In 11 days I'll turn 27. Despite certain bullshit, the mid 20's aren't that bad. Right after college, everything was awkward and terrible. College drops you right on your ass and you're supposed to be an adult now but you have no money and you don't know what you're doing without some kind of set framework - it sucks. Then things calm down and you can party and figure out what your actual options are.
When I was a kid, I was led to believe that I'd marry before 20, preferably at 16. Once I reached 14 and 15 and not only had no suitors come along, but also my peers told me that I was so ugly that the only way anyone would have sex with me was through rape (they didn't know that this was actually happening at the time). I was distraught, thinking that I was unlovable and had failed my authorities by not fulfilling their mandates.
Once I figured out that marrying by 16 is usually a horrible idea and that my education came first, I set my goal to 28 for both marriage and parenthood. My mother was heartbroken. I'd find a monogamous partner, we'd have fun and explore the world, we'd gradually intertwine our lives codependently, then we'd marry and have kids. After a few attempts at this, it finally dawned on me that monogamy is not for me and codependency nauseates me. Marriage and parenthood hold no appeal.
Although I shed all age-related goals and my personal wants have changed dramatically - they may again, who knows - that marker of 28 still holds significance. It was an arbitrary choice: I watched Friends and thought it was what normal young adult life was like and they were all around 28, right? Nevertheless, onwards to another year of adventure!
Thursday, October 4, 2012
Monday, August 27, 2012
Tumbleweed
Anyone who's ever watched Looney Toons and other hokey children's cartoons are probably familiar with scenes in which a small tumbleweed rolls across the scene to signify boredom. The visual equivalent of crickets chirping, a tumbleweed emphasizes the emptiness of what's happening.
In real life, small tumbleweeds like that, about the size of a basketball, roll around so long as there is a slight breeze and/or slope. Fullgrown tumbleweeds, however, can grow to the size of a pickup truck, and it takes powerful gusts to roll them across the landscape.
Tumbleweeds are actually trees with very shallow roots. Their branches grow very low to the ground and in a round shape, holding in thousands of seeds. When the wind is strong enough, the tree dislodges from its spot and rolls across the landscape and the seeds scatter - kamikaze propagation. Larger tumbleweeds can cause terrible destruction in high winds, as rolling dries out these trees and they shatter explosively upon impact.
A tumbleweed will see many remarkable things on its travels across the desert, only to continue the cycle of shallow roots and self-destroying reproduction. Would one come to rest on rock rather than sandy soil, the cycle would be broken.
In real life, small tumbleweeds like that, about the size of a basketball, roll around so long as there is a slight breeze and/or slope. Fullgrown tumbleweeds, however, can grow to the size of a pickup truck, and it takes powerful gusts to roll them across the landscape.
Tumbleweeds are actually trees with very shallow roots. Their branches grow very low to the ground and in a round shape, holding in thousands of seeds. When the wind is strong enough, the tree dislodges from its spot and rolls across the landscape and the seeds scatter - kamikaze propagation. Larger tumbleweeds can cause terrible destruction in high winds, as rolling dries out these trees and they shatter explosively upon impact.
A tumbleweed will see many remarkable things on its travels across the desert, only to continue the cycle of shallow roots and self-destroying reproduction. Would one come to rest on rock rather than sandy soil, the cycle would be broken.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Body Positivity: Figure Drawing
My cousin-in-law is an artist and, when I was 11, she began taking me
to a figure drawing studio every other Sunday. This continued until
the studio closed six years later, but then I took honors art classes in
high school and those involved figure drawing. And then I kept doing
figure drawing throughout college.
It took a few years, especially since my mother poked my belly and called me fat when I was in middle school, but this exposure to naked bodies dramatically changed my beauty standards. In figure drawing, the most interesting bodies are "flawed" - fat, saggy, scarred, and marked. Drawing different bodies so frequently shifted my understanding of the "ideal" body, so I rejected the mainstream standards in favor of every body.
The best way to develop body positivity, especially in children, is to see every kind of body in a welcoming setting over a long period of time.
