectively.

I never really wanted this site to be a collection of posts detailing yet another aspect of the music industry where women are underrepresented, but this is getting kind of old. And I don't entirely fault Rolling Stone for picking the same artists who've been topping lists for decades: Eric Clapton, Jeff Beck, Jimi Hedrix, et al... because girls are still too rarely encouraged to play guitar, but their panel of experts should, at least, be hip to the fact that some great guitarists exist outside the Beck-Clapton-Hendrix trifecta. And some of those guitarists are women.

Yes, it's a boy's game and all. This is a fact, and not something that's about to change anytime soon. It dovetails nicely with what I wrote yesterday: women aren't seen as masters of their craft. Women may be topping the charts, but lack the respect male artists get.

Lady/Genius

2011-11-23T09:02:00.000-06:00

This recent Question of the Day from Shakesville reminds me of something I read at Jezebel a few years ago: why are so few female artists affixed with the "genius" label, or a handful of others for that matter like wunderkind? Or prodigy? To be honest, I agree with the writer of the Jez article: the word genius is too hastily tossed around. A good composer, a good arranger, a good singer or a good lyricist is just that, but not a "genius" in the dictionary-sense of the word. (Okay, I admit I have a pretty narrow view of the word "genius.") IThat being said, women aren't thought of as masters of their craft.

When I was in grade school, I was a good student. So was S. He was the class brain while I just "worked really hard." See the parallel here? Men are inherently gifted, while women have to work at it. And there's nothing wrong with working for something, but women's talent are seen as something conditional while men's are innate. It's not "hers," but instead something acquired. (Unless it come from some "witchy-poo" place -- see Bjork, et al. -- and then she has no agency whatsoever.)

The Controversy Surrounding Florence + the Machine's New Video, "No Light, No Light"

2011-11-22T09:00:00.000-06:00

At best, Florence + the Machine's new video for "No Light No Light" is a misguided attempt at symbolism, at worst, it's an exercise in how privilege allows one to use bits and pieces of other cultures as metaphors without seeing the inherent racism in those symbols.

Jezebel's Dodai did a complete breakdown of the video. There's been a lot of discussion whether the dancer in dark body paint is an example blackface or not. Honestly, if it looks like blackface, it is blackface, but the good christian/bad voodoo motif is just as troubling:

The man is half-dressed and sticking pins in a voodoo doll.

Haitian Vodou is a religion that is very misunderstood. Slaves were brought to the Caribbean against their will and forbidden to practice their traditional African religions as well as forced to convert to the religion of their masters. The Bond movie/Eurocentric/Americanized viewpoint presents Vodou as an evil, primitive version of witchcraft. But it's a religion like any other, with a moral code, gods and goddesses. Many ceremonies deal with protection from evil spirits.

In addition, the "voodoo doll" itself has been misconstrued. In Haiti, it was traditional to nail small handmade puppets or dolls to trees near graveyards; these small figures were meant to act as messengers to the spirit world, and contact dead loved ones. It's safe to imagine that European folks didn't understand this — and assumed an evil intent behind a doll with nails in its body. (source )

Also, multiple sources pointed out that the racism in "No Light, No Light" is not intentional. Come on. Racism 101 teaches us that intent need not be there for something to be racist. In fact, some of the most pervasive forms of racism are covert rather than overt.

Cultivating vs Creating Content

2011-11-21T08:54:00.000-06:00

My posts of late have followed the same pattern of link-plus-commentary eerily reminiscent of my Tumblr, which itself started as a link blog. If I'm being completely honest, a lot of the things I post here start as pithy Tumblr posts, and are only slightly more fleshed-out on my "real" blog.

I want to be okay with this. I think I should be okay with this.

Riffing off someone else's work usually results in some of my best, most thought-out posts, and I always make sure to credit the source first. It's not like I'd adding nothing original, so why does it feel like a lazy-woman's cop out?

During my inchoate web days, I spent a lot of time on pop culture forums. Most of what was posted was links from other sites; rare was the 1000-word screed about someone's actual life. (Which, come to think of it, would be really impractical when you're limited to only so many characters, not to mention wanting to maintain some sense of anonymity online.) About five or six years ago, I entered the world of personal, diary-type blogging. I sucked at it. No really -- my life would make a terrible sitcom. Or I guess these days, a terrible reality show.

There's an unspoken rule that to be a successful diarist you has to open up a wound and bleed for the audience. The blog world is full of that: it's relatable, it resonates with readers. I think it's wise to note that most of the really successful diary-type bloggers are women. When I started blogging, Dooce (before she was known primarily as a mommyblogger) was my template, but I didn't know how to make the minutiae of my daily life sound interesting. I chipped away at this formula for a few years before I realized "you know, this isn't really my bag."

Women as cultivators of the web should be granted the same privileges. Most political or pop cultures sites pull content from other sites and add their own commentary, but women are, at large, underrepresented at those sites, and in the feminist/SJ blogosphere, where women have a stronger voice, there's a fair amount of wound-opening.

I'm not trying to disparage that: clearly there's a place for the personal essay, but if you're just ill-equipped at writing about your own life, you're lazy... or not relatable. Women have a greater expectation to write about themselves, and if they're not, there must be something wrong. I believe in self-protection, which is a great reason for not spilling one's virtual guts, but also placing greater emphasis on women who are good web curators and pundits.

Culturally irrelevant, or just plain old?

2011-11-20T08:33:00.000-06:00

I'll admit, I snickered a bit when I read Edith Zimmerman's NY Times article about feeling "culturally irrelevant" at the ripe ol' age of 28. I'm a full decade older than she -- in actual "life years" that's standing on the precipice of middle age, but my "internet coolness factor" expired years ago. I'm a dinosaur. I've gone past cultural irrelevancy straight to cultural extinction.

