The Cycle of Abuse, Celebrity-Style with Rihanna and Chris Brown

When I first heard about Rihanna’s attack, I braced myself for the rumours to come. Here is an obviously very public relationship and I knew the mixture of such a private issue (domestic violence) with such public figures would either be really good or really bad. Mostly bad.

One thing that has consistently pissed me off is the commentary that celebrities have been saying about the incident known as “Domestic Disturbia.” First of all, I never understood why OTHER PEOPLE should comment about someone’s relationship, especially when they are in such prominent positions that they can’t really say anything. The support for Chris Brown was appalling. I don’t know how many times I read some male celeb/artist saying how they were friends with Brown and would support him and know he just made a bad mistake. THIS IS WHAT HELPS ABUSERS TO ABUSE. There is no reason to stop. Many abusers are prominent in their communities and very respected; they care about what others think about them. This is why they put so much effort to looking good in public, but don’t hesitate to do what they want when no one is watching. Unfortunately, we have become so concerned with losing a friend or hurting someone’s feelings that we’d still support someone who obviously does not know how to treat someone else.

Another issue that has annoyed me is that oftentimes people would say things about Chris’ character. “He’s a good guy” they say. But when asked about Rihanna? “She’s a beautiful girl.” Is there nothing else to be said about her? Is there nothing valuable about her other than her looks and fame? Would this incident be less upsetting if Rihanna wasn’t beautiful but society’s standards?

Anyway, the cycle of abuse has proceeded to the next step in front of us. Reading through the posts of Ohnotheydidn’t (yes, I am guilty of reading it every so often), I see the progression of the relationship’s public cycle of abuse (we don’t know how things have been behind closed doors). Things have been going well between them. Things escalate to an act of abuse. They break up. Brown sends Rihanna gifts (jewelry, flowers, etc) and calls her to wish her well on her birthday. Apologizes. They finally get back together.

As upset as I am that they got back together, I must say that I am not surprised. The LAPD has been reluctant to officially charge Brown because it’s a high profile case (let’s be serious, it would be difficult even if it weren’t a high profile case) and Rihanna didn’t press charges. It must have been heartbreaking to go through such a horrific ordeal publicly and then to not be able to be comforted by your significant other. The overwhelming loneliness makes it difficult and I’m sure both parties are thinking over the incident repeatedly, thinking that they could change and keep the incident from happening again.

A lot of people are surprised by her actions. People have even gone as far to say she deserves it now or they hope she gets beaten again. Shit like that only helps the abused to stay with their abusers. The cycle of abuse varies. The abuser can convince the abused that it is their fault; perhaps the abuser says that the other started it and if they behaved differently the abuser wouldn’t “have” to hurt the other. Oftentimes people have the misconception if they’re not beaten on a “regular” basis (whatever that means) that they are not in an abusive relationship.

There are so many factors that many cannot relate to, yet people are choosing to put in their two cents. Well, here are my two cents. Watch what the fuck you say. And don’t fucking judge. We need to educate ourselves. The ignorance about abusive relationship needs to end. We need to speak out. Instead of putting the burden on Rihanna to be a spokesperson/model for all abused women out there, how about we take on responsibility ourselves and strive to do our part.

We can start by learning and understanding.

Ooh Boobies! And more boobies!

In “Stupid Boob Behavior” Cosmo wonders why there seems to be an increasing trend of young women exposing their breasts in public whenever and wherever they want. In the second paragraph author Michelle Stacey writes:

At concerts, festivals, college parties, and athletic events, chicks are grinning and baring their boobs. Which begs the question: Why are so many young women making their breasts public property? And who really ends up getting the best end of this deal – the girls who say all this flaunting makes them feel empowered and free or the men ogling them?

Calling women ”chicks”? It’s supposed to be a cutsey word but it’s just belittling, condescending, objectifying and offensive. The questions that she poses are legitimate and relates to the whole issue of whether women are being active, autonomous agents when they exhibit their bodies. However, there are many things about the article that irk me and I do not think that Stacey does a good job of critically addressing the questions she asks.     

Also, as I scrolled down while reading the article I couldn’t help but cringe at the side bar that linked articles like “30 Things to do with a naked man,” “What his body language is telling you,” “What men really like in bed” and “How to snag a rich guy.” Not only is this extremely heteronormative, but it also completely eliminates female desire from the picture. For a magazine that’s supposed to be for “fun, fearless females”, one of the most popular magazines that women read for sex advice, why is there nothing about female pleasure? (And don’t they run out of ways to drive him wild? It seems like there’s always something about how to please your man on every cover.)

Under the heading “Why Girls Go Wild” Stacey writes, “All you have to do is turn on the TV or cruise the Internet for a few minutes to observe the current exhibitionistic climate.” What she completely forgets to mention is you know, just browse through Cosmo. If you look at their cover models or just the models in the magazine, the women are generally hypersexualized and bare their cleavage. A professor cited in the article also notes that women these days “are exposing themselves more, with very low-slung pants and very skimpy tops that show the belly”. Again, open any issue of Cosmo and you’ll see models wearing exactly what he describes, and sometimes even less than that.

Stacey does a poor analysis of how alcohol factors into the equation. She writes:

…there is no question that being “drunk and stupid” is indeed often another key element in the process of “going wild.” The AMA [American Medical Association] spring-break study firmly put the blame on booze for girls’ misbehavior during what the AMA’s president characterized as “a dangerous binge fest.” But which comes first, the alcohol or the desire to flash? “Alcohol may partly enable some of this behavior,” says M. Lynne Cooper, PhD, professor of psychology at the University of Missouri at Columbia and an expert in alcohol use and risky behavior.

 There have been many conversations about the role of alcohol in hook-up culture and boobie-flashing culture, but one thing that hasn’t been mentioned is how many young women feel the need to alcohol as a social license in order to be sexual. The larger issue here is that we live in a misogynist culture that not only simultaneously devalues and overvalues sex (sex scandals always make headlines and it’s what sells, yet why is abstinence-only sex education dominant?) but also sends women contradicting messages about their sexuality (like the whole virgin/whore dichotonomy). Women may feel unable to explore and pursue their sexual side unless they are under the influence and may use alcohol as an excuse for their sexual behavior because women aren’t supposed to be sexual anyway (we’re supposed to be sexy but not sexual, we’re supposed to be desired and desirable but “pure” and virginal).

