EqualityQuilt

Tech Chauvinism

The Internet and technology provide new opportunities for those seeking to expand their chauvinist outlets. In the last couple of months there has been a rash of chauvinism in the tech world. Ryan Tate over at Gawker has listed a few: 

• Booth babes" were explicitly discouraged at the TechCrunch 50; some people still hired the attractive spokesgirls.
• On stage at the same event, Penn Jilette promoted his iPhone magic app by explaining how it helped a stripper increase her tips.
• When the fit, female co-founder of the startup TotalTrainer gave a presentation at VentureBeat's Demo conference, some male geeks in the audience got snarky about her body on Twitter, provoking a backlash against their "sexist tweets." 
• Attendees at TechCrunch had to be warned not to mock the accents of speakers from foreign countries, according to co-organizer Jason Calacanis.

I would like to add a few he missed:

• Pepsi released a iPhone app called “AMP Up Before You Score.” This app provided men with twenty-four different female stereotypes and gave tips to help him score with that type.
• Other sexist apps include a PMSTracker for men so they can avoid the women in their lives during her time, and “I am a Man” which allows men to track several women at once.
• LG marketed cell phones as stalking devices.

As a gadget lover, it is no surprise to me that technology is heavily marketed to men. Furthermore, it is very apparent that regardless of the rise of women in technological careers, it is still a male dominated industry. With the rapid fire development of new technology and the incredible power of social networking sites and the blogosphere, sexism has found new ways to infect our society. All the more reason for women young and old to embrace technology! - Erin Parrish

Heene Boys: "Not Pussified"

My house is currently in internet flux as we're having some cable issues, so I missed the boat on the Balloon Boy debacle yesterday.

But yo, what is going on here???

I cannot really make out everything the boys are saying, but I have a strong feeling that the majority of it is not good. And considering that the aforementioned debacle may in fact be a hoax, it makes me anxious to think about what goes on in the Heene household. - Linda Nguyen

A Bigger Red Book

Over the weekend, my friend Stacey emailed me an article from the Guardian about menstruation activists, people who talk candidly about their periods and make zines sharing their stories in the effort of breaking silencing taboos and encouraging access to more environmentally (this includes bodily too) friendly menstrual products. I thought this was absolutely fabulous! Women talking about and taking ownership of their bodies! Zines, y'all!

But yo, not everyone feels the same way. A disagreement came from Salon's Broadsheet, who feels that menstrual activism "seems like an overreaction to a taboo that has mostly dissipated," and is mostly grossed out by the photography of women wearing their own menstrual blood as lipstick. The article cites men who buy tampons without fear and advertisements that makes jokes on themselves as the primary indicators of this dissipation. Really?

The undoing of the argument is of course already written into the article, albeit marginalized in parentheses: "just because periods are out in the open doesn't mean there aren't still sexist ideas about them." Which is the heart of the matter more often than not -- sexism. Sexism is complex, insidious, and structural with very real material consequences and manifestations. It does not simply end when all genders are comfortable and complacent with partaking in consumerist consumption, encouraged by capitalist campaigns extolling tampons that don't ruin your white skirt (despite their pollution of both the earth with their waste and the bodies they enter with their dioxins).

Shunning and shaming of menstrual activists in favor of performing radical tactics does not help the cause of liberating women with their bodies, not from them. We should never limit the conversations started, as the issue of menstruation is key topic in discussing how women take care of their bodies, and is directly linked to the other topics that may be deemed more important: equal pay (women have historically been marginalized in the workplace because they are thought of as hysterical due to their menstrual cycles) or domestic violence (having to use toxic products due to lack of [access to] healthier options is an act of domestic violence [does it not get any more domestic than our own bodies?]) or human rights abuses committed against women (see domestic violence).

Linda Nguyen

How Not to Blog

One of the nice things about interning at the Consortium is being able to keep up with feminist news. I should have included this in my introduction, but will make it known to the internet now, that I love my Google Reader. I check it multiple times a day as with my email, and get excited when my friends share the things they're reading and find fascinating. Since starting, I have added Salon's Broadsheet and Feministe, my new favorites.

However, as much as I love reading blogs, it is quite difficult for me to post to one. I saved a draft on Friday about the way we die now and how end-of-life care is a feminist issue, which reminded me of what I read in class last week on feeding tubes. But this morning I was too ashamed to finish it because it feels like old news (five days, actually) by internet standards. Everyone seems to be talking about Roman Polanski now, following his arrest over the weekend.

