 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
December 15, 2010
The above image/title is reference to a very popular Ryan Gosling meme. Â For more on that, see here or here.
Appeals for film ratings are not uncommon. Filmmakers frequently protest when the MPAA dishes out a verdict they feel is undeserved. So when Blue Valentine was rated NC-17, it wasn’t surprising when the producers filed for an appeal. (An NC-17 rated film won’t be carried at most major theater chains, can not be attended by anyone 17 and under, and television networks and newspapers won’t run ads.)
As part of the appeal, the films stars, Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams each composed letters defending the film, which ended up receiving a lot of press on a variety of blogs. Â In his letter, Gosling stated:
“You have to question a cinematic culture which preaches artistic expression, and yet would support a decision that is clearly a product of a patriarchy-dominant society, which tries to control how women are depicted on screen. The MPAA is okay supporting scenes that portray women in scenarios of sexual torture and violence for entertainment purposes, but they are trying to force us to look away from a scene that shows a woman in a sexual scenario, which is both complicit and complex. It’s misogynistic in nature to try and control a woman’s sexual presentation of self. I consider this an issue that is bigger than this film.â€
He also stated in an interview with E!
“The MPAA really needs to…There is something very distorted about this reality that they’ve created, which is that it is OK to torture women on screen…Any kind of violence towards women in a sexual scenario is fine. But give a woman pleasure, no way. Not a chance. That’s pornography.”
It’s surprising to hear anyone in Hollywood discussing the patriarchy and repression of women, even more so to hear a male movie star do so. The Notebook may be bad for you, but Ryan Gosling is good for feminism. The filmmakers won their appeal, and Blue Valentine was issued an R-rating. The film will open in limited release in the U.S. on December 31st, 2010.
June 3, 2010
I didn’t celebrate my first period my drinking bottles red wine with the women in my family, wine purchased on the day of my birth in anticipation of this rite of passage. I didn’t call my friends giggling to share the wonderful news. There was no fanfare of any kind. In fact, there was nothing but fear and shame. I kept silent and stuffed my panties with layers of toilet paper that would peak to a v and eventually shred to bits. When”outed” by my mother, I fiercely denied the truth while simultaneously wishing that I would tell her the truth and get some maternal support (and a box of pads). Sensing my reluctance and discomfort, my mother bought a box of pads and left it under the bathroom sink. This silent delivery of bulky, winged pads continued in silence for years. The absence of celebration and generational bonding leaves me with a small hole in my heart. The shame I felt about my maturing body and the cultural messages that equate the vagina and menstruation with a noxious cesspool robbed me of an opportunity to love my body and its unique life-giving properties.
Examining representations of the female body within pop culture would not be complete without a critical examination of sociohistorical attitudes toward menstruation. After all, the advertising industry is replete with messages that reinforce ancient notions that menstruation is a cringe-worthy, filthy subject. How can a girl love herself completely when she has been raised in an environment that sees the female body as dirty? Shameful? How different would we feel about ourselves if our first period was met with revelry and joy?
For a recent blogging assignment in my Women and Pop Culture class, my students discussed their experiences with their cycle while referencing Red Moon: Menstruation, Culture and the Politics of Gender and The Body Project: An Intimate History of American Girls. What follows is a collection of posts that provides an insightful glimpse into young women’s attitudes about “the curse.”
(more…)
April 21, 2010
Originally posted at The Delphiad Blog by Dominique Millette in response to my post at Ms. Magazine yesterday, Unretouched Photos: Empowering or just more “Empower-tainment?” Cross-posted with permission.
The following post has been inspired by discussions in the blogosphere of whether or not unretouched photos are progress. I argue they’re not: because beauty as a public discourse is a trap for women, unretouched or otherwise. No matter how we change definitions of beauty, the fact that women are constrained by the requirement of being beautiful above all else is the main problem. It remains whether or not we retouch the photographs.
Women are separated at birth from the right to their own beauty, just as they are separated from the right to their sexuality. Within patriarchy, both exist only to service male expectations and fantasies. We stop owning what belongs to us — it gets appropriated by men. Our beauty, like our sexuality, becomes a commodity to be traded and bartered, to be put on display, to be graded and tinkered with, for the profit and enjoyment of men.
(more…)
March 18, 2010
Check out the thought provoking and insightful take on Rielle Hunter at Womanist Musings.
Excerpt:
Rielle had sex with a married man and has thus become the modern day scarlet woman. She made no promises to Elizabeth Edwards and in fact had no relationship with Ms. Edwards, therefore; it puzzles me why she is being shamed alongside John Edwards.
If he had truly wanted to stay faithful to his wife, nothing that Rielle did could have caused him to sway. Edwards made an active choice to be unfaithful and therefore; if we are going to judge or blame (though I feel we should do neither) it should be him. Edwards was the one that was deceitful.
People have latched onto the photos [in her GQ interview] of Rielle to justify the slut shaming. Attacking how a woman chooses to dress and then making a correlation to sexual behaviour, is one of the most obvious ways in which patriarchy works to eliminate female agency. What disturbs me most, is watching women jump on their high horse to finger wag, completely oblivious to the fact that they are supporting their own oppression.
 
November 6, 2008
I really enjoyed piece by Russell Bishop in yesterday’s Huffington Post that follows below.