Granted, had I read this ten years ago, I'd completely agree. Twenty-seven, twenty-eight is about the age where you can no longer fool yourself into thinking you're still an adolescent. You start realizing that the brunt of popular culture is simply not for your consumption anymore. (Some of it is even, gasp, made by people much younger than you.) This isn't a bad thing. This is what Zimmerman said of her late-discovery (and bemusement) of internet phenomenon Kreayshawn:

[...] way back in May when I watched the video, wherein Kreayshawn brags about smoking weed and not wearing clothes made by fancy brands (for example, Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Fendi) — it seemed like nothing new in rap as far as lyrical content went. Her voice was annoying, thin and smug. So I turned it off. Just some random stupid video that no one needs to know about. Case closed! (Brushes hands, moves on.) [...]

So I went back to the Kreayshawn video I’d dismissed as ugly and stupid, determined to like it, sort of in the way a suburban dad flashes peace signs at his children to be hip. (I’m with it! Hip-hop!) And, quietly, alone in my apartment, I watched the video again, as if I were unwrapping a package I was afraid of. I watched it wanting to like it, I guess. And hey! Do you know what? I decided I did. I decided the video is actually pretty cool! The young people were right! (I’m 28, by the way.)

I think her criticism of Kreayshawn is actually pretty accurate (and I'd like to add to it Kreayshawn's use of the "n-word" on her Twitter was inexcusable). This is a perfectly reasonable response for someone with a few more years of critical thinking under her belt. Maybe it's because I'm part of a generation that basically hated everything, I don't see a problem here.

Making Peace with Andrea Dworkin

2011-11-19T08:48:00.000-06:00

I just finished reading Andrea Dworkin's memoir, Heartbreak, which was published a few years before her death in 2005… and I liked it.

While I don’t agree with everything Andrea Dworkin has ever written, she’s an immensely entertaining writer, and even when she’s wrong, she’s wrong with absolute conviction. I have to admire that. But I cannot be a “cafeteria feminist” and pick and choose only the pieces I agree with. Radfem’s history of transphobia — and Dworkin is a part of that — is enough to make me feel really conflicted because I do enjoy her work. Especially when she says something like this:

It happens so often that I, at least, cannot keep track of it. A woman is only believed of and when other women come forward to say the man or men raped them too. The oddness of this should be transparent. If I am robbed and my neighbor isn’t, I’m still robbed — there is no legal or social agreement that in order for me, the victim of a robbery, to be believed, the burglar has to have robbed my neighbors.

Granted, Heartbreak is far from a theory-laden pedantic tome, and her prose itself makes me want to start a riot of my own, but I know her history. Or rather, I know her often contentious history with contemporary (as in late 20th-century and beyond) feminism. I'm supposed to vilify her, or at least admit that her brand of feminism is at odds with today's feminists. Maybe I should provide a bit of my own background.

Unlike a lot of women in their twenties and thirties, I didn't come to feminism though the predictable channels: punk rock, riot grrrl or a women's studies class at college. My feminism came straight from my library's limited selection of second-wave feminist literature. I'm not going to pretend that our mothers' feminism has well as they've should, but I don't want to deny that there's still truth in their words. If I sound like I'm making excused, it's because, as I said, I can't pick and choose, but I don't want to deny that there's still good to be had in those old feminist classics, at least for a lot of us who can't get it anywhere else. (And if I'm being completely honest, the current wave of sex-positive feminists, some of the most vocal critics of Dworkin's antediluvian attitude toward sex, leave me cold anyway. I see sex-positive feminism as another facet of the same movement that prioritizes the needs of some women over others.)

I think it's possible -- if not advisable -- to read through the feminist "canon" with a critical eye, while still acknowledging what got us here. And it's also naive to assume we've solved all the problem's of feminism's past.

Links & Bits: 11/18/11

2011-11-18T08:55:00.000-06:00

Samhita from Feministing talks a little about mansplaining.

Tiger Beatdown's s.e. smith asks, "What's Your Slavery Footprint?"

Mac Pogue for Bitch Magazine wrote a nice feature on writer Gloria Anzaldúa.

Get Ready for RuPaul's Drag Race, Season Four!

2011-11-17T06:55:00.000-06:00

Drag Queens in Space!!!

Season four of Rupaul's Drag Race premiers this coming January. If you've never seen it for one, what's wrong with you? and two, the best way I can describe it is America's Next Top Model meets Paris is Burning with a soupcon of Bad Girls Club. Check out the season four cast here .

Boring is the New Boring

2011-11-15T10:31:00.001-06:00

Last.fm

As someone nearer to her forties than her twenties, I listen to a lot of "boring" music. Boring, I realize is not only a loaded, but an ambiguous, term, though for most music fans boring means the kind of pleasant, unchallenging "grown up" rock typified by the adult contemporary radio your parents used to play in their Taurus. Today it means long-time critics' favorites like Wilco and Feist. Steven Hyden for the Onion's AV Club examines this new brand of boring:

Boring” is its own genre. It is a code word that instantly conjures artists with clearly definable attributes. “Boring” music is slow to mid-tempo, mellow, melodic, pretty in a melancholy way, catchy, poppy, and rooted in traditional forms. It is popular (or popular-ish). It is tasteful, well-played, and meticulously produced. (Or it might sound like it was recorded in somebody’s bedroom under the influence of weed and Sega Genesis.) It is “easy to like”—or more specifically, “easy for white people to like” (“white people” being a sub-group of white people singled out by other white people). It is critically acclaimed (perhaps the most critically acclaimed music there is), and yet music critics relish taking “boring” musical artists down a peg more than any other kind of artist.

He goes on to say that boring isn't the critical death it seems to be, and that making music for adults is a fine thing to do; however, he only briefly touches on the correlation between "boring" music, and music made by white people for other white people. Boring can also means a sort of cultural paucity -- a lack of "exoticness," which is troubling because it others artists and their audiences who fall outside the white, middle-class standard. (And artists who step out of that often risk appropriating styles that aren't theirs -- see Vampire Weekend.)