It took a few years, especially since my mother poked my belly and called me fat when I was in middle school, but this exposure to naked bodies dramatically changed my beauty standards. In figure drawing, the most interesting bodies are "flawed" - fat, saggy, scarred, and marked. Drawing different bodies so frequently shifted my understanding of the "ideal" body, so I rejected the mainstream standards in favor of every body.
The best way to develop body positivity, especially in children, is to see every kind of body in a welcoming setting over a long period of time.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Sexual Objectification EDITED
I admit that I was frustrated and flustered when I wrote the original
Sexual Objectification blog entry, therefore it isn't well written.
Here is the edited version, beginning with some definitions:
sexualization: prioritising the sex, sexuality and sexiness of a person.
sexual objectification: treating a person as a sexual object.
feminism: the belief that people of all genders and sexes should have equal opportunity and choice.
the women's movement: the history of feminism, particularly in America in the 1960's/'70's
http://www.livescience.com/21609-self-sexualization-young-girls.html
A friend posted this on her facebook. She and her peers are religious, involved mothers and they all commented about how relieved they are that being religious, involved mothers combats early sexual objectification.
I pointed out that I was under the impression as a child that I would marry by 16. My mother and the mothers who volunteered at my Catholic school (which, I discovered much later on, was an extremist parish) all emphasized that little girls should prepare for marriage constantly until they're at the altar - sexual objectification was encouraged, though in manners less obvious than skimpy clothing. Religious, involved mothers can do more damage than good - another lady commented about how her mother actually pushed her in the opposite direction and hated sexuality.
Nobody in this discussion on the article replied to my point, but eventually one of them commented "It's as though the women's movement created more objectification than less of it."
Because of the correlation between the women's movement and shifts in advertising, this can appear as a causation. In the years leading up to the women's movement, sexual objectification in advertising was minimal - women still appeared in advertising as service objects, only fully clothed. The levels of sexual objectification, particularly of women, in mainstream advertising are at a disturbing high today in American culture.
However, women were more sexually objectified, to the point of being considered property of father/husband before the women's movement. Higher education was discouraged for a woman because it made her a less serene servant - and nobody saw the problem in proclaiming this conundrum bluntly. Women themselves chose to abandon education in order to objectify themselves.
So I replied to this lady " the women's movement made it illegal for a husband to rape his wife...so no." What more obvious example is there that the women's movement gave women human status?
She replied "that's a law, this article is about culture."
.....WHAT?!?!?!? Don't most laws come about through cultural shifts?!?!? The women's movement is incomplete, it isn't finished. It gave women choices, that's what feminism is. However, because woman-as-sex-objects are still very highly valued in our culture - as evidenced by advertising - many women make the ill-informed choice to objectify themselves. I argue that a choice made without awareness of other options isn't an autonomous decision at all, which is the difference between sexualization and sexual objectification. If you want me to elaborate on how I know these women's decision-making, please ask.
Feminism is still working to elevate women's minds to equal societal value. I hate to say it, but the women who choose to be sex objects, as opposed to sexual human beings, are perhaps the biggest obstacle to feminism.
And yes, I'm aware that my privileges are showing...I'm working on it.
sexualization: prioritising the sex, sexuality and sexiness of a person.
sexual objectification: treating a person as a sexual object.
feminism: the belief that people of all genders and sexes should have equal opportunity and choice.
the women's movement: the history of feminism, particularly in America in the 1960's/'70's
http://www.livescience.com/21609-self-sexualization-young-girls.html
A friend posted this on her facebook. She and her peers are religious, involved mothers and they all commented about how relieved they are that being religious, involved mothers combats early sexual objectification.
I pointed out that I was under the impression as a child that I would marry by 16. My mother and the mothers who volunteered at my Catholic school (which, I discovered much later on, was an extremist parish) all emphasized that little girls should prepare for marriage constantly until they're at the altar - sexual objectification was encouraged, though in manners less obvious than skimpy clothing. Religious, involved mothers can do more damage than good - another lady commented about how her mother actually pushed her in the opposite direction and hated sexuality.