Though I have been having a hard time jumping in on that conversation. Despite reading about a dozen separate articles on the matter, I'm still trying to figure out how to talk about it. Or rather, how not to talk about it. As is the case with both end-of-life care and sexual violence, it is important to not forget and take into proper account that we are talking about real bodies with real lives and histories and desires. By the same token, trigger warnings are meant to be reminders that the words we transmit to be read do not enter bodies empty of histories and emotions. But as is wont with media portrayals, numerous bodies, particularly marginalized and vulnerable bodies, become instruments of representation, battlefields for journalists, celebrities, politicians, and anyone with a blog to wage word wars over.

And I do not want to participate in that. So I am just going to list some points that I've arrived at personally through all of my Google Reader musings and try to be respectful as I can.

• Not everyone wants to have a feeding tube used to extend their life; some would rather have the choice to spend their days as they please.
• • And the people charged to take care of them during this time need to be adequately paid and benefited. 
• Not all victims of rape want to have their names spattered across media accounts and their stories re-told time and again for all to see and read.
• • But the perpetrators of that violence should be brought to justice, even if they did have enough wealth and fame to escape it.

Linda Nguyen

Longing for Riot Grrrls

Born on the cusp of the Gen X and Gen Y, I was exposed to the politics of the cold war and the aftermath of the Reagan era as well as new technological horizons. Murphy Brown of the late 1980s and riot grrrls of the 1990s were my feminist icons—even though I did not recognize them as that. The feminist icons that I knew stood for women’s rights. They made it ok to be a single, career woman and a mom. They made it ok for women to speak their minds and break through the male dominated music industry. They were not afraid to step up and say “Hey. Women are unfairly treated differently than men and that needs to change. And here’s how we change it.” These women embodied a women’s agenda that actually addressed women’s needs and experiences.

 After four years of a liberal women’s studies education and a handful of years working for a feminist organization, I’m saddened that many advocates for women’s rights have forgotten that there was a feminist agenda. Feminist has become a dirty word and is often replaced with humanist (which is inappropriately used but that is a different blog post). Instead of fighting for equal pay, rape prevention, or the elimination of gender stereotyping, many feminists believe the solution is more women politicians. However, I believe a woman candidate is not useful to the feminist movement unless she calls herself a feminist and creates policy that advances the status of women. I do not see this happening unless it is under the guise of families.

Beefing Up with Macho Meat

    Alanna's great post on Carl's Jr has reminded me of a very interesting book I read (part of) in college titled "The Sexual Politics of Meat," by Carol Adams.  Meatiness and manliness are bizarrely closely related in our society. From fairytales in which kings are eating four and twenty blackbirds (when heroines like Snow White are dining on apples) to popular phrases such as "beef up," meaning to gain muscle, we have been indoctrinated into believing that more meat = more manly.

    And now Carl's Jr is not only reinforcing that connection (Eat our super meaty burgers. They'll make you super manly.), they're also defining manliness as objectifying and controlling women (Eat meat--> be a man--> women will be your playthings). How terrible!

    So other than awful Carl's Jr, what does this macho meat concept mean for women, and where did it come from? Well, Adams writes that "People with power have always eaten meat." When food is scarce

Beyond the Burqa

Once again the burqa is stirring up controversy. New legislation has been introduced in France to completely ban the burqa, and Sarkozy has spoken strongly in favor of it, saying that "In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity,". I can't help but be annoyed by this.
Previously in France (and in the US) there have been controversies about veiling in public schools. The argument there was that a veil is a religious symbol, and, like a cross necklace, should not be mixed with a public, non-religious school. This at least I can understand a little bit. But when the reasons to ban burqas, which are a very conservative type of full body covering, are some white men's assumptions about what they mean or do to a woman--that is just intolerable.

Many Muslim women choose to wear a burqa, yes, choose! Women wear burqas (and other forms of veils and body coverings) for a vast array of reasons. Some wear them to feel safer, or more comfortable, others wear them to be respected, or to be judged by their character rather than their appearance. Burqas do not inherently make women prisoners, they do not inherently cut women off from social life, and they do not inherently deny women of their identity. In fact, many women feel the core of their identity lies in their religion, which they express by donning a burqa. Just because a woman in a burqa looks different from a woman in a business suit, that does not necessarily mean she is less strong or less independent or less of a feminist. Of course, some reasons for veiling are less honorable--many Muslim women veil just to fit in with their friends. Just like everyone else. And here we are, wearing tighter and skimpier clothing every year, just to fit in with the social trends. Who is more of a prisoner: the woman pressured to wear a burqa or the woman pressured to wear a bikini?