Hyden made another good point about "boring" music not resonating with the listener. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this, as the myth of universality is just that -- a myth. I don't think fans should have to force themselves to listen to music like a five-year-old choking down his vegetables. If it's not happening, it's probably not gonna, and I think there's too much made -- among critics and fans -- about not "getting" a certain artist. Everyone brings their own cultural baggage, and liking something, even if it's a silly piece of pop music, is often more complicated than "I just don't like the way this sounds."

Rewind: Velvet Underground - S/T

2011-11-14T14:46:00.001-06:00

I have a somewhat complicated relationship with The Velvets. It's long been said that not a lot of people know their music, but those who do go out and form bands themselves. The Velvet Underground was pretty much and indie or punk rock institution by the time I'd heard of them, and I never got around to forming that band myself (unless you count the "tapes" my cousin and I made when we were teens trying super hard to be all goth and angsty -- I don't). So that shoots that theory down.

The Velvet Underground has the distinction of being one of those "critics' pets" (see yesterday's post) that can do no wrong, and is at the apex of cool according to my record-collecting guy friends. The latter, though unfair, has always been an issue of mine, although I like a lot of "dude rock." If the critics -- the ones whose voices are being heard, at least -- are men, and they are the ones setting the standards, you have an unfair balance of male-dominated acts in the canon. Duh. (Okay, the Velvets had a pre-Meg White "ladydrummer" in Mo Tucker, and Nico guest croaked on the Warhol-produced The Velvet Underground and Nico, but they're thought of as primarily Lou Reed's band.)

So why does "the couch album" make it past my sensors? Eh, I have to go with the simple (and very reductive) "it's a good album." A strong collection of songs that explore things like religion and sexuality and anything that was off-limits to my adolescent brain. The cornerstone of a lot of "really good albums." I'll give the dudes this one.

Transgressions Against Pop Culture

2011-11-13T08:46:00.001-06:00

This was a topic of discussion on a music forum I was a part of back in my novice internet days. Basically, it's saying, what bands or artists universally loved by critics and fans do you just not get? The things most people agree are "good" and "worthy?" It didn't end pretty.

I've written here before about my apathy toward much of Dylan's music, or his brand in general. I'm a little surprised, even though I made sure I criticized his product rather than criticize him personally or his fans, that someone didn't trying to "school me" on the wonderfulness of Mr. Robert Zimmerman. Because that's exactly what happened on that early blog.

I bring this up because I see this happening a lot lately those whom I know to be otherwise reasonable people who know not to take it personally when someone doesn't like "their guy" (or gal). Yeah, we form attachments. With music in particular, we identify with the voice coming from the speaker, or the writer of those words. (The former is often stronger than the latter.) But their needs to be room for criticism, even of those artists long deemed sacrosanct.

Break It Down: Suggestion

2011-11-12T15:01:00.001-06:00

I didn't know the backstory behind Fugazi's song "Suggestion" until about a year ago when I read Sara Marcus's book, Girls to the Front, about the history riot grrrl and the third-wave feminist movement associated with it. During their set, Fugazi would invite a female vocalist to sing the lyrics, which are about street harassment and rape:

Why can't iI walk down a street free of suggestion?Is my body the only trait in the eye's of men?I've got some skin. You want to look in. There lays no reward in what you discover. You spent yourself watching me suffer. Suffer your words, suffer your eyes, suffer your hands. Suffer your interpretation of what it is to be a man. I've got some skin. You want to look in. She does nothing to deserve it. He only wants to observe it. We sit back like they taught us. We keep quiet like they taught us. He just wants to prove it. She does nothing to remove it. We don't want anyone to mind us. So we play the roles that they assigned us. She does nothing to conceal it. He touches her 'cause he wants to feel itWe blame her for being thereBut we are all guilty.

The song itself doesn't give me pause: the lyrics are harsh, brash, and self-aware enough to want break down those institutions that allow men to objectify women. A lesser songwriter would fail at this self-awareness; however, I don't think this is a man's song to sing (hence the guest vocalists), or even a man's song to write. Regardless of the all the good intentions, "Suggestion" always felt like appropriation to me, especially since hardcore itself was pretty inhospitable to women.

Born This Way?

2011-11-11T11:51:00.001-06:00

I've been sitting on this quote from a jezebel commenter for some time, trying to fashion it into a post. It succinctly illustrates why I've been reluctant to embrace the whole "born this way" rhetoric. Then I found this post from the Social Justice League :

Queer people do not need to offer excuses or defend their own existence. If one could become queer by simply waking up one morning and deciding to become queer, for a day, for an hour, it wouldn’t change the fact that being queer is just as good, as valid, as worthy, as being straight. Providing straight people with reasons or excuses for our queerness simply confirms their suspicions that our sexuality really is their business and that we need to justify our existence to them. This allows heterosexists to continue to believe there is something superior about heterosexuality, and that being queer is a deviation from some kind of normal or default sexuality. There isn’t and it’s not.

I understand that "being born this way" is probably the best leverage against homophobia the LGBT community has, but it justifies something that should need no justification, and erases experiences of sexual fluidity or not fitting the narrative of "just always knowing."

Links & Bits: 11/11/11

2011-11-10T16:31:00.001-06:00

Flavia writes about Europe's treatment of Roma women.

We said goodbye to Heavy D and Gay Cable Network founder, Lou Maletta .

