Intersectionality vs. Being Human

I read yet another screed on intersectionality in feminism that both made sense and irritated me. There is this assumption in a lot of the talk about intersectionality in feminism (which I don' see cropping up in conversations about racism, it's only the women who leave things out, I guess) that individual feminists should talk about the issues of all women whenever they talk about feminism. White feminists talk about the things that affect white women. Cis women talk about what affects them. Straight women are all about talking about dating issues in heterosexual couples. Western women talk about being a woman in America or Europe. And of course they do, because that is what they are, that is their experience. A black cis hetero man still experiences racism and still has things to complain about. A white cis hetero woman, likewise, has issues. Privilege doesn't even out oppression.

I get the complaint that most articles and talking about feminism is coming from a straight, cis, white, western perspective. I get that annoyance that they are the ones getting the big writing deals and having their voices and concerns heard. I get that they sometimes - or even usually - don't acknowledge other types of women, much less talk about the issues facing them. I get it, I really do, because there is something I've left out, maybe two, three, or more somethings. Two because being obese isn't seen as a 'real' disability and three or more because I don't remember every piece of identity all the time either.

One of the things feminist articles - especially those regarding the issue of dating or men hitting on women - is that all women are thin. When a fat woman pokes her head up and says "I wouldn't mind being hit on every now and then", she's told that she really wouldn't. And like clockwork, she backs down in the face of all of the thin/normal sized women's stories of creepy guys not leaving them alone. But as a fat woman, I can say that I don't mind being hit on now and then because it happens a lot more rarely than that. I've had people call out to me on the street. In New Orleans in March, a guy a block away started swinging his arms. When I got closer, he indicated that he wanted a hug. I shook my head and smiled, but I didn't feel creeped out at all. Being bigger than the average male - same average height, more average weight - I am not really afraid of them. In fact, I actually do feel flattered when people call out to me on the street, and I don't give a shit if the guy intended it that way or not. It is my feeling to have.

But I would never begrudge a thin, normal sized woman her feelings about those situations either. I think their experiences are important to understand and those issues are important to talk about. Sure, I'd like to read more about how fat women experience sexism (and without the concern trolling about our health, please). Intersectionality is important, but I can't stand the comments about how this article or that article didn't touch on this type of person or that type of person and therefore their feminism is oppressive, unwelcoming, racist, homophobic, anti-trans, and everything else. Nothing can be everything, so take it for what it is and write your own article that does talk about those kind of people.

My Offensive Reality: Roots of Problems and Lady Boys

On Friday morning, I walked around Berkeley and North Oakland while listening to a lot of Soul music. My walk took me to the UC Berkeley campus, and got there just in time to see all the students going to their 9am classes. I wanted to buy some CDs, but the record stores did not open until later, one at 11, and another at 10:30. Even Moe's did not open until 10am, so I went to a breakfast place that supports the no sit-lie proposition for Telegraph & other places in Berkeley. Personally, I wish we had better public mental health services and a more thriving economy to solve the persistent begger problem in Berkeley, but it seems easier to make it more illegal to be poor in America.

I went home and watched RuPaul's Drag Race, where a couple of episodes broached the question of people being legally forbidden to marry - not because they are too young, or deemed mentally incompetent, but because the other competent adult that they want to marry isn't of the opposite sex. Another episode went over the contestant's journeys in life, and the struggles they have had with acceptance from their families. The other parts of the shows were fabulous, with incredible costumes, makeup, singing, and dancing. One show asked the contestants to be rock 'n' roll singers, and sing RuPaul's own song called Lady Boy. The song is about the essence of being a Drag Queen, in my opinion. That of a man, who does not want to be a woman, but who enjoys dressing up, putting on makeup, wigs, and high heeled shoes to become completely fabulous, glamorous, and carefree. I know that everyone has difference preferences, but I don't understand people who would never want to experience that for themselves.

Ewe Ess Aye! Live Blogging

In the dawn of Internet 2.0, I seem to remember that live blogging just meant updating a post. I might have made that up. I was compelled to do this today.

Just Before Game Start: The commentator called the US team 'attractive', which in context simply means that they perform well, but strikes me as an odd adjective to use.

10 minutes in: We're in the World Cup Finals today. This is the second finals I've watched, and it is a lot more exciting.

30 minutes in: There is an image of a flower on the Japan team's uniforms. The specific flower is a Japanese cultural symbol of the ideal woman.

33 minutes in: Japan is dominating the ball, and it's intense!