Perhaps the best part of the article is the part that says:

“Young women today are children of the sexual revolution,” says Donna Lisker, PhD, director of the Duke University Women’s Center, “and many have grown up with the explicitly feminist message that they should be proud of their bodies. So they can cast their behavior as a form of feminism — as girl power, being in charge of their own sexuality.”

Are you really in charge of and owning your sexuality when your actions are influenced by patriarchal, heteronormative, misogynist, objectifying ideas that equate a woman’s beauty and worth to simply what your body looks like? Are you really in charge of and owning your sexuality when you flaunt your body expressly for the male gaze and to get male attention?

Don’t get me wrong – I wear make up sometimes, I wear high heels sometimes, I even wear skimpy clothes sometimes, but I don’t think that you can equate feminism with buying into patriarchal standards of beauty and offering your body up for (male) objectification and consumption. Is it feminist to consign yourself to being just a sexual object to please the ogling eyes of men? It’s feminist to love your body and embrace it the way it is without objectifying it as a way to get sexual attention.

My main problem with this article is the hypocrisy in it: how can Cosmo question why women are so into publicly baring their breasts when the whole magazine is basically all about telling women (even the ones who go around flashing people in public, the very women whose motives they are questioning) that it is empowering to display themselves as sexual objects. The whole magazine is dedicated to the public consumption of female bodies which makes it so hypocritical to feature an article that so innocently wonders gee, why do women like to show their breasts so much? Well Cosmo, take a good look at yourself and you’ll find out why.

OMG, Just Say the M word!

Menstrual cramps.  Many women dread the arrival of our periods because of painful cramping, headaches, bloating, and a variety of other symptoms.  Menstrual cramps are thought to be related to natural hormone-like substances called prostaglandins which cause contraction of the uterus.  Women use Tylenol, Midol, chocolate, heat pads, and a plethora of other home remedies in an attempt to get rid of cramps.

Go ahead and look it up online.  Ask your friends how they relieve their cramps.  You will probably get a ton of semi-useful advice.  Regular physical activity, yoga, balanced diet, herbal remedies, oral contraceptives, chocolate, bananas, and even socks filled with rice and heated in the microwave are said to be effective ways to relieve cramps.  It is rare that you will find a site or book that recommends sex as a relief for cramps.  But many women find sex while on their periods (especially when experiencing abdominal pain) to be thoroughly unappealing.

Why does sex relieve menstrual cramps?  An orgasm causes your uterus to contract.  This enables it to use up excess prostaglandins.  Some say that sex can relieve pain by stretching out the contracting uterine muscle.  Others argue that cramping is caused partially by blood pooling up in the abdomen, especially in the uterine/cervical tissues, and sex with orgasm clears up some of the congestion that causes cramping in the first place.  Whatever the reason, many women find that sex during menstrual cramps completely relieves their symptoms!

But when the few internet sites that recommend sex for the relief of menstrual cramps discuss the topic, the conversation is disturbingly hetero-centric.  Plus, some sites say that sexual intercourse can at times actually worsen cramps if you are in a position where the uterus can become disrupted.  It really seems to be the orgasm, not the act of heterosexual intercourse that is effective in cramp relief.  Even the rare sites that are comfortable recommending sex seem to completely leave out the lesbian and bisexual population, or the huge population of women who do not achieve orgasm in heteronormative sexual intercourse, and only achieve orgasm by clitoral stimulation.  Some sexologists have suggested there may be ways of moving your body during heterosexual sex so that the tip of the clitoris comes into contact with your partner’s pelvis, and you can achieve orgasm during intercourse.  But this has not been confirmed, and as many as 75% of women have never had orgasm by penile thrust alone.

Well, here comes the M word….MASTURBATE.  I am absolutely perplexed as to why nobody ever recommends masturbation as a relief for menstrual cramps.  One of the closest recommendations I have seen is a veiled comment by user elizabelis on allnurses.com.  ”I don’t think intercourse is necessarily the best way to go about relieving cramps through orgasm. We’re all grownups, I’m sure I don’t need to elaborate…be creative!”

Many women report their most intense orgasms as occurring during masturbation.  It has been repeatedly suggested that women achieve orgasm more quickly and more pleasurably during masturbation.  Face it, most women know best how to please themselves.  Female masturbation is often necessary to know how to achieve pleasure in other forms of sexual activity.  And female masturbation is a completely healthy and safe way to achieve sexual pleasure and relieve tension without a partner.

But female masturbation seems to be a huge taboo in our society, so it is not surprising that advocating masturbation in relief of menstrual cramps is virtually unheard-of.  Masturbation could be a great way to relieve cramps safely and naturally, without a partner.  Of course, partner sex with orgasm also works, but many women do not have sexual partners at all times or do not feel inclined to engage in sexual activity with a partner during their period.

There are more than twice as many nerve fibers in the clitoris (about 8,000) than there are in the entire penis.  The most orgasms ever recorded in one hour in a research setting is 17 in the case of male orgasms.  In the case of women, the number is a shocking 134.  For lack of a better way to put it, we’ve got this really cool thing down there, and it is sad that so many women are so afraid to talk about it, or even to use it at all.  Just say the M word!

Only in a Woman’s World? Really?

It is no secret that advertising tends to be very sexist especially if the target audience is specifically male, or specifically female. Frito-Lay has been/is researching how women feel about snacking and guilt in order to create a more effective marketing campaign, packaging that appeals more to women, and new flavors to entice women to eat Frito-Lay snacks. A recent article in the New York Times by Stephanie Clifford says:

Women are snacking more than men, but are not eating as many Frito-Lay snacks, said Jill Nykoliation, the president of Juniper Park, the advertising agency that handled the Frito-Lay women’s project. “So if it’s, you’re snacking two times as much, but you’re not snacking with us, why, and what can we do for you?”

In order to determine why women aren’t snacking with Frito-lay and how to encourage them to snack with Frito-Lay, Nykoliation did research on how women’s brains compared to men’s brains, employing “pop neurology” and “neuromarketing” techniques.

She was especially interested by the guilt factor. Frito-Lay and Juniper Park asked about 100 women to keep journals about their lives for about two weeks. According to their logs, the women felt guilty about quite a lot, whether it was snacking, not seeing their children enough, or not spending enough time with their husbands.