Tom Waits gives a shout-out to the Stones in his new video, "Satisfied :"

Glee's first time: slightly less than controversial

2011-11-09T16:53:00.000-06:00


Entertainment Weekly

The controversy surrounding Glee's "First Time" episode in which three of its characters lose their virginity -- Rachel (with Finn, whom I think was deflowered last season by Santana), and couple Blaine and Kurt -- never really materialized. Oh, there were the complaints from right wing parent's groups for its implications of gay sex, or teen sex in general, but the protests seemed relatively tame, which fell right in line with the show itself: relatively tame.

(I'm ill-equipped at writing recaps, so let me direct you here or here for a play-by-play of the full episode.)

Don't get me wrong, I thought the episode was quite sweet, and it's undeniably huge to have an out, young character on a big prime-time show show who's not completely desexualized. (This has been a frequent criticism of Kurt's character for some time now.) Although in a very different league, Showtime managed to produce two young gay characters who are allowed to be sexual, at least with the parameters of TV: Shameless's Ian , and the now-defunct United States of Tara's Marshall. Both are far more nuanced and interesting characters, but Glee being the juggernaut that it is, showing -- or rather implying -- that two gay kids had sex is still a pretty big deal.

Men Call Us Things

2011-11-09T08:54:00.002-06:00

I've become jaded to the taunts of "bitch," "fat", "slut," "whore," and "dyke," that are part and parcel of being a woman with an online life, and I've been quite lucky that I've never truly felt threatened online. But it has happened to other women -- a lot of them. And it's disheartening that the usual gamut of name-calling has gotten so commonplace that we are numb to it.

Sady Doyle from Tiger Beatdown has launched the Twitter hashtag #MenCallMeThings, which focuses primarily on the harassment women who write about feminism and politics face, but it easily spills over into our off-line lives and interferes with our everyday interactions:

To you, my friends, I say: Fuck that noise. All of this matters. A hostile work environment matters. Being afraid of your own in-box matters. Deleting your blog because that’s the only way for you to have a normal, non-hate-filled life matters. “Accepting” that continual, virulent, hateful misogynist abuse is a pre-condition for being a lady who talks about thing, or for challenging sexism in any way, no matter who you are: That matters. And if you think we’re fragile, well. LET US COUNT THE WAYS we have hacked it, under conditions your pampered manly self just cannot imagine. LET US DEMONSTRATE FOR YOU the shit we wade through, every day, in order to talk about whether or not we liked that one “Community” episode or Lady GaGa album. LET US JUST TELL YOU what we put up with, what we’ve been strong enough to endure, and even knowingly court; the given consequences we face for being anti-sexist and/or ladies on the Internet, which we’ve all put up with, without crumbling. And then you can decide whether we’re wimps or not.

I've never had to deal with the egregious brand of harassment some of the more visible bloggers have. I've never been called a name outside the trifecta of bitch/fat/dyke. (It's times like these I thank my lucky stars for my nearly non-existent audience.) Most of the online communities I've been a part of have been mostly women, or keep a comment policy that's so draconian nothing slips by the mods. This isn't a bad thing, but I realize I've been relatively sheltered from the worst of it. The examples that stick with me, though, are the things guys who were purportedly my "friends." I can boast no taunts of "lesbian hambeast, " but I've been told I have "hillbilly DNA," whatever that means. (Even under the best circumstances, that's pretty classist.) I've been called "abnormal," and my favorite, "You know, for someone who reads a lot, you're pretty stupid." On the surface, those things don't sound particularly gendered, but when you're one of few women in a community, and you've seen yours and the contributions of other women go unrecognized or dismissed, it becomes really suspicious.

Being an ethical fan and consumer

2011-11-08T08:53:00.000-06:00

Rachael from The Social Justice League posted a fantastic guide called How to Be a Fan of Problematic Things.

This is pretty timely since I've been trying to marry all my various fandoms with my politics, and not entirely succeeding. The most important thing to take away from this is that you can be a conscientious consumer without actually give up the things you otherwise love:

After all, most texts have some problematic elements in them, because they’re produced by humans, who are well-known to be imperfect. But it can be surprisingly difficult to own up to the problematic things in the media you like, particularly when you feel strongly about it, as many fans do. We need to find a way to enjoy the media we like without hurting other people and marginalised groups. So with that in mind, here are my suggestions for things we should try our darnedest to do as self-confessed fans of problematic stuff.

Acknowledgment is key. It's pretty obvious I devote most of my energy to music, but if I removed every artist that has ever made a questionable statement, in song or elsewhere, from my iPod I've had not much left. I'm also a casual watcher of Glee, a show whose failures often outnumber its successes. I still enjoy those things, but with a more critical eye. One thing I have noticed is the more I pay attention to what's being sold here, the more I am likely to seek out alternatives.

R.I.P. Judith Widdicombe

2011-11-07T08:54:00.000-06:00

Judith Widdicome, a champion of abortion rights in the St. Louis area, died earlier this week at age 73. From the St. Louis Beacon :

Within days of the 1973 [Rove v.Wade] court ruling, Ms. Widdicombe declared her intent to open Reproductive Health Services [which has since merged with Panned Parenthood], a clinic that would provide abortion services to all women without regard to their ability to pay. “Judy provided a safe, medically sound facility to provide abortions that saved women’s lives,” said Jean Berg, who offered counseling at the clinic through her work with the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. “Without Judy Widdicombe, thousands of women would have died.”

Reproductive Health Services opened its doors in the Doctor’s Office Building at 100 North Euclid in the Central West End on the rainy Wednesday morning of May 23, 1973. It had been scheduled to open a day later, but Ms. Widdicombe was becoming impatient.

The clinic had been ready for a month, just waiting for the Supreme Court’s formal announcement. But when it did open, Ms. Widdicombe, and her small medical and counseling staff were nervous. The court said it was now legal, but it didn’t feel legal yet. An attorney was on standby and a stack of bail money was on-hand just in case she or the surgeon was arrested.

There were no complications during the first procedure, nor during any of the others that were performed that first day. No one went to jail.

