I just finished reading Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power & a World Without Rape, edited by Jaclyn Friedman and Jessica Valenti. Margaret Cho wrote the introduction, a powerful essay on how just passively consenting to sex isn't enough in our sexual lives (READ IT here: http://lachristagreco.com/2010/08/07/on-consent/). It's a fantastic book of articles, noting how rape and sexual assault/coercion and the taboo of women's sexuality are two sides of the same coin. Most of the contributors have experienced sexual trauma and wrote about opening up a more sexual, sensual, respectful culture. Some of them articulated the connection between sexual trauma and sex-positive activism, and for others it was unstated but obvious.
Of course, this has lead me to analyze (overanalyze) my current sexual life in light of my resurfaced sexual trauma. People keep asking me if I'm queer/lesbian/bi because of my childhood sexual assault. NO and that's the wrong question! Am I a proud, queer sexual being because of that trauma? Yes and no. I had been wanting a more sensual life long before those memories were triggered, so my libido is unrelated to the trauma. Now that I'm consciously navigating the role of that assault in my life while I'm slutting it up, the boundary blurs. Awareness of consent heightens my experiences now.
I agree with the authors of Yes Means Yes in that more than just consent is necessasry, though. ENTHUSIASTIC consent, respect, communication, self-awareness, responsibility, play, desire, etc. It's the difference between "ok" and "YES YES YES!!" Knowing the value of these things in my experiences, that my partners value them too, and that I have complete control over my 50% all enhance my ethically slutty life now. That's a great book too!
And what's really mind-boggling is that the sexual assault that happened to me as a child wouldn't have happened (probably) had the perpetrator been sexually aware. She had no idea that what she was doing was sexual because anything other than penile-vaginal sex was entirely unknown. Had she been sexually aware, maybe she would have reconsidered what she did to me. Clearly, this doesn't make it ok.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Cinderella Ate My Daughter
The next time you spy a Disney Princess product, check to see if the princesses are making eye contact with each other. They're not! Roy Disney was opposed to bringing together princesses from different movies, so this was a creepy compromise.
I'm not arguing that trivial details like this are manipulating the children of America, but it gives you a good idea of how the higher-ups of child-focused companies function (or not). This is just one anecdote of oddity included in Peggy Orenstein's Cinderella Ate My Daughter, through which she navigates her new parenthood.
It's no conspiracy that the boys' and girls' sections of toy stores are so neatly divided, but it's no accident either. Orenstein did an unbelievable amount of research and found that the decision-makers of toy companies honestly believe that they're just giving kids what they want: pink, feminine, consumer/domestic items for girls and violent, mechanical items for boys. They also are after making the biggest sale, but that's to be expected of anyone. And parents are often dismayed at what their children are offered in the gender-segregated aisles, but see no other option. It's partly the companies themselves and it's partly the parents that divide children along masculine and feminine, but Orenstein's research into children - especially little boys who want to wear mommy's makeup and little tomboys - is the most revealing. I'll leave you to actually read the book to find that out.
As in her previous books, Schoolgirls and Flux, Orenstein articulates how gender divisions in our society impact real people in Cinderella Ate My Daughter. She makes connections through hard-hitting research that seem so obvious upon her articulation. I highly recommend reading any and all of her books!
My only complaint, though, is her description of Sesame Street and the Muppets - and I admit that this is only a personal bias. She investigated the very few regular women characters (Ms. Piggy, Janis, Zoe, Abby, ...?) and the Henson company explained that feminine characters just don't market as well as "masculine" ones. Honestly, I always thought that most of the characters were androgynous. Even as a kid, I thought that Big Bird, Elmo, and most of the monsters were genderless (same for the Toaster and Blanket from Disney's The Brave Little Toaster). Then again, that probably explains a lot about my genderqueer identity...
I'm not arguing that trivial details like this are manipulating the children of America, but it gives you a good idea of how the higher-ups of child-focused companies function (or not). This is just one anecdote of oddity included in Peggy Orenstein's Cinderella Ate My Daughter, through which she navigates her new parenthood.
It's no conspiracy that the boys' and girls' sections of toy stores are so neatly divided, but it's no accident either. Orenstein did an unbelievable amount of research and found that the decision-makers of toy companies honestly believe that they're just giving kids what they want: pink, feminine, consumer/domestic items for girls and violent, mechanical items for boys. They also are after making the biggest sale, but that's to be expected of anyone. And parents are often dismayed at what their children are offered in the gender-segregated aisles, but see no other option. It's partly the companies themselves and it's partly the parents that divide children along masculine and feminine, but Orenstein's research into children - especially little boys who want to wear mommy's makeup and little tomboys - is the most revealing. I'll leave you to actually read the book to find that out.