Trying to exploit women’s guilt, huh? Why do women “feel guilty” about so much? Because in this supposed post-feminist world, women are supposed to be perfect and do it all – they have to be thin, in shape, beautiful, always well dressed or made up, perfect moms who can balance work and family time, etc. In our patriarchal society, we are not good as we are – we always have to be better at something, to improve on something. All these double standards (a man in power is admirable but  a woman in power is a bitch), conflicting messages (be pure and virginal, but also be sexy and seductive for your man), and constant demands on women to achieve perfection in all aspects of their lives can get very overwhelming. Isn’t it great, capitalizing off women’s guilt to try to make us spend money on useless crap and then eat it too?

But I digress…Check out Frito-Lay’s new ad campaign specifically targeted to women. The cartoon series features four animated women (Anna, Cheryl, Maya and Nikki) who are “fab funny, fearless females” as the site puts it. They talk about men and health: eating healthy and exercising. The Times calls it “something of an animated Sex and the City.” Here is one of their (problematic) advertising images:

The woman on the left points to the Lays bag and says, “This is the best invention since the push up bra” and the woman on the right looks down at her breasts and responds, “I wouldn’t go that far.” I frankly don’t get it – chips and push up bras? Huh? A bag of chips better than a push up bra is supposed to make me want to buy and eat those chips?

What’s wrong with this “Only in a Woman’s World” campaign?

1. The women are all heterosexual: Anna is dating Steve, Cheryl is married to Mike, Maya is married to Simon, and Nikki is single but looking for Mr. Right. This assumes heterosexuality, thus perpetuating heteronormativity.

2. The women are so stereotypically feminine: Nikki is the single girl who wants to have a boyfriend (because women always want or need men), Maya owns a fashion boutique (owning something definitely indicates some degree of power but at the same time it is in a stereotypically feminine sphere: fashion which sort of minimizes her power), Cheryl is a full time mom who “sometimes finds herself wishing the annoyingly perfect Super-Mom next door would have a mental breakdown” (classical: pitting women in competition with each other. Cheryl is jealous of her Super-Mom neighbor and just wants her to crack so that she doesn’t feel as threatened) and Anna is an avid yoga practitioner (there’s nothing wrong with yoga – I practice and enjoy it myself, but at the same time it is generally more associated with women than men. Why couldn’t they have made her really into baseball or hockey or something that challenges dominant perceptions of femininity?)

3. If you look at the Get your goodies section of the site, there are three different wallpaper backgrounds that you can download that all have to do with women eating and feeling guilty. In the middle image, a woman is looking in a mirror and sees a big cupcake with pink icing on top and says “Whoa. Bad mirror.” This is supposed to encourage women to snack on salty foods rather than sweets because apparently research shows that women prefer snacking on sweets rather than salty foods. It doesn’t seem to do that though, at least not for me. It just further shows how this marketing campaign is trying to exploit and capitalize off female guilt concerning food.

A larger problem underlying the ad campaign is women and food, tying together self esteem, body image, how to be healthy, unhealthy eating practices and behaviors, eating disorders, and how privilege factors into what some women can or can’t eat.

I hope people don’t actually base their decisions on WikiHow

Why on earth did I ever start reading WikiHow?

This article just screams “Oh my GOSH is my friend a lesbian?!  I absolutely must know immediately because if she is a lesbian she will totally fall in love with me and that would be oh my gosh so AWKWARD and WEIRD!!!!”  Here’s “How to tell if your best friend is a lesbian,” according to the ever-so-knowledgeable WikiHow database:

Friendships between girls can become very close, and you see that reflected in the body language, eye contact, and verbal language. However, there is a thin line between close friends and lesbians. If you suspect that your best friend may be a lesbian, or just want to learn how to spot the difference, then this is the article for you.

Watch the body language. This is usually a definite giveaway. Does your friend brush against you or touch you very often? Does she often stand very close to you, and look at you a lot? Test this out when you’re together, and test this out when you see her with other girls.  Make sure you don’t make a mistake though. Sometimes she may just be looking at you because you’re wearing a new outfit, and brushing against someone is an action used with most, if not all good friends.

Okay, WikiHow has got people on the sleuthing path.  The Discovery Channel and WikiHow are teaming up to explore the land of the dangerous and mysterious species lesbian.  First, we have to analyze our “friend’s” every move.  Because apparently the author thinks that if your friend is a lesbian she is totally going to hit on you constantly and touch you when you don’t want to be touched.  And your friend looking at your new outfit and being lesbian are described as mutually exclusive.  Because obviously lesbians only look at other women out of lust, and only straight women like clothes and fashion.  DUH.

Think about the way she talks. Does she often hit on you or other girls jokingly? Is she flirtatious? Consider the way she is when talking to other girls – how close she is, her eye contact, and read her body language. Think about all of it carefully and see if anything is crossing the friendship line.  

Let’s delve deeper.  Does she TALK like a lesbian??!!  If she flirts with girls jokingly, she must be a lesbian…because she couldn’t possibly just be someone as ignorant and immature as the reader who actually is attempting to follow the steps in this article.  Jokingly making fun of lesbianism is something that lesbians do all the time?!  Well, WikiHow says so, so it must be true!  But wait, we can further pry into our friend’s personal business!  Brace yourself for step three!

Check for rainbows. Rainbows (a lot of the time with only six colors) are a gay/lesbian symbol. Many gay people wear a rainbow bracelet, anklet and/or necklace. Other places where people place “pride” rainbows are: on bumper stickers, on clothing, in/as tattoos, on backpacks, on laptops, etc. Keep your eyes peeled for them – but don’t jump to conclusions.

Well this is even more ridiculous.  Not only are we inspecting the person for rainbows, but we are counting colors.  And I guess if the species marker isn’t readily visible, well the tattoo might just be hidden underneath her short hair or baggy clothes, right?  The article of course doesn’t take into account that if your friend is wearing a rainbow, maybe they identify as any of the letters in LGBTQIA, maybe they are an ally, or maybe they just like rainbows.  But mostly it just isn’t your business anyway!!! 

Watch her reaction to people who are gay/lesbian. Does she seem absolutely disgusted about it or is she relaxed? Use your brains, though; sometimes she may be pretending to be disgusted with the idea in an effort to hide her true feelings. She may also be lesbian if she seems very uptight and nervous about the topic. Be sure to take into account what kind of a person she is. In addition, many straight people are unaffected by exposure to gays and lesbians, so be careful to factor this into your conclusion.