But each day, they ran the gauntlet.

Hundreds of anti-abortion protesters showed up on May 24, the day after the clinic opened, and a contingent kept vigil every day thereafter.

Full disclosure: I initially found this story on another local website. The contempt I have for my fellow citizen's anti-choice rhetoric won out over the "good blogger" in me, and I can't, in good faith, link to that site. Further evidence that women like Widdicombe are much-needed and their work appreciated.

Earworm of the Day: Kathleen Edwards - Hockey Skates

2011-11-06T08:28:00.000-06:00

To say I live in a pretty big sports town would be an understatement. It's been more than a week since the World Series ended, and everyone is still reeling from the Cardinals' improbable win.

Don't get me wrong: I follow the Cards, along with the Blues and (sometimes) the Rams. I don't write about it here, though I've had a post about being a woman and a sports fan stewing in my drafts folder for over a month. It's another piece of my life I feel I have to compartmentalize, and, to be honest, a bit guilty. To follow something so conspicuously dominated isn't something a "good feminist" should do. (There she is again, always judging.)

Songs with sports metaphors are always doomed to be hackneyed, but Kathleen Edwards's "Hockey Skates" is one that works.

Writers on Writing: Dorothy Allison

2011-11-05T08:31:00.000-05:00

"When feminism exploded in my life, it gave me a vision of the world totally different from everything I had ever assumed or hoped. The concept of a feminist literature offered the possibility of pride in my sexuality. It saved me from either giving up writing entirely, or the worse prospect of writing lies in order to achieve some measure of grudging acceptance. But at the same time, Feminism destroyed all my illusions about Literature. Feminism revealed the city as an armed compound to which I would never be admitted. It forced me to understand, suddenly and completely, that literature was written by men. The city itself was a city of Man, a male mind even when housed in a female body. If that was so, all my assumptions about the worth of writing, particularly working-class writing, were false." -- Dorothy Allison from Skin: Talking About Sex, Class and Literature

This is a pretty lengthy passage, but there's a lot of truth in it that goes beyond writing and literature: feminism has destroyed my illusions about everything, including feminism itself.

I don't want to turn this into some sort of academic screed, so I'll just ask, "Where do you go with that? What do you do once you've realized your own lack of agency?" It's strangely freeing knowing your words probably won't be taken seriously, but it won't sustain a career.

Feminism has made me question everything, especially those "universal truths." And I'd be lying if I said feminism hasn't made me a better writer, or at the very least, a more conscientious one. It's also made me a better media consumer, and while I still like the idea of a "cannon," I know who decides what is art and what is commerce, and it's a less than democratic process. In Skin, Allison talks about teaching her students to judge for themselves what's good and what's not: literature is nothing but subjective.

Allison is also unafraid to talk about the unglamorous side of writing: not the hard work that goes into putting words on paper, but the intense self-loathing and questioning whether you're "worthy" of the craft. She reminds me of Gloria Anzaldúa in that respect. I hate guides that talk about writing as something as natural as breathing, and "oh what glorious fun" it is to create. It's more like picking a scab.

Links & Bits: 11/3/11

2011-11-04T08:55:00.000-05:00

The Woman is Red: The Racebending of Billie Frechette (Racialicious)

When Hollywood sought to adapt the story of my ill-fated, almost-aunt Evelyn “Billie” Frechette, they made it clear that despite the fact she and her sisters were actresses they would not have been welcome at the casting call. She was the victim of “racebending” in its most unadulterated form. The kind that transformed Audrey Hepburn into an “Indian”, saw Michelle Phillips, a singer from the Mommas and the Papas, turned into Billie onscreen. A Menominee girl who grew up on reservation and went to a mission school was portrayed by a white pop star.

How Audre Lorde Made Queer History (Ms Magazine Blog)

Sister Outsider also contains her oft-quoted “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle The Master’s House,” a poignant critique of the white feminist intellectual as activist in academia. And in “An Open Letter to Mary Daly” she confronted the philosopher and challenged the racism between feminists in search of a common ground for sisterhood. In my personal favorite, “Transformation of Silence into Language and Action,” Lorde insists on the power of speaking out, because silence will not protect you.

Young Woman Captures Her Father's Abusive Actions on Tape (Feministe)

A young Texas woman with cerebral palsy was whipped and beaten by her father for downloading games and music — and she stealthily recorded the whole thing, then posted it to YouTube. A major wrinkle is that the girl’s abusive father is allegedly Aransas County Court-At-Law Judge William Adams.

Are Adele's Voice Problems a Wake Up Call for Young Singers?

2011-11-03T08:54:00.000-05:00

With her second album currently sitting atop the Billboard 200, Adele is one of the hottest young artists around, but a vocal chord hemorrhage forced her to cancel her North American tour. Could this send a message to young singers who overuse and abuse their voices to learn proper technique? According to specialist Phyllis Hoffman, injuries like Adele's are happening more than ever to young singers, usually a result of fatigue, strain, and a lack of training:

Hoffman blames such injuries on “our reality TV music culture,’’ because of the seemingly increasing volume of young singers who go from occasional amateur performances to intense, daily singing sessions in an effort to make a name and build their brand.

“It’s using the body in an excessive manner. And it makes me cringe when I see it,’’ said Hoffman, BU’s chairwoman of Applied and Performance Studies and a professor of music and voice at the school. “Young people perform on these shows that require them to throw caution to the wind in exchange for a chance at fame.’’

There's some pretty good information about the stress singing does to one's voice in this Jezebel post, too, with a handful of singers and vocal coaches chiming in. As as casual, but wouldn't-embarrass-herself-on-karaoke-night kind of singer, I'm finding these discussions most informative, as I haven't set foot in a formal music class in more than twenty years. I don't sing often, but I've always hated that I can't belt. I can reach the notes, but it sounds more choir-girl than soul singer. I think I'm going to be okay with that.