As in her previous books, Schoolgirls and Flux, Orenstein articulates how gender divisions in our society impact real people in Cinderella Ate My Daughter. She makes connections through hard-hitting research that seem so obvious upon her articulation. I highly recommend reading any and all of her books!
My only complaint, though, is her description of Sesame Street and the Muppets - and I admit that this is only a personal bias. She investigated the very few regular women characters (Ms. Piggy, Janis, Zoe, Abby, ...?) and the Henson company explained that feminine characters just don't market as well as "masculine" ones. Honestly, I always thought that most of the characters were androgynous. Even as a kid, I thought that Big Bird, Elmo, and most of the monsters were genderless (same for the Toaster and Blanket from Disney's The Brave Little Toaster). Then again, that probably explains a lot about my genderqueer identity...
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Sex Positive Feminism + Queer Liberty
As stated in my previous blog post, I'm dating a bioguy. Thanks be to the diversity of Chicago, no straight privilege shit or queer-based biphobia has come my way - just many many MANY questions. The number one question, asked by queers and straights alike, has been how this impacts my identity. I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'm as queer as a purple $3 bill riding a rainbow unicorn.
I'm still on the trajectory that began as I graduated high school and started college. That was when I discovered sex-positive feminism and when I came out of the closet as bi/lesbian/queer. The two lifestyles collaborate, not codependent upon one another, so that one may CHOOSE to base identity upon sex. Active members of the queer community may realize that sleeping with "the same sex" isn't enough the qualify as fabulously queer. What goes on in a consensual bedroom (or bathroom or car or ski chair lift) shouldn't mean anything to the government nor anything to one's movement.
There's this lesbian movie, Go Fish, from the early 90's. It's pretty shitty, but a few scenes stick out in my mind. A dyke playah has sex with a man, then gets captured by the lesbian community and they interrogate her for her reasons and identity. She argued that sex is just sex, that it shouldn't make her less of a lesbian - especially considering all she had done for the community. The lesbians demanded that she identify as bisexual, even if it means she gets less pussy. Another scene shows a lesbian getting married to a man, but fighting to maintain her lesbian history. She nearly suffocates in her self-justification: "I'm a dyke despite my straight privilege" .
Were I not in Chicago in '11, would that be my world? Fellow sex-liberated friends have been through that shit. Is it just a matter of time and place for me as long as I keep dating and fucking people to whom I'm ATTRACTED?
I'm still on the trajectory that began as I graduated high school and started college. That was when I discovered sex-positive feminism and when I came out of the closet as bi/lesbian/queer. The two lifestyles collaborate, not codependent upon one another, so that one may CHOOSE to base identity upon sex. Active members of the queer community may realize that sleeping with "the same sex" isn't enough the qualify as fabulously queer. What goes on in a consensual bedroom (or bathroom or car or ski chair lift) shouldn't mean anything to the government nor anything to one's movement.
There's this lesbian movie, Go Fish, from the early 90's. It's pretty shitty, but a few scenes stick out in my mind. A dyke playah has sex with a man, then gets captured by the lesbian community and they interrogate her for her reasons and identity. She argued that sex is just sex, that it shouldn't make her less of a lesbian - especially considering all she had done for the community. The lesbians demanded that she identify as bisexual, even if it means she gets less pussy. Another scene shows a lesbian getting married to a man, but fighting to maintain her lesbian history. She nearly suffocates in her self-justification: "I'm a dyke despite my straight privilege" .
Were I not in Chicago in '11, would that be my world? Fellow sex-liberated friends have been through that shit. Is it just a matter of time and place for me as long as I keep dating and fucking people to whom I'm ATTRACTED?
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Queer Qualifiers
When I hung out with the Madison Socialists, a newbie at one of the group meetings asked what qualifies someone as queer. As the most visibly queer person in the group*, I answered that someone who doesn't get straight privilege would be considered queer. Then we all had a big discussion on how privilege doesn't actually benefit anyone.
I'm dating a straight bio-guy and a lot of people expect my identity to change, that I identify as bisexual rather than lesbian now. With people who are easily confused or won't invest much thought into gender/sexuality, I let them think what they will. My gender identity had started shifting years ago and, because of that, "woman-identified-woman" hasn't really applied to me for a while. Lesbian is too small a box for all my fabulous queerdom. And don't even get me started on the binary "bisexual" label. The genders of the people I date impact me so little that it surprised me when that was the first place people went upon this news.
Just look at me! I'm not gonna get straight privilege anytime soon. Heterosexism both disrespects gay relationships and elevates straight relationships for no reason; as a confusing genderqueer, the genders/sexes of the people I date are used as judgement. When I pass for a guy or an "it", it implies the guy I'm dating is gay; when I pass for a woman, it implies that I'm straight. Either he gets a taste of homophobia or my queer identity gets smothered by straight privilege. It's a lose-lose situation.