It strikes me as a clear example of new visions of power, politics and interpersonal relationships. The emotional realm that includes compassion, caring, and empathy has long been regarded as “feminine” and subsequently devalued. The realm of the rational, linear, calculated and methodical has been deemed “masculine” and consistently valued over the weaker realm of feminine characteristics listed above. This has been a disservice for both men and women in our culture as each is encouraged to disconnect from the full spectrum of human characteristics and qualities. Simultaneously, in a patriarchal culture that values masculinity and the social constructions correlated to the masculine realm, we have culturally suppressed important and under emphasized qualities that would serve our aggressive, competitive, and, often, ruthless hypermasculine culture in a myraid of positive ways.
As Bishop implies, Barack Obama’s style and grace is a departure from business and politics as usual. And, it’s about time. As a culture mired in cut throat competition and a paradigm of power that stresses “power over,” a political leader that is balanced on the socially constructed gender continuum and demonstrates deep wisdom and compassion serves as an inspiring role model.
Last night we witnessed a graciousness that belies the apparent animus that oozed through much of the last several weeks of the campaign.
Last night, John McCain evidenced a grace and essence in his concession speech that helped me considerably. As much as I have disagreed with the Republican campaign rhetoric, I have tried my best to look past the unseemly smears and expressions of anger to see the person, the human being that lies more deeply within.
My sense is that had Senator McCain campaigned with the same grace and elegance as he evidenced in his concession speech, he just might have won.
As I wrote earlier this week in Election Anxiety articles about Lincoln and what to do if the other side wins, I hold to the notion that both Barack Obama and John McCain care, and care deeply. They certainly disagree about how to demonstrate and act on their caring, but care they do.
The anger that often flares around John McCain is something I recognize inside of me. It comes out most frequently when I care deeply about something and feel frustrated and ineffective in my ability to communicate that caring.
Barack Obama cares and cares deeply as well. One of his great blessings is the ability to stay in touch with his caring and to communicate from that place of caring, even at those times when he, too, must be feeling frustrated, even angry.
As an educational psychologist by training, I recognize the difference between denial or suppression of deeply held feelings, and the channeling of that deeply held feeling into positive resourcefulness. Throughout the campaign, I witnessed times when Barack Obama found himself tested, angry, and otherwise mistreated. However, I also witnessed him channel those tests and discomforting feelings into a resourcefulness that allowed his caring to be communicated even more profoundly.
Like John McCain, Barack Obama demonstrated graciousness and a profound elegance in his election night speech. In particular, he evidenced a confidence unencumbered by hubris, an ability to assess the challenges that lie ahead, a conviction in his and our ability to address those challenges, and a willingness to embrace his opponents in discovering solutions to the challenges we face.
After Barack Obama gave his speech, the CNN panel tossed around ideas about how the President-Elect might lead going forward. As suggestions were made that he might govern from the left, or perhaps claim Reagan era centrist turf, David Gergen reminded everyone that Obama’s victory was not one of simply left or liberal proportions; rather, Barack Obama claimed vast numbers of voters from all across the nation, and from just about every demographic subset CNN could find to post on the wall.
As the govern-from-the-left vs. govern-from-the-right debate ensued, my wife offered a profound insight: Barack Obama has the opportunity to govern from the heart.
That struck me in a very resonant chord. What is it about Barack Obama that has penetrated so many different people from so many different walks of life? Sure, he has some brilliant campaign strategists and ran an amazing campaign over the past 20 months. However, there have been brilliant strategists and effective campaigns in the past. This one seems different.
The difference to me is that President-Elect Barack Obama cares, is willing to share that he cares, and has the amazing ability to connect his heart to his considerable intellect. By connecting heartfelt concern to reasoned problem solving, he represents an opportunity to bring about the change that was the theme of his campaign.
Beyond a mere campaign slogan, my sense is that this man cares enough and knows enough to realize that he must stay focused on the outcome, while be willing to adapt to the inevitable changes that will arise. He signaled clearly that solving the problems before us and creating real change will require far more than he can accomplish alone, and far more than can be accomplished in his first 100 days.
Perhaps his first 100 days will be characterized by the bridging of differences, connecting heartfelt concerns with practical realities. Perhaps we will focus on building like-minded communities of people willing to lead from the heart while slogging through difficult times of rebuilding our broken economic, social and political systems. Perhaps the common tie that will bind people of different backgrounds and disparate points of view about the way forward, will be a common bond of caring, commitment, and compassion.
Surely the nation could use greater caring and compassion. We already know that the President-Elect has the commitment to go with his caring and compassion.
The real question will not be what he can or will do as President, but what we and and will do as individuals. Are we willing to demonstrate the graciousness that both Senator McCain and President-Elect Obama showed us last night? Are we willing to take up the challenge to repair and rebuild with our own combination of caring, commitment and compassion.
Yes We Can.
October 20, 2008
Posted on NPR 10/14/08:
China’s booming economy means that factories are popping up all over the country. Makeshift cities emerge around these factories for the poor villagers that stream in looking for work.
“It’s chaos,” says author Leslie Chang, who explores life in these cities in Factory Girls: From Village to City in a Changing China. “And the most striking thing is that everyone is young.”
As Naomi Klein notes in No Logo, not only are most of the workers in these factories young, they are young women. Young women that moves hundreds and thousands of miles from their home provinces lack the support networks and are more easily intimidated and controlled as they work under intolerable conditions for low wages so that the industrialized nations can but cheap shirts at Walmart.
|
|
 |
|