Nobody in this discussion on the article replied to my point, but eventually one of them commented "It's as though the women's movement created more objectification than less of it."
Because of the correlation between the women's movement and shifts in advertising, this can appear as a causation. In the years leading up to the women's movement, sexual objectification in advertising was minimal - women still appeared in advertising as service objects, only fully clothed. The levels of sexual objectification, particularly of women, in mainstream advertising are at a disturbing high today in American culture.
However, women were more sexually objectified, to the point of being considered property of father/husband before the women's movement. Higher education was discouraged for a woman because it made her a less serene servant - and nobody saw the problem in proclaiming this conundrum bluntly. Women themselves chose to abandon education in order to objectify themselves.
So I replied to this lady " the women's movement made it illegal for a husband to rape his wife...so no." What more obvious example is there that the women's movement gave women human status?
She replied "that's a law, this article is about culture."
.....WHAT?!?!?!? Don't most laws come about through cultural shifts?!?!? The women's movement is incomplete, it isn't finished. It gave women choices, that's what feminism is. However, because woman-as-sex-objects are still very highly valued in our culture - as evidenced by advertising - many women make the ill-informed choice to objectify themselves. I argue that a choice made without awareness of other options isn't an autonomous decision at all, which is the difference between sexualization and sexual objectification. If you want me to elaborate on how I know these women's decision-making, please ask.
Feminism is still working to elevate women's minds to equal societal value. I hate to say it, but the women who choose to be sex objects, as opposed to sexual human beings, are perhaps the biggest obstacle to feminism.
And yes, I'm aware that my privileges are showing...I'm working on it.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Street Harassment
I got off the Megabus at 12:45am and had about a mile to walk to
my hotel in Chicago. The streets were almost empty and I was walking
briskly.
A black Mercedes Benz from Connecticut, with 3 young men inside, drove by and slowed down when they saw me. I was crossing a large & empty intersection and they very slowly turned, right behind me. The front passenger leaned out his window and called “hey sweet ass. Sweet tart ass.” Had I stopped, slowed or turned around, they would have been able to grab me. Instead, I ran onto the sidewalk. I was walking east and this street was a 1way going west.
THEY CIRCLED THE BLOCK. When they pulled over by me again, a huge crowd of partiers was right next to me so I guess they realized what a bad idea it was to bother me.
This was horrifying.
A black Mercedes Benz from Connecticut, with 3 young men inside, drove by and slowed down when they saw me. I was crossing a large & empty intersection and they very slowly turned, right behind me. The front passenger leaned out his window and called “hey sweet ass. Sweet tart ass.” Had I stopped, slowed or turned around, they would have been able to grab me. Instead, I ran onto the sidewalk. I was walking east and this street was a 1way going west.
THEY CIRCLED THE BLOCK. When they pulled over by me again, a huge crowd of partiers was right next to me so I guess they realized what a bad idea it was to bother me.
This was horrifying.
Sexual Objectification
http://www.livescience.com/21609-self-sexualization-young-girls.html
A friend posted this on her facebook. She and her peers are religious, involved mothers and they all commented about how relieved they are that being religious, involved mothers combats early sexualization.
I pointed out that I was under the impression as a child that I would marry by 16. My mother and the mothers who volunteered at my Catholic school (which, I discovered much later on, was an extremist parish) all emphasized that little girls should prepare for marriage constantly until they're at the altar - sexualization was encouraged, though in manners less obvious than skimpy clothing. Religious, involved mothers can do more damage than good - another lady commented about how her mother actually pushed her in the opposite direction and hated sexuality.
Nobody in this discussion on the article replied to my point, but eventually one of them commented "It's as though the women's movement created more objectification than less of it."
At first glance, that line of thinking isn't illogical. Magazines, commercials, billboards, etc. show highly sexualized women, which didn't exist before the women's movement. Women in advertising back then were still objectified and portrayed as stupid, only they were fully clothed.