Ok, this is REALLY infuriating.  It basically implies that most straight people are completely uncomfortable and rude around LGBT people, and only a true lesbian would be comfortable around lesbians.  But even if the friend is totally ignorant and rude to LGBT people, the author implies that she could still be a lesbian and just be ashamed of her shameful nature.  The author should be ashamed of his/her shameful nature, if you ask me.

Be forthright and ask. If, after looking for these signs, you still aren’t sure, and even if you are 99 percent sure, you need to ask her. Be careful though, it may be a touchy subject if she is still confused or feels cornered by your question. If you do ask, make sure it is in a way that makes it clear that you’ll be supportive of her, whatever she answers.

Ugh, people who think they are being open to others but are really just annoying and rude piss me off to no end.  Why is it that everyone feels this overwhelming need to know everybody else’s sexual orientation?  Is it so we can box people into little neat stereotypes?  Why do so many people feel entitled to know everything about everyone?  It is so sad that people cannot get past their nosy curiosity and fear of LGBT people.  

To add insult to injury, there is a list of sources and citations at the bottom of the WikiHow page that lists some pretty legit LGBT positive websites.  The inclusion of the list kind of gives the feel of “this is where I got my info on their behavior patterns, because this is where they congregate.”  But none of the info in the article even remotely resembles something you might find on a queer-positive site!  There are some disclaimers near the bottom of the WikiHow post that remind people that not ALL lesbians act the same and not ALL lesbians are attracted to their friends just because they are girls.  So the author only thinks that most lesbians are the same.  That definitely does not reassure me as to the author’s accepting nature and high quality of advice.  If even the author admits that the approach is at least a little bit faulty, why on earth does the article exist at all?  Because unfortunately, in WikiHow as in everyday life, people will share their self-proclaimed expertise whether we like it or not.

Other gems from WikiHow include:

•  How to Understand Gay and Lesbian People 
• How to Be a Popular Transgendered Person in High School 
• How to Lead a Heterosexual Lifestyle if You are Gay (this one is REALLY ridiculous)
•  How to Defend Your Support of Gay Marriage Rights (Because you only support it to go along with the crowd but you have no idea why, I guess.  I could actually write an entire other post on this one because some of the supposed arguments in support of gay marriage definitely seem more than a little off-base.)
• How to Get a Gay Male Friend (For Girls)  (“Everywhere on TV you see them: fabulous, close gay male friends who support, amuse, and accompany their straight girlfriends everywhere.”  Go out and get one now, its like the new trend and stuff.)

The list could go on and on, but I shouldn’t waste my time on any more of this ridiculousness.  I wonder how many walking talking human robots actually try to follow these steps on WikiHow, and how often they embarrass themselves with their insensitivity and closed-mindedness.  HRUMPH.

 

“Rape is cheaper than bullets”?

Amnesty International has launched a new ad campaign in the London underground subway called Rape is cheaper than bullets:

These ads are appearing in subways to call attention to how rape is used as a weapon of war all over the world and will be up from now until March 11th right after International Women’s Day. They are meant to be provocative and make people think about the pervasiveness of sexual violence as a weapon of war in global conflicts.

However even if this campaign is well intentioned and meant to encourage more awareness and activism around sexual violence, what message is it really disseminating? What does it actually mean? Is the message that it’s cheaper to rape people than to buy bullets and shoot them instead?

Over at The Curvature Cara writes:

My first thought was: yes, rape is indeed cheaper than bullets. And I suppose that I had never thought of it that way before, or consciously realized that the incredibly low economic price of rape, combined with very high “results” in terms of effort to terrorize a people, would indeed make it desirable to the kind of people who are intent on destroying other human beings with limited funds.

But where, exactly, does that analysis get us? Because my first question after considering that was, and still is: so what, we should make bullets cheaper?

How exactly does this ad make people think critically about rape? The link between rape and war is not clearly made. It’s not explicit enough that Amnesty is trying to highlight the pervasive use of sexual violence as a weapon of war. The link between rape and bullets on the other hand is certainly made, granted it’s in terms of economic cost and the implications are rather vague.

These ads can be potentially triggering for survivors which can be problematic. Also, they do not seem to assign the accountability on the perpetrators but just make a cost comparison between rape and bullets.

I wonder how effective these ads actually are – are they sparking conversations among people about sexual violence or are they leaving riders simply confused? Are there more efficient and clear marketing strategies and campaigns that Amnesty can use to help raise awareness about sexual violence, because it’s certainly an important cause but the way they approached it isn’t quite so accessible and poignant.

One of my favorite ad campaigns is This is not an invitation to rape me by Rape Crisis Scotland. The ads visually debunk popular myths about rape.

 

Myth: a woman raped for wearing revealing clothing is at fault for “leading a man on” and “asking for it.”

Reality: clothing (or lack of) has nothing to do with it.

 

 

Myth: a woman raped after consenting to any level of sexual activity is at fault for “giving mixed signals.”

Reality: there is no such thing as blanket consent – agreeing to one level of sexual activity does not mean agreeing to all types of sexual activity.

The things third graders say about the Chris Brown/Rihanna case…

So my friend sent me an article, Lessons from a fallen idol, which has more on the Chris Brown/Rihanna case and the distressing nature of some of the discussions that have been occurring among elementary school children. Before I even read the article in its entirety I couldn’t help but be frustrated and upset with the title of the article. “Lessons from a fallen idol?” This speaks to the media maltreatment of women: they love to elevate women and put them on pedestals and then just as quickly to bring them down and tear them to shreds. Also, it implies that because Rihanna was in an abusive relationship and injured, she is no longer worthy of being an idol. This adds to the negative stigma on domestic/relationship/sexual violence survivors and omits the perpetrators from the narrative. Perpetrators are able to get away with it because they tend to be invisible in the picture and thus all the attention gets focused on the survivors.

The article writes that a third grade teacher at the Neighborhood Charterhouse School in Dorcester has said that his eight year old students have been very opinionated regarding the Chris Brown/Rihanna case. Unfortunately they are schpealing out your typical misguided victim-blaming language and siding with Brown or coming up with excuses that justify his actions. Many children fail to grasp the severity of relationship/domestic violence (the article calls it “domestic dispute” – what a nice euphemism) and are echoing what they hear and see on television and at home.