Let women speak for themselves, and make decisions for themselves. In Iran woman have protested against being forced to veil and in Turkey they have protested against being banned from veiling. So let's just stop trying to legally control what women wear; we get enough pressure from all other aspects of our life as it is. And once the Western world can at last get past its obsession with the veil, maybe it can finally think about the many, much more difficult issues that Muslim women face, such as genital cutting and honor killings. So please, let's get beyond the burqa.

By Cecelia Watkins

Date Rape in Popular Culture

A couple of (male) friends tipped me off about a scene in Seth Rogan’s latest ‘bromance’ “Observe and Report”. My friends were shocked to discover that, among the various offensive references and dialogue, the film contained a date-rape scene. This scene is meant to be far from dark or serious, but actually supposed to be humorous. It goes something like this: Seth Rogan’s character has brought Anna Faris’s character home. Anna Faris is on a bed passed out after mixing alcohol with antidepressants, when Rogan begins to have intercourse with her. The scene is supposedly awkward, but the awkward atmosphere is dispelled once he stops for a brief moment and she awakes from a drunken stupor to say, “Why are you stopping, motherf***er?” only to pass out again.

In response to this particular scene, Seth Rogan believes that this last line makes this scene ok and funny, as quoted in a Huffington Post article. Wired referred to this scene as a shocking sex scene…? A more apt term, used by the actress Anna Faris herself in an interview with A.V., is DATE RAPE. Can we please recognize the act for its criminal qualities? I think  ‘humor’ such as this is indicative the rape culture in which we live, where rape and sexual violence are normalized and part of everyday life. Big-Hollywood movies (and actors, producers, writers, etc.) have the power to validate such acts of rape, strengthening the rape culture in which we already endure. Such blatant displays of violence against women also reflect a black hole in our educational and cultural system about what constitutes rape or sexual assault. Does anyone really know what consensual sex really is? Drunk sex happens all the time, but it’s always framed as sex, and not rape, which is what it usually is. If someone who is drunk consents, is sex that occurs rape? YES, it is STILL rape because alcohol impairs judgment and therefore, one’s ability to give free and informed consent.  These are basic facts that I believe should be instilled into our children at an early age. Children especially must be taught about this, and alternative forms of expressing masculinity, femininity, or their identities in general.  I myself did not fully comprehend the meaning of rape or sexual assault until my sophomore year of college. I have always considered myself a feminist, revealing how little the general public must know about these issues.

I think it would be constructive to interrogate why movies such as these are so popular. Why do people love these movies? These movies portray an accessible form of masculinity which is so popular because they validate young males’ struggles with restrictive, traditional notions of masculinity. At least, that is why I think young men love these movies, because they can relate to barriers to ‘getting the girl’, a common one face by the socially awkward main characters in these highly popular ‘bromances’. In their struggle to become REAL MEN, however, women suffer. Many of Seth Rogan’s films focus upon “getting’ with” the really ‘hot chick’, continuing a long pattern of objectifying women by framing them as sexual conquests.  These conquests are at the center of the kind of masculinity depicted and glorified by such movies. These movies fail to challenge traditional notions of masculinity, and instead, lock this version of masculinity as the only version. But at the same time, why do women enjoy these movies? I hypothesize that it is easier for some women to laugh at these movies rather than being seen as the ‘angry feminist’. By laughing at these movies, they can feel comfortable in uncomfortable situations. Instead of thinking about how difficult and unbalanced sexual power dynamics are, it is easier to laugh them away. Validation of this type of humor only perpetuates and strengthens a rape culture.

"Observe and Report"’s date rape scene illustrates how casually rape is depicted and referenced in the media. In addition, rape is often thrown about in everyday, casual conversation.  I’ve heard the term in discussions about environmental destruction, in competitive sports events, and just everyday banter. Using the term rape further naturalizes it, taking away the negative stigma it MUST retain.
We can only hope that big-profile controversy around this scene in Observe and Report will force filmmakers, writers, actors, everyone, to at least think about what they are doing and what kind of message they are sending. Comedy especially is a genre that has the potential to either critique oppressive norms or strengthen them. So while creative ingenuity is great, one piece of advice: rape is never funny, so don’t even try.