However, women in general were more objectified, to the point of being considered property of father/husband. Higher education was discouraged for women because it made her a less serene servant - and nobody saw the problem in proclaiming this conundrum bluntly. Women themselves chose to abandon education in order to objectify themselves.
So I replied to this lady " the women's movement made it illegal for a husband to rape his wife...so no." What more obvious example is there that the women's movement gave women human status?
She replied "that's a law, this article is about culture."
......WHAT?!?!?!? Don't laws come about through cultural shifts??!?
The women's movement is incomplete, it isn't finished. It gave women choices, that's what feminism is. Because women are still valued most highly as sex objects, many women still CHOOSE to fulfill that. Feminism is still working to elevate women's minds to equal societal value. I hate to say it, but the women who choose to be sex objects are perhaps the biggest obstacle to feminism.
A friend posted this on her facebook. She and her peers are religious, involved mothers and they all commented about how relieved they are that being religious, involved mothers combats early sexualization.
I pointed out that I was under the impression as a child that I would marry by 16. My mother and the mothers who volunteered at my Catholic school (which, I discovered much later on, was an extremist parish) all emphasized that little girls should prepare for marriage constantly until they're at the altar - sexualization was encouraged, though in manners less obvious than skimpy clothing. Religious, involved mothers can do more damage than good - another lady commented about how her mother actually pushed her in the opposite direction and hated sexuality.
Nobody in this discussion on the article replied to my point, but eventually one of them commented "It's as though the women's movement created more objectification than less of it."
At first glance, that line of thinking isn't illogical. Magazines, commercials, billboards, etc. show highly sexualized women, which didn't exist before the women's movement. Women in advertising back then were still objectified and portrayed as stupid, only they were fully clothed.
However, women in general were more objectified, to the point of being considered property of father/husband. Higher education was discouraged for women because it made her a less serene servant - and nobody saw the problem in proclaiming this conundrum bluntly. Women themselves chose to abandon education in order to objectify themselves.
So I replied to this lady " the women's movement made it illegal for a husband to rape his wife...so no." What more obvious example is there that the women's movement gave women human status?
She replied "that's a law, this article is about culture."
......WHAT?!?!?!? Don't laws come about through cultural shifts??!?
The women's movement is incomplete, it isn't finished. It gave women choices, that's what feminism is. Because women are still valued most highly as sex objects, many women still CHOOSE to fulfill that. Feminism is still working to elevate women's minds to equal societal value. I hate to say it, but the women who choose to be sex objects are perhaps the biggest obstacle to feminism.
Monday, June 11, 2012
Sex Positivity Interview
A reader of this blog recently emailed me a request for an interview of my opinions on sex positivity. I was ecstatic to oblige and I got permission to post the interview here:
A.B.: How do you define sex positivity?
Me: Sex positivity is harmonious with enthusiastic consent. Both involve a strong sense of self, awareness, communication, and respect for other consenting adults. A positive attitude about sex, both what one is having (or not having) and in general, educates and opens minds. Sex is more enjoyable when it is enthusiastic and positive - not fluffy bunny happy-face positive, but positive in the sense that the participating consenting adults are aware, respectful and pleased. This is not to say that asexuals and virgins can't be sex positive. The actual act of sex is only a part of sex positivity. Body positivity, respect for identity, intersectionality and inter/intrapersonal literacy are all other parts as well.
A.B.: When you lived in Edgewater, did you feel it was a sex positive place? Why or why not?
Me: It's difficult for me to say whether or not Edgewater was sex positive, except in comparison to Jefferson Park, where I grew up. Sex shops such as Tulip (would that count as Edgewater or Andersonville?) and Early 2 Bed never would have made it into Jefferson Park, nor would gender-aware businesses such as Kitchen Sink and Graham Cracker Comics - shout out to Shanna, who's a guru of comic books and feminism. In this sense, Edgewater is sex positive. I also had an art show as part of the Edgewater Art Walk in October 2011, which was technically PG-13 but with more racy ideological themes. Aside from these individual places and experiences, particularly in comparison to other more conservative/Victorian neighborhoods, Edgewater didn't seem to have much of a centralised community awareness. I have friends in Edgewater who don't tend to participate in in the community, and I know outsiders who make a special effort to participate.