“That was the first thing I started hearing – excuses,” said Shiggs-Quiroga, 28, who has been teaching for five years. “The same girl who brought it up had said to me . . . ‘If he did that to me, I would bail him out.’ I said, ‘Really?’ I was like, ‘Oh my God. How am I going to have this talk now?’ “

An eight year old girl essentially saying that she would return to her boyfriend and let him go if he abused her and got in trouble for it is problematic. It shows how deeply ingrained and pervasive victim-blaming attitudes are in our society and how children are indoctrinated so early on into our violent, sexist, misogynist, victim-blaming rape culture that sanctions violence against women and even broader gender based violence. Obviously third graders are very young and may have difficulty truly understanding domestic violence for what it really is, but there need to be conversations with young people that rectify misogynist language, attitudes and ideology that perpetuate the pervasive victim-blaming in society. These kids are echoing what they see and hear in the media and in their homes, and schools have a responsibility to educate students and correct harmful and false beliefs that reinforce and sustain oppressive structures in society.

Schools are a microcosm of society at large and tend to be often violent places. In addition to physical bullying and fist fights, educational settings can legitimize violence occurring in the world by failing to intervene and challenge and alter students’ perspectives that enforce various forms of violence in society: institutional/structural violence that excludes membership from certain individuals or groups as well as behavioral violence that manifest in escalating physical violence. Inaction is one of the greatest flaws in perpetuating injustice and oppression, and to connect this back to a previous post, Tufts’ failure to reform and improve its sexual assault policy to make it more accessible to and friendly to survivors is a form of structural violence. It creates an atmosphere that is hostile and unsympathetic to survivors and basically sends the message that sexual violence is clearly not their problem, or an important enough problem to be addressed.

But to go back to the article, the author writes:

Worth noting is that the same 8-year-old told her teacher that Brown had reason to hit Rihanna because she gave him an STD. That made Shiggs-Quiroga’s head spin.

The young girl said, “I heard she gave him – diabetes!”

Believing that Brown had the right to hit Rihanna because she gave him an STD is ignorant because no one deserves to be hit especially not by someone you love, someone close to you or someone you are intimate with. It also touches on a larger problem: the stigma around sex and the lack of comprehensive sex education that can result in unnecessary health problems that could’ve been unavoidable if people were more informed. Instead of punishing someone for giving you a disease one should be educated enough to make safe choices to prevent any infections or diseases.

Another important thing – an eight year old thinking that diabetes is an STD? This just clearly shows why we need to have comprehensive sex education so that people are aware, informed and prepared. In education, there is a false binary between issues around gender, sex and sexuality and “academic” material like math, English, science, history, etc. However issues around gender, sex and sexuality are so integral to identity and lifestyle issues/politics and are important aspects of child development/growth that never gets discussed because it’s pushed to the sidelines as irrelevant.

It’s never too early to start having conversations around healthy sexuality and healthy relationships so that children can make more responsible choices about sex and sexuality that are safe, healthy and informed. They should have the facts, information and “rules of the game” before it applies to them, before they become involved in romantic relationships. If we want to prevent violence it’s important to educate our children, like the Gandhi quote “If we want peace we have to begin with the children.”

Newsflash: You’re part of the problem

While browsing a social website, I came across a post that became quite popular, and now I can see why. A twenty-seven year old woman from California posts a journal entry titled “Newsflash: Guys are Great” After reading the title, I braced myself for the post.

I’ve been skimming journals for the past few days and it seems there is too much guy bashing for my liking. I heart guys. They’re great to cuddle up next to, carry heavy stuff, getting advice and just generally fun to be around.

Girls make guys crazy. I don’t like feminism; I like a guy to be a gentleman but more so to just be themselves. If you’re a girl who meets stupid guys who treat you bad:

FUN FACT: You brought it on yourself.

People can only treat you as good or bad as you let them. If someone sucks at being nice, you can totally choose to not be around them anymore. If you choose to stick around.. you get what you pay for.

I’ve met some scumbags in my time, and the key is to move on and know that there are nice guys out there..

So.. where are these guys hiding out these days?

This post basically sums up my biggest pet peeves of anti-feminism. It upset me even more that a woman posted this, but it comes to show that one’s gender is not always a guaranteed indicator if one is a feminist or not. Where do I begin?

“Girls make guys crazy.” Yes. All women collectively have worked to make men the way they are now. It is not one’s fault if they’re “crazy” (whatever she means by this), but it is the woman’s fault! How dare women push these guys who would be otherwise perfect if it were not for their existence!

“I don’t like feminism; I like a guy to be a gentleman but more so to just be themselves.” I’m not sure why she put these two clauses together in the same sentence. It seems like she’s saying that feminism is encouraging men to not be themselves? Damned feminists! Wanting their equal rights! They’re just trying to change men from their perfect selves! Who cares if the guy is abusive or a rapist? We shouldn’t have to change him! Feminism isn’t about changing men. It’s about changing society…so that men and women are EQUAL and have the SAME opportunities, i.e. same pay, same access to certain professions, etc.

“If you’re a girl who meets stupid guys who treat you bad:

FUN FACT: You brought it on yourself…If you choose to stick around.. you get what you pay for.” Did you guys have as much fun as I did reading that fact? This is the kind of victim blaming that keeps people in abusive relationships and then causes them to not get help. NO ONE deserves to be hurt. One does not have control over another’s actions and it is not their fault that they love someone and believe that they will change. It is not their fault of the abuser has made it nearly impossible to leave someone. It is VERY difficult to get out of an abusive relationship– abusers do not start out being abusive. If they did, they most likely would not have any victims to hurt. Partners are lured in by this so-called “amazing person” and then the abuse comes unexpectedly. Oftentimes the abuser says exactly what this poster has said “you deserve this.” The victim lives in fear thinking that they caused this abuse to happen and if only they didnt bring it onto themselves the situation will change.

“I’ve met some scumbags in my time, and the key is to move on and know that there are nice guys out there” Yes, it is just so easy to “move on” after being in an abusive relationship. It is difficult enough to start to heal after such an ordeal and even more difficult if they do not seek outside help. What does “move on” even mean anyway? Many say it takes a lifetime to heal from an abusive relationship. Does that mean they have moved on? I think women have a right to share about their bad experiences with men; it’s a way to show that their behavior is not right and should not be encouraged. Taking time off from men CAN be a good thing. Her dismissive attitude about women’s suffering and victim blaming is deplorable. Just because she personally has been able to “move on” from these “scumbags,” it doesnt give her the right to say that everyone out there deserves to be treated badly if they have.

