After megastar Rihanna was beaten by her then-boyfriend Chris Brown last February, police photos of her battered, swollen face appeared all over the internet. But we heard nothing from Rihanna herself. That silence was filled instead by heaps of celebrity speculation about the couple's relationship, especially after Rihanna briefly returned to Chris only to later break it off. Now, for the first time, Rihanna testifies on television about the violence in her relationship. In an interview with Diane Sawyer, Rihanna acknowledges the epidemic of violence against women. She speaks movingly about her realization that the way she reacted to her beating could influence legions of her young female fans, saying, "when I realized that my selfish decision for love could result in some young girl getting killed, I could not be easy with that part. I could not be responsible for telling them, 'Go back.'" Rihanna's protective instinct in her most compromised moment is a generous one. As Jezebel notes, celebrities who suffer abuse are often pressured to turn their complex, painful experiences into parables for their young fans. Though Rihanna's concern for young women undoubtedly comes from a real place, it's difficult not to wonder if we are asking too much of someone who has already endured such horrors.
Watch a portion of the interview below. -Naomi
Friday, November 6, 2009
Thursday, November 5, 2009
What happened in Maine?
When Maine voters repealed a same sex marriage law on Tuesday, gay rights advocates and their opponents alike were perplexed. Maine is a socially liberal, 'live and let live' state in a region of the country that has historically backed marriage equality. And even though gay rights supporters organized a tight, well-financed campaign in Maine, voters met the initiative with an overwhelming "no."
So what gives? According to several analysts, the ballot initiative process itself might be the culprit. When the public is given the opportunity to vote on controversial social issues, fiery individuals show up to the polls.
“[Ballot questions] tend to marginalize the group that is being targeted and inflame people’s passions in a way that is at best divisive and at worst terribly cruel,” Jennifer C. Pizer, marriage project director for Lambda Legal, a national advocacy group tells the New York Times. “Our founders did not intend to allow a majority to take basic rights from a minority.”
At FiveThirtyEight, a pollster blog, Nate Silver writes that, "at the end of the day, it may have been too much to ask of a state to vote to approve gay marriage in an election where gay marriage itself was the headline issue on the ballot. Although the enthusiasm gap is very probably narrowing, feelings about gay marriage have traditionally been much stronger on the right than the left, and that’s what gets people up off the couch in off-year elections."
Rather than leave the gay marriage question to voters, then, perhaps politicians should take up the helm and pass state-level gay marriage acts. But that, of course, brings up another problem: the complete lack of political will. -Naomi
So what gives? According to several analysts, the ballot initiative process itself might be the culprit. When the public is given the opportunity to vote on controversial social issues, fiery individuals show up to the polls.
“[Ballot questions] tend to marginalize the group that is being targeted and inflame people’s passions in a way that is at best divisive and at worst terribly cruel,” Jennifer C. Pizer, marriage project director for Lambda Legal, a national advocacy group tells the New York Times. “Our founders did not intend to allow a majority to take basic rights from a minority.”
At FiveThirtyEight, a pollster blog, Nate Silver writes that, "at the end of the day, it may have been too much to ask of a state to vote to approve gay marriage in an election where gay marriage itself was the headline issue on the ballot. Although the enthusiasm gap is very probably narrowing, feelings about gay marriage have traditionally been much stronger on the right than the left, and that’s what gets people up off the couch in off-year elections."
Rather than leave the gay marriage question to voters, then, perhaps politicians should take up the helm and pass state-level gay marriage acts. But that, of course, brings up another problem: the complete lack of political will. -Naomi
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Papa Ken
You too can have your very own Sugar Daddy, thanks to Mattel's newest doll, the Palm Beach Sugar Daddy Ken Doll. Among the doll's feature's are rooted hair, a lap dog, and a man "ready for the Palm Beach social season."
Barbie and Ken have long been known for their strong tendency to align with traditional gender roles, and the new sugar daddy doll is no different. As I've blogged about on The Lady Finger before, relationships tied up in financial exchanges--like those of sugar daddies--do not pose a priori problems. It is the power associated with such relationships, and the normalized gender roles that accompany that power. This Ken doll will no doubt be a companion to a needy, but very sexy, Barbie. But that sense of smugness isn't for Barbie alone; to the doll collector, "Look no further for your sugar daddy!" -Sara (Thanks, Ryan, for the tip.)
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Get out the vote for women
It's Election Day again! And while this year's ballot pales in comparison to last November's electrifying poll, this day is still an important marker in considering women in politics.
As of last year's election, women made up a paltry 18 percent of elected leaders in parliaments and senates across the globe, according to the United Nations, which urges member countries to strive for 30 percent. And in the United States in particular, the figures are equally dim. Women make up 17 percent of the Senate, 24 percent of state legislatures, and 17 percent of big city mayors.
But don't hang your head this Election Day. Instead, take a cue from the White House Project and bring your daughter to the polls with you to show her the power of casting her vote and the possibility that she, too, can appear on the ballot one day. Or buck up and peruse the Women's Campaign Forum list of female candidates nationwide who deserve our votes. Or you could even urge a female friend to run for office. I personally nominate my co-blogger Sara. -Naomi
As of last year's election, women made up a paltry 18 percent of elected leaders in parliaments and senates across the globe, according to the United Nations, which urges member countries to strive for 30 percent. And in the United States in particular, the figures are equally dim. Women make up 17 percent of the Senate, 24 percent of state legislatures, and 17 percent of big city mayors.