A.B.: Where do you think the expression and enjoyment of a healthy sexuality tie into the grand picture of women’s health?*
Me: One can better enjoy sex with education, which involves sexual health. Many women don't have comprehensive sexual education about their own bodies, which is a health issue. When a woman doesn't comprehend her own body, how can she decipher her cycle, understand what angle of penetration is most pleasing to her (or penetration at all), or love her body at all? For example, many clinics and gynecologists will not give IUDs to women who are not already married with children. This practice declares that pleasurable sex is allowable only after one has reproduced sufficiently and in legally recognised monogamy. Firstly, very few women know about IUDs in the first place; secondly, how many women in that situation would continue to search? Or would know where to look? Or know that their states might provide financial coverage for both the IUD itself and its insertion procedure? Or whether she should get a Mirena IUD, Paragard IUD, or use another method? Reproductive health is a branch of sexual health, though the emphasis is stronger for women. The difference between vaginal and clitoral orgasms isn't valued as much as how an egg gets fertilised in our society (and even education on that is poor). The emphasis is on reproduction, not pleasure. While it's true that this information is important and protection from unwanted pregnancy is necessary, awareness should continue beyond that. A woman can take a birth control pill - regardless of her knowledge of how it affects her body - to keep from getting pregnant but still might not orgasm during sex and not know why. Resources for that understanding are fewer than for birth control, which is still too little.
A.B.: On your blog, you talk about sex positivity as a prevention technique. Can you expand on this?
Me: To better understand "prevention technique," I'll elaborate on exactly what is being prevented. There are many layers of sexual assault/harassment, none of them "better" or "worse" than another. There is the commonly perceived scene of a masculine stranger forcing a woman into something sexual; to be certain, this does occur and it is horrifying. There are also respected authority figures or seemingly-platonic intimates who use their relationships, sometimes unknowingly, to manipulate the trust of one for sexual ends. And then there is sexual coercion, given into in order to avoid a fight or to maintain a relationship. Sex positivity is not a shield against sexual harassment/assault, but it can both enhance one's awareness of a situation - particularly one's role, responsibility, options, lack of responsibility - and be a healing agent. Through sexual enthusiasm (again, not necessarily pertaining to the actual sex act), one can transcend from victim to survivor. Many people use this as a way to take back control in sex, whether as a dominant or a submissive or vanilla or asexual or "born-again virgin." For a survivor, sex positivity erases the taint on sexuality brought about by an assaulter. A "sex negative" mindset relates sex to shame and guilt (not in a consensual, bdsm way). When this connection is made, coercion and manipulation tend to be more effective. This isn't to say that a survivor in this kind of a situation is to blame: chances are that the survivor doesn't know that "no" or "yes" could be said and respected. Sex positivity as a cultural awareness opens communication and makes sex a discussion between consenting adults, personal sex positivity involves a consciousness of options and what one actually wants.
* I'm defining women's health as any health issues (mostly sexual health) that are of concern to anyone who identifies as female. I suppose an issue I'm also grappling with in the article is how typical discussion of women's health is kept narrowly to reproductive rights and resources, and I want to explore past that.
A.B.: How do you define sex positivity?
Me: Sex positivity is harmonious with enthusiastic consent. Both involve a strong sense of self, awareness, communication, and respect for other consenting adults. A positive attitude about sex, both what one is having (or not having) and in general, educates and opens minds. Sex is more enjoyable when it is enthusiastic and positive - not fluffy bunny happy-face positive, but positive in the sense that the participating consenting adults are aware, respectful and pleased. This is not to say that asexuals and virgins can't be sex positive. The actual act of sex is only a part of sex positivity. Body positivity, respect for identity, intersectionality and inter/intrapersonal literacy are all other parts as well.