The comments just pissed me off too much. Some gems say that feminism has shifted to Valerie Solanas’s feminism: man-bashing with the goal of manocide (read: male genocide). Other say that feminism is IRRELEVANT…sure you women got your voting rights…what else is there to be done? Feminists just want to be a part of something, so they joined this so-called movement.

This served as an eye-opener. I surround myself with educated, like-minded women, so reading that there are people still out there jolts me back to reality.  This is a reminder that we still have sooo much to still be done in this society.

There is not enough D: in the world.

NPSA offering gay rehab! Just what we all wanted

The South African National Party’s former spokesperson, Juan Dval Uys, is said to have “agreed” to resign from the party in recent weeks; he has come out as a gay man in the past. Their affairs leader, Elize Sprague, insists that the change in the manifesto didn’t affect his recent departure…right.

The South African National Party recently released a revised election manifesto. The party now states that they will accept gay and lesbian members, but they will have to “rehabilitated.”

Sprague said, “The party is open to all. We don’t approve (of homosexuality), but there is nothing we can do about people’s lifestyle. We won’t exclude them, we will rather rehabilitate them. We regard them as South Africans and we will still serve them.”

This party has been seeking to abolish same sex marriage in the country, which has been legal since November 2006.

This party needs to acknowledge that homosexuality is NOT a disease to be “cured” and that these so-called reparative therapy programs do not work.

The policies of this party are a disgrace. You can email/write to this party and tell them that they should cease their efforts to change the constitution to outlaw gay marriage and that homosexuality is nothing that is needed to be “cured.”

Contact info
NATIONAL PARTY SOUTH AFRICA (NP)
P.O. Box 1344, Sea Point 8060
Fax: (+27) 086 627 7405
E-mail: mail@nationalparty.co.za

Berlusconi does it again

Around a month ago, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi made statements strongly suggesting that women are raped because they are just so good looking and men can’t resist them. He falsely implies that rape isn’t about power or a sense of entitlement and ownership over another, it’s about sex. And her perpetuates another dangerous myth about rape – that it is a compliment because you know, sometimes men just can’t control themselves when a beautiful woman walks by. 

Now, Berlusconi’s gone even further by essentially blaming sexual violence on immigrants and enforce stricter police state measures:

Italy’s government has rushed through a decree to crack down on sexual violence and illegal immigration after a spate of rapes blamed on foreigners.

The decree sets a mandatory life sentence for the rape of minors or attacks where the victim is killed.

It also establishes rules for citizen street patrols to be conducted by unarmed and unpaid volunteers.

Critics of this act include the Vatican who has warned that these measures can ”turn innocent foreigners into convenient scapegoats.” These xenophobic measures will also legitimate vigilantism, xenophobia and violence against immigrants.

Also, blaming immigrants for sexual violence falsely perpetuates the myth of the stranger rape and obscures the fact that most people are raped by someone they know. This also paints an incredibly narrow picture of the perpetrator as an immigrant, which is not only false, but xenophobic and racist as well.

It’s disgraceful when people in power are so ignorant and misguided. And it really breaks my heart that there are so many myths about rape floating around: like rape is only perpetrated by strangers, or that survivors lie about rape, or that rape is a compliment to how irresistible you are. Feminists have been fighting this uphill battle to demystify rape and make it easier for survivors to come forward and for perpetrators to get prosecuted for years now, but people like Berlusconi just remind you that we’ve still got quite a long way to go.

Menarche Parties and Purity Balls

More and more frequently, parents are celebrating their daughters’ coming of age with purity balls.  At these balls, girls as young as four are urged to live a pure life, and vow chastity until marriage.  The ceremony is somewhat like a wedding, with vows formally recited and jewelry exchanged.  Their fathers are the head of the ceremony, often presenting the girls purity rings or bracelets.  The July 2008 Time article on the subject describes one such ceremony in which a young woman, Kyle Miraldi, attends a purity ball for her 18th birthday.  At age 13, Kyle was given a bracelet charm by her parents in the shape of a lock.  Her father held the key.  She explains:

On my wedding day, he’ll give it to my husband…It’s a symbol of my father giving up the covering of my heart, protecting me, since it means my husband is now the protector. He becomes like the shield to my heart, to love me as I’m supposed to be loved.

Young girls who participate in these ceremonies often describe their choices as a positive decision, a personal choice to live a pure lifestyle in the face of hookup culture and loose sexuality.  But the implications of putting the father in charge of a young woman’s sexuality seem more than slightly creepy.  What does pledging virginity to your father in an elaborate Cinderella-like ball have to do with the very personal choice of abstinence until marriage?  By making a young woman’s sexual “purity” a public vow, are we pressuring young women into making personal choices in an inappropriate public sphere?

On the opposite end of the spectrum, more and more young women are celebrating their coming-of-age not with purity vows, but with menarche parties.  Menarche parties celebrate a woman’s first period in a positive light, embracing menstruation as beautiful instead of disgusting.  Menarche parties are even becoming commercialized, as sites like Menarche Parties R’Us spring up offering menstruation-themed party items.  Young women who have these parties are celebrated in their womanhood, and the party is often themed around the color red and options for the use of alternative menstrual products such as The Keeper.

When I first heard about menarche parties, I was admittedly skeptical.  Even if I could get over viewing my own reproductive functions as dirty, could the rest of society?  How would my family have been viewed by our community if my parents had invited all of my friends to a party celebrating my first menstruation?  Would my friends and neighbors even have attended?  Additionally, is it really okay to embrace menstruation when women’s bodies are for many women both a joy and a burden?  Our bodies have been used against us for so long, in sexual violence and dominance.  Can we really reclaim our bodies in a positive light without acknowledging the history of abuse?  Pregnancy and childbirth can be a joy or a shackle, depending on a woman’s situation.  Menarche parties initially struck me as geared towards the upper-middle class women who have the privilege of viewing their bodies as beautiful and risk-free.

But, imagine the liberation in celebrating your first period.  I was ashamed of my first period, as I’m sure so many girls are.  Many young women don’t even understand their menstrual cycle until long after they have begun getting their period.  If we could learn to celebrate our cycle as beautiful and natural, perhaps we could learn to grow up in a more female-positive or sex-positive world.  ”Feminine hygiene” and “sanitary napkins” might be replaced with terms that do not imply that our natural bodily functions are dirty.  After all, we don’t see male genital hygiene products such scented deodorant condoms.  Why should women spend exorbitant amounts of money on so-called “feminine hygiene” products that treat our menstrual cycle as smelly and downright icky?  Menarche parties can help young women to view their bodies as powerful and wholly their own.