Observe and Report, Written and directed by Jody Hill, starring Seth Rogan and Anna Faris

The sexual social contract: American soldiers and Afghan leaders

This story is a couple months late, but outrageous enough to think about and discuss. Many thanks to former Consortium staffer Grace Harkness who alerted us to this issue.

Viagra, according to a December 2008 article in the Huffington Post and the Washington Post, is being dispensed as gifts by American soldiers to male tribal leaders in Afghanistan, in an effort to extract information on Taliban movements and supply routes. While the CIA possesses a long history of bribery as a strategy for information gathering, the exchange of prescription drugs for essential intelligence information has another set of implications, especially when it involves sex with women, who have no role in this exchange. 

This exchange between American soldiers and Afghan leaders can be seen as a type of sexual social contract because more than just little blue pills are being exchanged between the two actors. The American soldiers are, in effect, reinforcing male control over sexual access to women. The Viagra strategy has been hailed as a great success, a beautiful story of cross-boundary brotherhood, a type of inter-cultural fraternity bonding over the subjugation of women in the bedroom. Isn't this great? Just sex up the world and all of our problems will be solved. Where does consent fit into this picture? Where are the women in this exchange? Well, women are involved in this exchange, as the objects being exchanged. More accurately, access to women's bodies is being exchanged.

This story reflects a lot of misguided assumptions and motivations originating from and perpetuated by the U.S. Yes, yes, we hear all the time about how brown women are oppressed by brown men, especially in narratives concerning the Middle East, but we must focus upon the role the U.S. government has upon these perceptions. First of all, portraying sex as the universal solution for extracting information (of course, only acceptable sex, in heterosexual, government sanctioned unions) marginalizes the power relations inherent in this process (the power of the CIA operatives over poor tribal leaders, in this case) and runs the risk of creating a picture of Afghan tribal leaders as sex-crazed dunces. It is interesting to note that in many blogs, this exchange has been compared to antiquated KGB strategies which coerced beautiful women to act as bait for their enemies.

This issue also illustrates the profit-driven nature of pharmaceutical companies and the absolute disregard for socially responsible practices. It doesn't seem like Viagra has taken any action to ensure their medicine is being used in a medically safe manner, no matter who is taking the drug. Viagra, a drug only administered via prescription in the U.S., has a number of side effects that could become serious without proper medical exams and unsupervised intake. These include: drug dependency, headache, and upset stomach. Less commonly, bluish vision, blurred vision, or sensitivity to light may occur. These side effects is dependent upon the medical history of the individual as well, which is the reason why a prescription is needed for Viagra in the U.S. The double standards of the U.S. are simply appalling. It is ok to dispense prescription medication freely to brown men in the Middle East, which emphasizes the idea that they are Others, not quite human, and therefore, a prescription is not necessary for them to take Viagra.

The double standards continue. Medicare is not allowed to buy drugs in wholesale amounts, but the CIA gets more than their fair share of little blue pills. This is outrageous considering the state of health care in the U.S.  Also, what does this sort of governmental-corporate contract mean for governmental accountability? What are the limits for governmental manipulation? The fact that the CIA is allowed to buy wholesale quantities of a prescription medication without any legal intervention only makes the totalitarian power of the U.S. government (in conjunction with transnational corporations) more apparent.

Most of all, the lack of attention to the women involved in these interactions, by the CIA and news outlets, is a great disappointment. -Suma Setty

Sexist Commentary is not Amusing

(by Jen Piller - See Jen's previous post) 

Chris Baker, a former Texas radio talk show host, now hosts KTLK 100.3 in Minneapolis.  Baker is one who believes politicians are nothing more than “puppets and gangsters,” no matter the political party affiliation.  However, he supported politicians, Ron Paul and Fred Thompson… Baker has also been making strong sexist commentary, of which I’m sure, from reading his viewpoints on the KTLK website, he sees no issue with it.  He has been saying Obama is being a “little bitch” or a “wuss” and not standing up to Palin (see his original comments), however, Obama has clearly expressed he is running against John McCain, not Sarah Palin.  Also, Baker has called Palin “a smoking-hot chick from Alaska.” Moreover, he said that Palin should have shown some cleavage during the VP debates to distract Biden, or that Baker noticed “a panty line on her.” Now, if one takes away the politics, or political parties, one might find something wrong with those comments.  I am outraged; this is a perfect example of male chauvinism.  And why are women in politics some how on some sort of beauty show???  This is another example of men being in control of women.