Last week, I went on a date with an androgynous, straight bio-guy and this table of jerky businessmen was leering and laughing at us. I don't know if they thought we were both lesbians or fags or if their behavior would've changed had they known our "opposite sexes" (so many things wrong with that system!). Aaaww my kitty just curled up in my lap! My point is that being gender-variant, especially with complete strangers who know only how you look, is more likely to stir up shit. And rather than trying to figure out who you are, they're more likely to fit you into the "gay", "straight" or MAYBE "bi" box. WHO CARES?!?
* by no means is this a value system or qualifier, it's just how it was. I was far more likely to get odd looks (at the least) in the street than everyone else in the group, who looked normal. Well...normal for Madison.
I'm dating a straight bio-guy and a lot of people expect my identity to change, that I identify as bisexual rather than lesbian now. With people who are easily confused or won't invest much thought into gender/sexuality, I let them think what they will. My gender identity had started shifting years ago and, because of that, "woman-identified-woman" hasn't really applied to me for a while. Lesbian is too small a box for all my fabulous queerdom. And don't even get me started on the binary "bisexual" label. The genders of the people I date impact me so little that it surprised me when that was the first place people went upon this news.
Just look at me! I'm not gonna get straight privilege anytime soon. Heterosexism both disrespects gay relationships and elevates straight relationships for no reason; as a confusing genderqueer, the genders/sexes of the people I date are used as judgement. When I pass for a guy or an "it", it implies the guy I'm dating is gay; when I pass for a woman, it implies that I'm straight. Either he gets a taste of homophobia or my queer identity gets smothered by straight privilege. It's a lose-lose situation.
Last week, I went on a date with an androgynous, straight bio-guy and this table of jerky businessmen was leering and laughing at us. I don't know if they thought we were both lesbians or fags or if their behavior would've changed had they known our "opposite sexes" (so many things wrong with that system!). Aaaww my kitty just curled up in my lap! My point is that being gender-variant, especially with complete strangers who know only how you look, is more likely to stir up shit. And rather than trying to figure out who you are, they're more likely to fit you into the "gay", "straight" or MAYBE "bi" box. WHO CARES?!?
* by no means is this a value system or qualifier, it's just how it was. I was far more likely to get odd looks (at the least) in the street than everyone else in the group, who looked normal. Well...normal for Madison.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
DEATHSTORM 2011
SNOMAGEDDON!!
My days off this week are yesterday and tomorrow, so thank goodness I didn't get caught at work. Around noon, I ran some errands and there had been no snow yet - just blustery winds off the lake. By 4, when I was heading home, the snow had started and the wind had increased. O'Hare closed at 4:30 but three of my coworkers, including my general manager, had to spend the night in a hotel which lost power and heat!! I got home just as the blizzard became unbearable. My apartment faces an airshaft, so the weather outside my window always looks like a milder version of how it really is; by 7, there was almost no visibility out my window. I believe that was when the Wrigley Field roof was torn off and my friend Liz's power went out. I fell asleep last night to the sounds of 70mph winds, my building didn't so much as flicker or quake.
When I woke up this morning, slightly less high winds were blowing around giant flakes and 5 inches of snow were built up on these top floor window sills. The cta is still technically running, but my manager told everyone to not even try to come out - especially since she and my two coworkers had yet to get home! It stopped snowing about an hour ago, so I walked the four blocks to my Jewel. At the flattest areas in the streets, the snow went up my knees - 18 inches. Due to the wind, there are more 5ft drifts than flat areas! I saw a couple abandoned cars and it looked like people had tried to shovel/blow some sidestreet intersections but then gave up. A fair number of people, mostly my age, are walking in the streets rather than braving the sidewalks. Nobody has even bothered digging out any parked cars. It's not that cold, maybe mid or upper 20's (how sad is it that I don't think of that as too cold anymore?) and the sun is fighting to get out.
My days off this week are yesterday and tomorrow, so thank goodness I didn't get caught at work. Around noon, I ran some errands and there had been no snow yet - just blustery winds off the lake. By 4, when I was heading home, the snow had started and the wind had increased. O'Hare closed at 4:30 but three of my coworkers, including my general manager, had to spend the night in a hotel which lost power and heat!! I got home just as the blizzard became unbearable. My apartment faces an airshaft, so the weather outside my window always looks like a milder version of how it really is; by 7, there was almost no visibility out my window. I believe that was when the Wrigley Field roof was torn off and my friend Liz's power went out. I fell asleep last night to the sounds of 70mph winds, my building didn't so much as flicker or quake.