Neither purity balls or menarche parties exist in a vacuum, and it is essential to examine the social implications of both practices.  Although purity balls may celebrate a young woman and these women may think of their purity vows as empowering, vowing chastity to your father in a public space seems to take the agency in the decision out of the daughter’s hands.  Menarche parties, although they may embrace female bodies as natural and wonderful, are  likely a very difficult thing for friends and neighbors to accept and condone.  Talking about our bodies is still taboo;  celebrating our bodies is mainly unheard-of.

We don’t need any more victim-blaming or survivor-shaming, especially not at Tufts

According to Massachusetts state law (Chapter 233, Section 21b), evidence of a rape survivor’s prior sexual conduct is irrelevant in any investigation, hearing or other judicial proceedings before a jury. This makes sense obviously because what isn’t being called into question is how many people the survivor has slept with before, or whether the survivor likes kinky sex, but rather the incident of sexual assault or rape that the survivor is coming forward about at the moment.

However in the part of Tufts’ Student Judicial Process booklet that details what goes on involving hearings regarding sexual assault cases at Tufts, it says (bold emphasis mine):

The University applies some elements of the Massachusetts Rape Shield Statute concerning evidence about prior sexual conduct. Usually, no questions, testimony, or evidence about the sexual activity of a complaining or responding party with anyone beside the other party in the case may be introduced. However, if a party introduces information about his/her own sexual activity with someone besides the other party in the case, questions can then be asked about that relationship.

In rare cases, if a party can demonstrate that the opposing party has reason to lie about the allegations made, testimony about prior sexual conduct may be allowed. For example, there may be a preexisting condition or factor that makes it advantageous for the complaining party to have others believe that he or she had been an unwilling participant in the sexual encounter.

Okay. Where do I start? First maybe reiterating the state law would be helpful: prior sexual conduct is irrelevant in any sexual assault / rape court proceedings. Tufts may be a private institution but it still resides within the state of Massachusetts and is not exempt to obeying state law. Even if a party introduces part of his/her previous sexual experience or conduct, it should not be considered at all because it is irrelevant to the case at hand!!!!!

And the whole bit about how “if a party can demonstrate that the opposing party has reason to lie about the allegations made, testimony about prior sexual conduct may be allowed”?! For lack of better words, WTF?!! Obviously the accused will try to show that the accuser “has reason to lie about the allegations made” because s/he does not want to be convicted as a sexual assailant or a rapist! Of course s/he is going to try and discredit and/or smear the survivor as much as possible, which sadly isn’t hard to do because we do live in a rape culture after all.

Another thing the language suggests that some rape survivors lie about being raped. Why would anyone lie about rape and come forward with that allegation?! There’s a false perception out there that many rape survivors lie about it which is total bull because what would s/he gain from lying about rape? Not only are so many survivors shamed into silence, but the ones who do come forward are rarely believed. There is nothing to gain from lying about rape and since it’s such a taboo topic in society, people do not generally lie about it.

The unfortunate reality is that it tends to be a lose-lose situation for survivors. You can be raped, stay silent and the perpetrator goes on living his/her life perfectly fine. Or you can be raped, come forward and be publicly humiliated; face the perpetrator through lengthy court (or student judicial) proceedings; be asked awkward, uncomfortable and irrelevant questions; and still not be believed while the perpetrator goes on living his/her life unscathed.

It’s been said before but it’s important to remind people that rape is the most underreported crime on college campuses across the nation. We need to hold institutions (yes you, Tufts) accountable for flawed policies that do not support survivors and we need to pressure them to improve their policies that are more survivor-friendly and survivor-accessible. Otherwise Tufts (and/or other institutions) just becomes a hostile climate for survivors. For a school that preaches active citizenship, social responsibility and all that jazz, isn’t it hypocritical to have such a broken sexual assault/rape policy?

Spotlight on SAFER

The Vagina Monologues is this Friday in Distler at 7 and 9:30 (if you haven’t bought your ticket yet, buy it from Amy at the Women’s Center between noon and 3 pm any day) and the beneficiary organization is SAFER: Students Active for Ending Rape. I’m a big fan of SAFER and its work, but many people do not know about it. So here’s some information about / praise for SAFER, so you’ll be more in the know about the great cause your attendance at the Vagina Monologues is supporting.

SAFER originated as a student group in Columbia University in 1999 with the goal of reforming Columbia’s sexual assault policy. After a year of students recruiting, educating, organizing and mobilizing, Columbia adopted a new sexual assault policy with a revised and more efficient disciplinary procedure that had greater transparency and oversight, and established a new office devoted to sexual assault prevention and education.

SAFER’s victory at Columbia galvanized media attention and set the precedent for many other colleges nationwide, serving as a beacon of hope and encouraging students to take action on their own campuses. Students at other colleges across the nation began contacting SAFER for advice on how to improve their school’s sexual assault policies. Since then, SAFER has expanded into a national nonprofit organization devoted to helping student activists organize on their own college campuses to reform their school’s sexual assault policies.

SAFER provides resources and support to empower students with knowledge and skills to take leadership in reforming their school’s sexual assault policies. There are organizational training workshops, short term instructional programs that help students critique their school’s policy and teaches them how to effectively organize to transform it. There is also a campus activist mentoring program which pairs a student activists with an experienced organizer to guide them through the process of fighting and changing their school’s policy over a longer period of time.

These resources are available for free or charge a fee based on a sliding scale charge to accommodate different budgets of different activist groups. SAFER wants to be as accessible to all students and give them as much as it can while asking for as little as possible in return.

Tufts’ sexual assault policy certainly is flawed (as some may say, it’s a lawsuit waiting to happen) and some folks from SAFER are coming to conduct an organizational training workshop to help the newly formed Sexual Violence Student Advisory Board figure out what’s wrong with Tufts’ policy (we’ve already got plenty), changes to make to improve it and how to go about this (especially since the administration can be so frustratingly bureaucratic and conservative).

So in summation, go see the Vagina Monologues, SAFER is awesome, and we need to start thinking more critically about sexual violence on this campus, and it’s important to have an administration that is supportive of survivors.

NO, you CANNOT have my number!