40 minutes in: If Japan's Ohno scores the winning goal, I will be sad, but the newspaper headline is already written.

Half Time (45 minutes): Steve has noted that there are fewer fouls in this game, and I agreed that it seems cleaner. Compared to the 2010 final, the field seems smaller, there is a lot more action, and there are hardly any penalties. Soccer is growing on me, and this game is helping.

48.5 minutes in: My heart was in my throat. We need to score!

68.5 minutes in: GOOOOOAAAAAALLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!

79 minutes in: Oh my, the game is even more fun now. Steve is noting that they are using the words 'attractive' and ' beautiful' in the commentating.

80 minutes it: Tension is back, but I think we have the upper hand.

72 minutes in: Hope Solo is a f*cking awesome name.

End of Regular Time (90+2 minutes): This is exciting, but I feel like an All Blacks fan watching the 1995 Rugby World Cup.

1 minute of extra time: A Japanese win could do wonders for Japanese spirit/morale.....

6.5 minutes of extra time: First yellow card.

13 minutes of extra time: USA Ahead Again!

19 minutes of extra time: Thrilling excitements

24 minutes of extra time: The goalie keeps being lead away from the goal. I hope she is still ok to play.

25.5 minutes of extra time: I don't think Hope can pull this out.

30 minutes of extra time: That penalty was incredible - it has become upper hand versus destiny

End of Extra Time: Ending a game with penalty kicks is kind of eh, but they're really good teams.

Before first penalty kick: I just saw a guy with a sign saying "Marry Me, Hope I'm Solo".

After Japan's first penalty kick: Hope is definitely limping...

Before Japan's second penalty kick: I think it is going to be destiny

Before Japan's third penalty kick: I call destiny

Game End: Congratulations, Japan. This is yours to celebrate.

My Freedom

Support Choice for your Mother and choice for your father.
Choice for your children, your sisters and brothers

The inability to plan parenthood would rob me of the liberty to plan my life. But don't support this just for my sake. I am wealthy (for now), but most of America is not. I have used Planned Parenthood once, when I was switching insurance providers. My friends and family have used it for essential services.

The activities of this Congress are stripping us of our essential rights.

Choices

I just saw the last part of Off and Running from POV. Avery is an African American teenager who was adopted by a Jewish lesbian couple. She and her boyfriend are track athletes. In the course of the show, she wrote a letter to her birth mother and received a response that set her into an identity crisis and may or may not have been a trigger for fights she had been having with her parents.

When I started watching, Avery was having trouble with her running. Her boyfriend was concerned about her because of all the things she was worried about. She was not living at home and was skipping school. The next set of scenes involved her taking a pregnancy test, then going to Planned Parenthood in Manhattan. Her comment was that she did not want to give up any of her children for adoption. She later ran in the Empire State Games and got the bronze. After acing the GED and studying for the SAT, she got a track scholarship to Delaware State. In the end, it seems like she made peace with her struggles and decided to hold off on contacting her birth mother until she finished college.

Huh

I found this link buried in my drafts, from two years ago.

Queen's bloomers sell for £4,500

In the Meantime

I have a couple more Stupid People posts coming up, but in the meantime, allow me to link an article by Barbara Ehrenreich: The Pink Ribbon Cancer Cult

Unrelated, but "Her presence underscores the impact and importance of bowling." I'm not sure if that line can be any funnier.

People are Stupid, Part 1

Last night, I learned that a woman who HAD CANCER that was detected by a mammogram at the age of 42 went and canceled her surgery to remove the cancer because of the new guidelines. At 42, this woman may have already had children, so when she dies, she won't be able to get a Darwin award, but she certainly deserves one. This is the concern - that stupid people will be stupid and do shit like this. Frankly, I could not care less about stupid people who ignore diagnosed problems. I think a lot of energy is lost trying to help people who are demonstrating no desire to help themselves (the cost issue has been ignored in this case, on my part, but the fact that cost is a factor in having life saving procedures is the fault of our shitty system anyway).

Then there are the emotional outbursts from people who think that the guidelines would work as restrictions and no woman under 50 would be able to get a mammogram. These people are idiots. The guidelines clearly state that this is ONLY the case for women who are not otherwise deemed to be at high risk for breast cancer. I understand the concern that this may mean that health insurance providers may stop paying for these screenings, which, when done correctly, save lives. Republicans are using this as a political football too, even though they have demonstrated that they have no problems with cutting off funding for procedures that save women's lives. But the problem with that argument is that the fault there lies with the ruthless tactics of the health insurance industry, not with well reasoned guidelines.