When I woke up this morning, slightly less high winds were blowing around giant flakes and 5 inches of snow were built up on these top floor window sills. The cta is still technically running, but my manager told everyone to not even try to come out - especially since she and my two coworkers had yet to get home! It stopped snowing about an hour ago, so I walked the four blocks to my Jewel. At the flattest areas in the streets, the snow went up my knees - 18 inches. Due to the wind, there are more 5ft drifts than flat areas! I saw a couple abandoned cars and it looked like people had tried to shovel/blow some sidestreet intersections but then gave up. A fair number of people, mostly my age, are walking in the streets rather than braving the sidewalks. Nobody has even bothered digging out any parked cars. It's not that cold, maybe mid or upper 20's (how sad is it that I don't think of that as too cold anymore?) and the sun is fighting to get out.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
I'm not paying to learn reverse cowgirl!
At work yesterday, this polygamous family - a guy with two wives - came in. The husband and Big Wife looked like they were in their late 30's or early 40's and they had thick Southern accents; Little Wife looked in her late 20's and she was very meek. They all browsed around a bit, then Little Wife picked out a magazine she wanted. Keep in mind that about three other customers were browsing around the store, too, while this happened.
Big Wife grabbed the magazine out of her hand, looked at it and started waving it around while yelling "A running magazine?! This is so stupid! You would want a running magazine! What articles do they have in this piece of junk...'Running to Happy?' What are you gonna do, run your way to happy?! That's why you want this, isn't it? This is so stupid!" Husband stepped in and quietly added it to his pile of magazines.
Big Wife had not picked out anything yet, so she yelled at them "I'm going to look in the erotica section!" Oh Jesus Christ, really? She looked around in there, then came back to the other two and yelled at them, "I'm not gonna pay to learn reverse cowgirl!" Husband politely asked "really?" And she angrily yelled back at him "I could teach you for free!"
And then they left, leaving the few other customers and I in shock.
Big Wife grabbed the magazine out of her hand, looked at it and started waving it around while yelling "A running magazine?! This is so stupid! You would want a running magazine! What articles do they have in this piece of junk...'Running to Happy?' What are you gonna do, run your way to happy?! That's why you want this, isn't it? This is so stupid!" Husband stepped in and quietly added it to his pile of magazines.
Big Wife had not picked out anything yet, so she yelled at them "I'm going to look in the erotica section!" Oh Jesus Christ, really? She looked around in there, then came back to the other two and yelled at them, "I'm not gonna pay to learn reverse cowgirl!" Husband politely asked "really?" And she angrily yelled back at him "I could teach you for free!"
And then they left, leaving the few other customers and I in shock.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
The Closing Scope of Masculinity
Imagine a man with a sleek mustache, a boater with a ribbon, a pink ascot, and a cream, well-tailored, three piece suit. A hipster seeking a classy sugar daddy, right? Nope! Up until WWII, our dapper friend here was the height of masculinity! You may not believe it but, in the early 1900's, pink was a very masculine color.
Unless you were alive at the time (I tip my boater to you if you were), check up some gif.s and YouTube videos of The Beatles early in their career. Watch A Hard Day's Night. Pretty gay, right? Nope! That was masculine fifty years ago. Granted, this is Europe we're dealing with but I think we can let that slide.
Masculinity has gone through drastic changes in a relatively short amount of time, these examples are only an obvious few. Pat Boone, Mike Douglas, Bill Shirley and other suave singers in the 50's had no cause to doubt their manhood; but a man who sings about dreams and his heart flying with joy today just sounds fruity. Not only have the social standards for masculinity changed, but the scope of it has changed over time as well.
Mark Hamil has noted that, in thirty years' time, his action figures have gained at least fifty pounds in muscle. As the Y chromosome shrinks, so shrinks standards for masculinity. It's become a competition of manhood, with more and more men's archetypes falling into girly territory. When an individual man asserts his machismo to the point of emasculating others, it's pretty obvious that he's insecure in his own manhood. On such a cultural scale, though, could insecurity alone have brought about the closing gates of masculinity?
Unless you were alive at the time (I tip my boater to you if you were), check up some gif.s and YouTube videos of The Beatles early in their career. Watch A Hard Day's Night. Pretty gay, right? Nope! That was masculine fifty years ago. Granted, this is Europe we're dealing with but I think we can let that slide.
Masculinity has gone through drastic changes in a relatively short amount of time, these examples are only an obvious few. Pat Boone, Mike Douglas, Bill Shirley and other suave singers in the 50's had no cause to doubt their manhood; but a man who sings about dreams and his heart flying with joy today just sounds fruity. Not only have the social standards for masculinity changed, but the scope of it has changed over time as well.
Mark Hamil has noted that, in thirty years' time, his action figures have gained at least fifty pounds in muscle. As the Y chromosome shrinks, so shrinks standards for masculinity. It's become a competition of manhood, with more and more men's archetypes falling into girly territory. When an individual man asserts his machismo to the point of emasculating others, it's pretty obvious that he's insecure in his own manhood. On such a cultural scale, though, could insecurity alone have brought about the closing gates of masculinity?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