I plan my route home based on my gender.  If it is light out, I will take the back streets. Besides the obnoxious kids in the house on the corner that scream “Baby got back!” at me as I pass, this is a relatively painless route. But if it is late, I will take Boston Avenue back, because there are shops along this route and it just seems safer. Boston Avenue is not my path of choice. I tend to get cat-called and honked at repeatedly nearly EVERY time I take this route home. Sometimes a random creeper will follow me for a while, until I duck into the corner store to escape him.

I find myself angry at nearly everyone on my walk home. The other day, an older man was sitting on a bench watching me. What right did he have to stare?! I put my Jedi-hood on and looked down at the ground. As I passed, I was embarrassed to hear a nearby woman say “My husband and I really like your hat!” I had snubbed two people who were just trying to be nice.

Sometimes I am infuriated by my trips home, but other times I am merely amused. The other day, a man was following me shouting “DAMNNN, girl, DAMMMN.” I completely abandoned my feminist indignation and burst out laughing. At the time, I didn’t take it as an insult, and I didn’t get creeped either.

What are the societal implications when sexual harassment is treated as a joke? If I followed a man around shouting demeaning comments, I doubt he would laugh. I doubt he would smile. But I don’t know what he would do. I have never thought to sexually harass a man. Nor would I want to. This is not to say women cannot participate in sexual harassment against men, but it certainly isn’t seen as the norm.

The situation reminded me of this MADtv skit.

The skit is actually quite funny.  But despite the “funny because it’s true” aspect, there are some things that bother me about the portrayals of the characters. The man (played by a woman) is obviously a black male stereotype. Black man harasses white female…sounds like a familiar stereotype…Am I reading too far into it? I don’t think I am.

The woman is a model of femininity. She rejects his advances not through blatant honesty or indignation, but through backhanded replies that she just doesn’t give out her number…in theaters. The woman is uncomfortable but not threatened, resistant but not indignant. Imagine how different reactions to the skit might have been if the woman had harassed him back, yelled at him, left the theater, or even (gasp) kicked him in the balls! She is, instead, passive and polite. She answers his questions with a sheepish smile, even though he has no right to ask her questions in the first place. And did you notice how nobody in the background of the skit defends Yvonne?

A lot of the stereotypes in the skit were probably intentional on the part of the writers. Darrell navigates the theater freely, moving his seat multiple times. Yvonne, on the other hand, sits with legs crossed and only moves her seat to escape Darrell. But this is the way women are taught to react to harassment, isn’t it? It would be unladylike to react in any other way, even though the harasser has no problem invading our space and our privacy.

Women experience sexual harassment every day. Whether the encounter is mildly annoying, outrageously insulting, or downright frightening, we are expected to respond passively. But, even though many of the perpetrators seem to think that sexual harassment is a joke, the experience is anything but funny. Sexual harassment is humiliating, and serves as a way to reinforce gendered power hierarchies. Even though the perpetrators may seem to most often be male heterosexuals, harassment occurs in many contexts and is always insulting and demeaning.  What about the LGBTQ person who is harassed for his/her sexual orientation or deviation from gender “norms?”  What about the heterosexual boy or man who is harassed daily because he does not correctly conform to the masculine ideal?  What about girls who harass other girls because they aren’t pretty, cool, popular, etc?  Or someone who is taunted and demeaned not because of gender or sexuality, but based on their race or ethnicity.  Would these topics still be funny in a MADtv skit?  Let’s be careful what we laugh at.

Do you think that we can find more empowering ways to deal with harassment, without putting ourselves in danger? Do you think that it is appropriate to treat sexual harassment as humorous? Does humor provide a good outlet to talk about harassment, or does it trivialize the issue? Share your thoughts in the comments!

Things to think about before/after seeing Coraline

So last weekend I saw the movie Coraline, which I thoroughly enjoyed and recommend to everyone. It was slightly creepy but still beautifully made and entertaining. As much as I liked it, there were still some highly gendered aspects of the movie that kept nagging at me.

Coraline’s real mother is a busy working mom who never really has much time for Coraline. Her husband, Coraline’s father, refers to her as “the boss”. He cooks all the time, instead of the mom, and Coraline takes issue with this. She gets upset that her mom never cooks and tells her that she should cook. It’s a bit strange how Coraline, a young girl, keeps trying to enforce gender roles within her family because usually it’s the other way around. It just goes to show pervasive gender roles are in society and how ingrained they are in even young children. Coraline wants her family to seem “normal” and “perfect” which would mean that her mother would be the one to cook.

Meanwhile Coraline’s “Other Mother” epitomizes the stereotypical 50s housewife who just stays home, cooking and cleaning. She wears an apron, spends most of her time in the kitchen, is always heavily made up, and even dresses up in some instances. She feeds Coraline, nurtures her and gives her things that she wants. Her whole identity is based on motherhood – she is just the “Other Mother” who tries to find out everything that Coraline, or other children, want in their mothers, and tries to fulfill their desires to be the “perfect” mom. The thing about the “Other Mother” though is that she represents a matriarch. (SPOILER ALERT!) She created everything and everyone in her world. The father is emasculated and controlled by her, thus she is in total power.

And of course, the “Other Mother,” the only older female character in a position of power is vilified. She is sneaky, clever, scheming and domineering, and consequently must be evil. She, like the surrogate maternal figure in Disney movies or fairy tales, is ugly, possessive, powerful (which is a bad trait for a woman to have), power-hungry (also a bad trait for a woman to have), and must be stopped.

Also, Wybie is the only African-American character. He is eccentric, likes to catch slugs, and goes around in a dirt bike and weird helmet. just a strange, awkward kid. He is also very submissive – he has a hunched posture and whenever his grandmother calls for him he is quick to obey and dash back to her. (SPOILER ALERT AGAIN!) In the “Other Mother’s” world  his lips are sewn together and therefore is silenced.

Another important thing to consider is who’s doing what behind the scenes. The protagonist of the movie may be a girl (and the antagonist a woman), but the animation industry, like the movie industry, remains very male-dominated. When you look at the credits after the movie, the screenwriter, director, editors, most of the animators are men. Surprising? No, not really.

With all this said, I want to reiterate that I still really liked Coraline and I still think that if you haven’t seen it already, you should go see it, because it’s amazing. (See, being a feminist doesn’t mean that you abstain from all things fun but instead you participate with a more critical and conscious eye.)