A.B.: When you lived in Edgewater, did you feel it was a sex positive place? Why or why not?
Me: It's difficult for me to say whether or not Edgewater was sex positive, except in comparison to Jefferson Park, where I grew up. Sex shops such as Tulip (would that count as Edgewater or Andersonville?) and Early 2 Bed never would have made it into Jefferson Park, nor would gender-aware businesses such as Kitchen Sink and Graham Cracker Comics - shout out to Shanna, who's a guru of comic books and feminism. In this sense, Edgewater is sex positive. I also had an art show as part of the Edgewater Art Walk in October 2011, which was technically PG-13 but with more racy ideological themes. Aside from these individual places and experiences, particularly in comparison to other more conservative/Victorian neighborhoods, Edgewater didn't seem to have much of a centralised community awareness. I have friends in Edgewater who don't tend to participate in in the community, and I know outsiders who make a special effort to participate.
A.B.: Where do you think the expression and enjoyment of a healthy sexuality tie into the grand picture of women’s health?*
Me: One can better enjoy sex with education, which involves sexual health. Many women don't have comprehensive sexual education about their own bodies, which is a health issue. When a woman doesn't comprehend her own body, how can she decipher her cycle, understand what angle of penetration is most pleasing to her (or penetration at all), or love her body at all? For example, many clinics and gynecologists will not give IUDs to women who are not already married with children. This practice declares that pleasurable sex is allowable only after one has reproduced sufficiently and in legally recognised monogamy. Firstly, very few women know about IUDs in the first place; secondly, how many women in that situation would continue to search? Or would know where to look? Or know that their states might provide financial coverage for both the IUD itself and its insertion procedure? Or whether she should get a Mirena IUD, Paragard IUD, or use another method? Reproductive health is a branch of sexual health, though the emphasis is stronger for women. The difference between vaginal and clitoral orgasms isn't valued as much as how an egg gets fertilised in our society (and even education on that is poor). The emphasis is on reproduction, not pleasure. While it's true that this information is important and protection from unwanted pregnancy is necessary, awareness should continue beyond that. A woman can take a birth control pill - regardless of her knowledge of how it affects her body - to keep from getting pregnant but still might not orgasm during sex and not know why. Resources for that understanding are fewer than for birth control, which is still too little.
A.B.: On your blog, you talk about sex positivity as a prevention technique. Can you expand on this?
Me: To better understand "prevention technique," I'll elaborate on exactly what is being prevented. There are many layers of sexual assault/harassment, none of them "better" or "worse" than another. There is the commonly perceived scene of a masculine stranger forcing a woman into something sexual; to be certain, this does occur and it is horrifying. There are also respected authority figures or seemingly-platonic intimates who use their relationships, sometimes unknowingly, to manipulate the trust of one for sexual ends. And then there is sexual coercion, given into in order to avoid a fight or to maintain a relationship. Sex positivity is not a shield against sexual harassment/assault, but it can both enhance one's awareness of a situation - particularly one's role, responsibility, options, lack of responsibility - and be a healing agent. Through sexual enthusiasm (again, not necessarily pertaining to the actual sex act), one can transcend from victim to survivor. Many people use this as a way to take back control in sex, whether as a dominant or a submissive or vanilla or asexual or "born-again virgin." For a survivor, sex positivity erases the taint on sexuality brought about by an assaulter. A "sex negative" mindset relates sex to shame and guilt (not in a consensual, bdsm way). When this connection is made, coercion and manipulation tend to be more effective. This isn't to say that a survivor in this kind of a situation is to blame: chances are that the survivor doesn't know that "no" or "yes" could be said and respected. Sex positivity as a cultural awareness opens communication and makes sex a discussion between consenting adults, personal sex positivity involves a consciousness of options and what one actually wants.
* I'm defining women's health as any health issues (mostly sexual health) that are of concern to anyone who identifies as female. I suppose an issue I'm also grappling with in the article is how typical discussion of women's health is kept narrowly to reproductive rights and resources, and I want to explore past that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