But don't hang your head this Election Day. Instead, take a cue from the White House Project and bring your daughter to the polls with you to show her the power of casting her vote and the possibility that she, too, can appear on the ballot one day. Or buck up and peruse the Women's Campaign Forum list of female candidates nationwide who deserve our votes. Or you could even urge a female friend to run for office. I personally nominate my co-blogger Sara. -Naomi
Monday, November 2, 2009
Gender terrorism again
As I sit here reading CNN this morning, these are stories on the main page: Jon Gosselin is an alleged emotional abuser, Troy Dale West, Jr attacked a woman leaving a Cracker Barrel restaurant in a fit of racist rage and is being released on bail, a former writer alleges that David Letterman’s show is a “hostile environment” workplace, and, finally, a 15 year old girl was gang-raped outside her homecoming dance in California for over two hours and no one came to her aid or intervened to stop the attack.
What all of these stories fail to mention is the most revealing about our society: these are all instances of (alleged – have to say that) violent men. Before you get defensive and call me a man-hater, just give me a couple of more paragraphs.
I’ve written before about the very real threat that women and some men in our society face because of Gender Terrorism. I didn’t coin that phrase, but many people have discussed the seemingly silent and strategic threat of gender-based crimes that cause possible victims (women, children, minority men, gays, lesbians, transgenders) to live their lives constantly looking over their shoulders, waiting for an attack. It isn’t as if we have screenings in place for violent misogynists like we do for liquids and sneakers. Let’s face it: if we were basing the level of expected violence on the Homeland Security Advisory Scale, we would definitely be at Code Red here.
The overwhelming problem, still, is the media coverage and the current public conversation (or lack thereof) about these issues. We self-righteously accuse Gosselin (and his “girlfriend”) of being a media whore so we can disregard his behaviors as outside the realm of typical behavior. We sometimes focus on the racist nature of some violence (finally, we are addressing something usually silenced). We make jokes about Letterman getting caught with his pants down as some kind of payback for his years of monologues that skewered other men caught in “compromising” positions. We devote stories to psychological research about the Genovese effect, which attempts to explain why people refuse to become involved in reporting violent crimes. We blame the lack of security at schools. And on and on and on.
What is unstated, and yet is the most important part of the story, is the gender of the perpetrators and, most often, the gender of the victims. These stories are about men who attack women. This is the crux of the story and yet it is never usually discussed as being even a part of the story.
In our society today we all face overwhelming threats to our lives: there is a terrorist on every block, houses are being foreclosed, no one in the government can figure out a way to provide basic medical care to the population as a whole, people are losing their jobs, money is tight, and on and on and on. Add to this the transformation in the Oval Office – and you have a real challenge to the privileges that the masculinity affords in a patriarchal society. And that serves as a very real “threat” to white male privilege that bleeds down to all men in our society.
I’m not sure how to begin to open up a discussion about the gendered nature of violence. For a start, however, I would like to start reading stories and hearing conversations about disenfranchised men and the very real threat they pose to others. I would like to see journalists actually highlight the gendered nature of most violence. I would like us to discuss, as a community, some of the reasons that violence against women by men is so typical that we don’t even discuss gender.
If we can get travelers to put all their fluids in two ounce bottles and walk barefoot on dirty, stained carpet, can’t we talk about sexism and misogyny and how it normalizes violence against women? -Tonja
What all of these stories fail to mention is the most revealing about our society: these are all instances of (alleged – have to say that) violent men. Before you get defensive and call me a man-hater, just give me a couple of more paragraphs.
I’ve written before about the very real threat that women and some men in our society face because of Gender Terrorism. I didn’t coin that phrase, but many people have discussed the seemingly silent and strategic threat of gender-based crimes that cause possible victims (women, children, minority men, gays, lesbians, transgenders) to live their lives constantly looking over their shoulders, waiting for an attack. It isn’t as if we have screenings in place for violent misogynists like we do for liquids and sneakers. Let’s face it: if we were basing the level of expected violence on the Homeland Security Advisory Scale, we would definitely be at Code Red here.
The overwhelming problem, still, is the media coverage and the current public conversation (or lack thereof) about these issues. We self-righteously accuse Gosselin (and his “girlfriend”) of being a media whore so we can disregard his behaviors as outside the realm of typical behavior. We sometimes focus on the racist nature of some violence (finally, we are addressing something usually silenced). We make jokes about Letterman getting caught with his pants down as some kind of payback for his years of monologues that skewered other men caught in “compromising” positions. We devote stories to psychological research about the Genovese effect, which attempts to explain why people refuse to become involved in reporting violent crimes. We blame the lack of security at schools. And on and on and on.
What is unstated, and yet is the most important part of the story, is the gender of the perpetrators and, most often, the gender of the victims. These stories are about men who attack women. This is the crux of the story and yet it is never usually discussed as being even a part of the story.
In our society today we all face overwhelming threats to our lives: there is a terrorist on every block, houses are being foreclosed, no one in the government can figure out a way to provide basic medical care to the population as a whole, people are losing their jobs, money is tight, and on and on and on. Add to this the transformation in the Oval Office – and you have a real challenge to the privileges that the masculinity affords in a patriarchal society. And that serves as a very real “threat” to white male privilege that bleeds down to all men in our society.
I’m not sure how to begin to open up a discussion about the gendered nature of violence. For a start, however, I would like to start reading stories and hearing conversations about disenfranchised men and the very real threat they pose to others. I would like to see journalists actually highlight the gendered nature of most violence. I would like us to discuss, as a community, some of the reasons that violence against women by men is so typical that we don’t even discuss gender.
If we can get travelers to put all their fluids in two ounce bottles and walk barefoot on dirty, stained carpet, can’t we talk about sexism and misogyny and how it normalizes violence against women? -Tonja
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