Generation Catalano?

2011-11-02T08:58:00.000-05:00

By virtue of being born in the early 70s, I'm fully ensconced in Generation X. There's no getting around it, and as much as I'd like to say that, no, I'm not that "stereotypical X'er" -- jaded, suspicious of authority, cynical to a fault -- for better or worse, I do personify a lot of the qualities ascribed to my generation. (Being a contrarian is very "gen-x," too, as my first reaction to a list of characteristics of those born in the 60s and 70s is "Nuh-uh, not me.") But as someone who spent part of her teen years in the 80s, and part in the 90s, I've always felt I was a younger X'er. But I just missed being part of Generation Catalano.

Oh damn.

According to Doree Shafrir's Slate article, "Generation Catalano" is sort of the younger siblings of Generation X. Or maybe the Millennials' older brothers and sisters. Or maybe something entirely all their own:

I was born during Jimmy Carter's presidency, a one-term administration remembered mostly for the Iran hostage crisis, the New York City blackout, and stagflation. The Carter babies—anyone born between his inauguration in January 1977 and Reagan's in January 1981—are now 30 to 34, and, like Carter himself, the weirdly brilliant yet deeply weird born-again Christian peanut farmer, this micro-generation is hard to pin down. We identify with some of Gen X's cynicism and suspicion of authority—watching Pee-Wee Herman proclaim, "I'm a loner, Dottie. A rebel," will do that to a kid—but we were too young to claim Singles and Reality Bites and Slacker as our own (though that didn't stop me from buying the soundtracks). And, while the proud alienation of the Gen X worldview doesn't totally sit right, we certainly don't yearn for the Organization Man-like conformity that the Millennials seem to crave.

I'm tempted to play the doubting X'er, but then she's goes on to say something I think is very telling about the difference between people my age, and those just a few years younger:

In Generation X, one of the protagonists, Andy, reflects that "we live small lives on the periphery; we are marginalized and there's a great deal in which we choose not to participate." It's no coincidence that Gen X's greatest artistic legacy is probably grunge, which is all about glorifying marginalization and alienation. Millennials, though, have been forced to live lives on the periphery, when they had always expected that they would be at the center. As Malone points out, the Fleet Foxes, led by 25-year-old Robin Pecknold, sing about thinking that they were "special snowflakes" but finding that they are in fact "cogs in some great machinery." In contrast, the most famous musician from Generation Catalano is probably 34-year-old Kanye West, who actually is something of a special snowflake—and at the same time that he has released some of the best music of the last few years (and gotten very rich off of it), he's also been engaged a very public battle with himself. Like West, Generation Catalano is never fully comfortable with its place in the world; we wander away from the periphery and back again.

Jealousy, Aggression and the Mean Girls Trope

2011-11-01T08:58:00.004-05:00

IMDB

I think in large part it's the title "It's Not Your Fault Your a Mean Girl" that gives me pause, but it's still a little -- nay, a lot -- unsettling that so many commenters embrace the stereotype that women's aggression is so much more sinister than men's and that men can "duke it out," and then go out for beers later. What's really going on here is that women's aggression and hostility are often seen as moral failures, where men's is, well, just part of being male. Perception is key.

I think jealousy gets a bum rap. I had this argument years ago on another site I was writing for at the time: jealousy itself isn't inherently bad; it's what you do with that jealousy. The article I linked talks about the paucity of "good" men, jobs, or college admissions that lead to women's competition with each other and the inevitable jealousy follows. (Provided you're a straight, upwardly mobile woman -- there's some unaddressed classism and straight-privilege going on here.) I don't have many feminist "click" moments, but one of my most salient was realizing I'm not being a traitor to "the sisterhood" if I'm not always happy for other women's successes, and -- gasp -- even a little jealous of them.

And the "mean girls" trope? I wish it would go away. It plays into the stereotype that women are supposed to be the world's moral centerboard. I don't want to be part of a feminism that tells me I have love and embrace every other woman simply because we're both part of the same system that privileges male over female.

Break It Down: U.N.I.T.Y.

2011-10-31T09:05:00.000-05:00

Instinct leads me to another flow... every time I hear a brother call a girl a bitch or a ho...

No other song so plainly and so poignantly talks about street harassment than Queen Latifah's "U.N.I.T.Y." This was one of the first "message" songs I fell in love with, and it stuck with me through the next twenty years or so.

Although released around time riot grrrl was just bubbling up from the surface, riot grrrl's politics made me feel less empowered than ever. Maybe it was a reality I was unprepared for hitting me smack in the face, but I never felt a sense of agency from punk rock's power, just alienation. Listening to "U.N.I.T.Y. I did.

I realize it's unfair, dangerous even, to pit one against the other, but the women-fronted punk of the early 90s is too often presented as a generation of women's entry into feminism. Riot grrrl had a host of problems: namely, it was inaccessible to those outside indie and punk's knowing few. (At least at first. By the time I'd heard of riot grrrl the mainstream media had reduced it to a sartorial statement.) Its problems of inclusion were a big part of feminism's past, and one of its greatest failures. It's easy to forget that not everyone comes to feminism by birthright.

The thing is "U.N.I.T.Y." was never explicitly feminist, which as a teen would have been a big turn-off. Not so much because I couldn't identify, but because I hate having feminism laid out to me in absolutes.

There were a lot of stealthily feminist hip-hop songs released in the 90s: along with "U.N.I.T.Y." there was "Ladies First," TLC's "Ain't To Proud to Beg," and "Unpretty" and Salt-n-Pepa's "None of Your Business." And they got a fair amount of airplay bringing those ideas to the masses, something riot grrl ultimately failed to do.