I can't emphasize that word enough - guidelines. Furthermore, these are guidelines for women who are not otherwise at high risk. Paranoid women and women with an ancestral history of breast cancer can get their damn mammograms every year, every 6 months if they really want it. However, had nobody ever come out and said that women under 50 need to have this done, we wouldn't be in this situation. I'm just glad that the paranoia didn't reach a point where they started proclaiming that women get mammograms in their 30's. After all, I do know women who have had breast cancer that early too.

[sarcasm]And lets not even try to think of better cancer screening procedures while we continue to post x-rays of women's breasts on the nightly news all the time, we're saving lives by barbarically smashing body parts and then posting them to the public![/sarcasm]

Another Quote

Over at Pandagon, I don't care for the bloggers that quote a lot because I want to read their analysis. I read the blog because I like the writing and opinions of the bloggers, so reading a bunch of quotes bores me. But, I'm not as skilled a writer as Marcotte, or this writer, so I guess I have to quote.

The fourth point: If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.

There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail?

Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.

This man scores higher on the threat level scale than Man with the Cockroach Tattoos. (Who, after all, is guilty of nothing more than terrifying bad taste.) You see, Mr. E-mail has made it clear that he ignores what I say when he wants something from me. Now, I don’t know if he is an actual rapist, and I sincerely hope he’s not. But he is certainly Schrödinger’s Rapist, and this particular Schrödinger’s Rapist has a probability ratio greater than one in sixty. Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.

So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.

For women, who are watching you very closely to determine how much of a threat you are, this is an important piece of data.

-Sweet Machine

Here is something that I already realize, but I did not have the capacity to put it into words. Fortunately, I can leverage the words of someone else and use this to put words to instances in my own life.

I Love You, Caren

So...by not going to SC and getting herself hurt or killed, Michelle Obama is oppressing the freedom-loving, conservative patriots who just want to express their “dissent” to her personally. Is that right?

On that note, I’m pretty fed up with theocratic assholes who think that their First Amendment right to be free from government impediments of speech means that they are allowed to force any particular person to listen to them.

Chicago just passed a law creating 50 foot buffer zone around abortion providers’ workspaces. Within 50 feet of the building, you cannot approach someone closer than 8 feet without her permission. The ACLU is actually on the theocrats’ side in this, evil socialists they are, b/c it’s hard to leaflet from 8 feet away.

Anyway, tons of screaming about how these wonderful people who never harmed anyone and have saved countless baybeez are being discriminated against and not being allowed their freedom of speech.

You can talk. You just can’t talk to a specific person if they don’t want to listen: that’s called harassment.

Specifically to this post, no one is stopping anyone in SC from dissenting. If they can’t behave like civilized people or like Americans, then it’s their own fault if they can’t have nice things like a visit from the First Lady.

-Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes

Under New York State Law

I turned on the TV tonight and the only thing on was Seinfeld, so I caught the end of the "Bra as a Top" episode. Elaine is annoyed by an acquaintance that never wears a bra, so she buys her one as a gift. The woman wears it as a top, with a jacket and causes Kramer to get into a car accident. It could be said to be a distraction, but in Manhattan, toplessness is legal, regardless of sex.

Names So Much

Three years ago, I got into Project Runway. I finished Season 3 and saw Season 4 to the end. Somewhere in there, I forgot TV and/or got busier, so I missed Season 5, maybe 6 too. Anyway, suddenly, I'm into the show again and Episode 2 had a maternity wear challenge. Pregnancy experience seems, to me, like a rare occurrence in popular culture and the winner worked with a model who had a 2 year-old. The Losers shook out like this:

• Ra'mon: an interesting optical illusion dress with contrasting color choices to create a bowling-ball-bag look.
• Mitchell: cute outfit, horribly sewn.
• Marvin: concept design to feature pregnacy: a mother hen.

. I don't remember as much about the winners, except that they were all women and Sharin won cuz she had an awesome dress and a super hot coat. I'm interested to analyze what I do know, however.

In other news, Project Runway is on Lifetime now, which allows me to see Lifetime commercials, including those for other shows on Lifetime. They all have incredibly emotional plotlines that can usually make me cry from intensity and wear me down. I have heard of a study claiming that having severe emotions one day reduces your physical ability to cope with the mental stress the next day. In other words, Lifetime stresses people out and the commercials are painful to me and I try to avoid them.