Credentialing

2011-10-30T08:42:00.000-05:00

Although I've been watching the SJ and feminist blog world do this for the past few years, and do it myself when applicable, hearing the term "credentialing" (providing a list of qualifiers or "credentials" -- i.e. "I'm a white, cis, middle class woman...") actually being discussed here and here makes me wonder how useful it is to preface your statement with the ways in which you are oppressed and, conversely, privileged.

Like I said, I do this. Sometimes it feels irresponsible not to. I have two primary issues with credentialing, though, one is that it can excuse casual bigotry. Saying "as a white person...." in a discussion about race, or "as a cis person" in a discussion about trans issues can be a shortcut for "I'm not a member of this particular marginalized group, therefor what I'm saying is probably bigoted, but because I recognize my privilege, you can't call me on it." Granted, it's rarely taken that far, but it's naive to think that's never going on below the surface.

The other problem I have is that we define ourselves by these narrow parameters that are far less than universal. I'm white, but grew up in a multicultural family; I'm cis, but I don't always present stereotypically feminine; etc. I don't think the blogosphere thinks in less than monolithic terms, and it's easy to be defined solely on those terms when that's what you're putting out there. I will periodically call myself working-class, which I am. It's part of who I am, and a big part of what informs my politics, but I don't want to be known as the "working-class girl" if that means my words will always be interpreted as unsophisticated, or if I make a mistake, it has to be chalked up to my having less formal education. (I really do obsess over this. Just last week I made an incredibly stupid spelling mistake in the comment section of another, more senior, blog. It had everything to do with being in the midst of a migraine, and nothing to do with my actual smarts, but I still thought, "Well, there goes my shot at every being taken seriously there again.")

I'm not saying credentialing is invaluable overall, but I think it's often a crutch. I'm curious what other people think, as it's almost required in certain activist circles.

Break It Down: Sheela-Na-Gig

2011-10-29T08:39:00.001-05:00

I wanted to do a series of short posts on popular songs that explore gender roles after I realized I had quite a few on my iPod, but I struggled with what to call it. Feminist classics seems a little reductive, and for myriad and often valid, not every woman identifies as a feminist. To label those songs as such reeks of a sort of ownership I'm not entirely comfortable with. (Plus the label "feminist" is becoming less and less meaningful to me as I get older, even though I still call myself one.)

So "break it down" it is, as I tend to do a bit of deconstructing. (Or until I figure out whom I stole it from.)

When I think of songs that really get to the meat (pardon the pun) of male/female relations, PJ Harvey's "Sheela-Na-Gig" tops my list. It was one of the first songs that made me step back and listen to words, and one of the few that made me a little afraid of what I was listening to. In his book, The Sex Revolts, Simon Reynold's says:

"Sheela-Na-Gig" turns around the gap between woman as ethereal icon and the fleshy reality of female physiology. The sheela-na-gig is a startling image, if you've ever seen one -- it's a Celtic fertility icon, a statue of a bulky, squatting woman pulling apart her vagina for all to see. In the verses, Harvey flaunts her "child-bearing hips," only to be rebuffed by the chorus, where she plays the part of a contemptuous or scandalized male: "You exhibitionist!"While icons of the Female Absolute from sheela-na-gigs to the Virgin Mary are idealized, flesh-and-blood woman with their periods and smells are deemed dirty.

I agree with this, but I think he's missing the larger point in reclaiming power in the grotesque. Instead of an idealized, plasticized doll, she's flesh-and-blood, reveling in the "grossness" that comes with being a woman, which she "lays down at his feet," only to yank it away and "take these hips to a man that cares." Look at this. You don't want it? Well, you can't have it anyway.

When I was going through songs, I tried to find the most "empowering" while disregarding the male gaze. I couldn't find any. Most themes of female empowerment unfortunately still have a "look at me" quality. This is also disconnect I feel with a lot of sex positive and choice feminists. I fail to see how empowering it is to still be an object of someone's affection. With "Sheela-Na-Gig" at least there's some level of awareness that our choices don't exist in a vacuum.

Links & Bits: 10/28/11

2011-10-28T08:52:00.000-05:00

Feeling left out of Generations X and Y? How about Generation Catalano?

Feministing's Zerlina talks about Amy Winehouse and the Bystander Effect.

The iPod turns ten. Soon it will want its own iPod.

Bi-Phobia on MTV's Real World

"We're a Culture, Not a Costume"

2011-10-26T08:52:00.000-05:00

Ohio University's Stars, a student organization dedicated to raising awareness about racism and social justice, has a new campaign called "We're a culture, not a costume. "

I've been seeing their posters pop up on my Tumblr the past few weeks, and thought it deserved a post of its own. They'll be passed around Ohio's Athens campus and other schools are taking notice.

Colorlines has written a pretty meaty post of its own about the campaign, and why it's not okay to dress up as a geisha or gangster:

Controversy surrounding racially offensive Halloween costumes and theme parties have become a routine part of the holiday on college campuses. Last fall, one Northwestern University dean went so far as to send an advance email to the whole student body, urging them to think carefully before getting decked out. "Halloween is unfortunately a time when the normal thoughtfulness and sensitivity of most NU students can be forgotten and some poor decisions are made," wrote Burgwell Howard. In 2009, Northwestern had drawn unwanted national attention when party pics of two varsity athletes dressed in graphic black face made social media rounds.

Rewind: Patrick Wolf - Lycanthropy

2011-10-25T08:58:00.001-05:00

If you were to described Patrick Wolf's music to me -- a mix of electronic, pop, and folk paired with earnest, sometimes brutally earnest, lyrics and a predilection for the flotsam of 80s glam* -- I'd say, "No thanks. I think I'll pass," but I was sold on the single "Accident & Emergency " a few years ago and haven't looked back. His latest album, Lupercalia, has been in heavy rotation on my iPod since early summer, but his debut, Lycanthropy , I'll admit, was a much harder sell.

I have this habit of walking backwards through an artist's career, latching on to a later record, deeming it "the definitive," when in reality, it's often the result of years of stylistic experimentation, especially when the debut was recorded while the artist was still so young. Lycanthropy's precociousness is overshadowed by its standout songs, period. (Full disclosure: I'm a full decade older than Wolf, making it impossible for me to see hims as something other than a "young" artist, particularly when listening to this album, which was recorded when he was barely out of his teens.)

"The Childcatcher" is one of those songs that makes you stop and catch your breath when its over. I don't want to label someone else's experience, but the lyrics are terrifying. In his words:

It was a certain relationship, I was 15 at the time but I was still a child. It wasn’t like I was 6-years-old, I was 15. I was still mentally a child and the person knew I was still mentally a child. It’s hard to communicate at the time because it’s like a complicated thing, but maybe put it into the context of a child being eight-years-old or seven-years-old; it was an easy way of communicating what was actually happening. But then there’s also the other side that five years later, like 19 I wrote the second part where it comes in with the voice of the person who did the abuse, and it turns out ‘Oh come on, you know, it wasn’t so much an abuse, maybe you just weren’t ready for it. Maybe you enjoyed it? (source )"

*How I'd describe it.

Stop pitting women with children against those without

2011-10-24T09:09:00.005-05:00

A few years ago when I was a novice blogger, I was given a link to a parent blogging site. I'm not a parent, nor do I plan on becoming one in the near future, but at the time, the only blogs I knew that were penned by women my age were "mommyblogs." Mine didn't exactly fit the template, obviously, but I was happy to find a gang of progressive-minded women who could write, and some of them even got paid. I wedged myself into their community.

The turning point came during one epic discussion about childless -- or childfree -- women. Being a childfree women in her thirties means usually fielding questions from society at large, but in my small blogging community, I never felt judged for it. So you can image my dismay when one blogger whom I respected declared that "you're not a real woman until you become a mother." Even if you ignore the apparent heterosexism and transphobia in those words, it's still a pretty shitty thing to say. Um, hi, I'm very real.

(Also it should be noted that the panel -- a panel on childfree women -- didn't actually have one childfree woman on it.)

A few years later, on another, even more progressive, site with a cabal of childfree women, the same kind of discussion swelled: this time the commentariat was more evenly split, but the results were unsurprisingly familiar. The mothers were bad feminists who insisted their children be present anywhere and everywhere adults are, and be universally loved for it; and the women without children were selfish, immature twits who must have had terrible relationships with their own mothers, hence their decision not to reproduce.

Can we stop this?

Fellow childfree women: children are people, not just annoying appendages. You don't have a right to childfree spaces; motherhood is a feminist issue, lest you forget. Mothers: I realize I'm not one of you and have no business criticizing how you raise your children, but not all childfree women live lives of leisure untethered to adult responsibilities. Reasons for not having children differ from woman to woman, and shouldn't be dissected. If not having children is "selfish" in the most literal, non-judgmental sense of the word, so what? Having children simply because you want to have children is also a selfish act.

Earworm of the Day: Buika - En El Ultimo Trago

2011-10-23T08:26:00.002-05:00

Concha Buika, whose family is originally from Equatorial Guinea, grew up in Mallorca among the Spanish Romani and merges traditional flamenco and coplas with soul and jazz to form her signature style. "En El Ultimo Trago" ("The Last Drink") is a perfect example of that, and really showcases her smokey, soulful voice. (source )

Indie Rock and Homophobia

2011-10-22T08:28:00.003-05:00

Spin magazine recently published a piece on the often ignored problem of homophobia in indie rock. Though long-considered a bastion of progressive thinking, and despite having quite a few openly gay artists, indie rock, like everything else, has also dealt with its fair share of bigotry. Brontez Purnell and Adal Castellon, of the band the Younger Lovers, were beaten and taunted with homophobia slurs outside Okland's Club Paradiso, which Purnell recounted on his blog and at the Bay Citizen. Leisha Haley, frontwoman for Uh-Huh Her, was kicked off a Southwestern Airline's flight for sharing, she alleges, "one modest kiss" with her girlfriend. The latter was pretty well publicized, but most incidents fly under the radar:

In fact, if you ask most out musicians about their experiences with homophobia, you'll hear a story that will break your heart. I did, at least, when collecting anecdotes for this piece. Magnetic Fields' Stephin Merritt was pelted with bottles, rocks, and slurs outside a club in Philadelphia in the 1990s. Xiu Xiu's Jamie Stewart was called a "fag" and had lit cigarettes thrown at him onstage in 2003 in Austin, Texas. After Holly Miranda recently played her song "Pelican Rapids," about Proposition 8, the 2008 California amendment restricting marriage as only between a man and a woman, she was confronted by a "big, burly door guy" who said that "if I got with him, he would make me do a 360," says the singer-songwriter. "I was like, 'I think you mean a 180. You're more right than you know.'"

There is also the reality of being pigenoholed as a gay (as in "not mainstream, not marketable") artist. In his recently published memoir, Bob Mould talked about the sexual ambiguity in his songs -- not fully "outing himself" but still trying to write open and honest music:

[...] I played with outing myself in the new video [for "It's Too Late"]. I thought that most people knew I was gay, and this was a "wink, wink, yes I am gay," action without specifically identifying myself as a gay artist. This was the constant struggle at the intersection of my work and my sexuality, the same struggle that led to the gender-neutrality of my previous relationship-based songs. I never defined then as being about a man dealing with another man; they were always presented in a universal, non-gender-specific way. They could mean something to everyone, straight or gay.

I'm not so naive as to be shocked by any form of hatred, even the covert, harder-to-prove kind, but what's really disheartening is that it's so seldom mentioned. Indie rock is, historically, the music of liberal college radio, but by no means is it immune to homophobia..