This is my favourite thing of today so far: http://www.racialicious.com/2011/10/13/theyre-going-to-laugh-at-you-white-women-betrayal-and-the-n-word/. 

if you haven't heard, some ignorant people at SlutWalkNYC held up a seriously problematic sign that used the John Lennon/Yoko Ono song title "Woman is the (n-word) of the World" as its 'message'. 

I've been following it loosely thusfar, because it's really nothing new. Oh, white people think they can use the n-word? White feminists are racist and don't think things through all the way? Next you're going to be telling me having a black president didn't change racial relations in this country at all! 

But the articles on this moment keep showing up on my GReader, which is a signal to me that this is something different. THIS particular instance of this painfully common action by white feminists & similar carries a new kind of weight. The above linked article specifically hit home for me because it mentioned Philadelphia, a place where racism (and other hatreds, like transphobia) pervades every single attempt at organizing and action anyone tried within the county limits. I was at one time one of those racist organizers (guilty of 'educate me pls! otherwise, how will i learn?'), and I also fought the racism in my fellow organizers (saying 'we need more black people' is probably not the best first step in attempting to build some diversity). So I'm really not surprised the n-word popped up at a Philly political event. I'm definitely still disgusted, though. 

What's really the most depressing part of this whole situation for me is that I cannot believe white people are defending their use of that word. I cannot believe it every single time it happens, and it happens far, far more often than it should. 

What moments like white people using the n-word and then DEFENDING their actions do is bring into stark relief how far behind we are with race. It is literally like the civil rights movement never happened. And I know a lot of white people would say, 'That's not true! Look at all the wonderful opportunities available to black people nowadays!', or whatever BS they want to spin. 

This SlutWalk sign stuff proves otherwise. Here's why:

The n-word is a vile, disgusting, horrific word. It is one of the worst words in the english language. As proof, I offer the fact that this is still a word used by hardcore racists, neo-nazis, and KKK members to talk about black people. Think about that: if black people have really and truly reclaimed this word, why would people aligned openly with hate still use it? Because it still has exactly the same power it did back in the day. 

So when a white person says this word, even when they're just some random person retelling a story, it is like a fucking bomb. It really and truly carries the same weight as if someone in KKK garb said it. 

Why? Because, again, it is still used against black people as a slur. To this, some white people might say, 'Well, it doesn't offend me!', which of course is irrelevant. Unless you are black, you don't get a say in whether or not that word is offensive. And if you think you do, you need to step back and examine your white privilege, because only someone who thinks they are worth more than someone with a different skin colour would attempt to tell a black person what to think or feel. 

If none of that hits any nerves for you, I will put it this way: do you really and truly want to be aligned with neo-nazis & the KKK? Because those are the only people who say it's ok to use that word. Everyone else of any authority or interest would tell you it is never ok for a white person to say the n-word. 

Every time I see that SlutWalk picture, that is what I see. I keep thinking it's one of those pictures like where protesters get photobombed by the opposing group. But it's not. It is a picture of women who thought long & hard about what they wanted to say to the world about their beliefs and their situation, and they never even considered the ramifications.

I can only venture to guess that it never occurred to them that they would offend people with their sign because they believe they live in a post-racial world where that word is meaningless. They feel this way because, technically, they do. At least, as far as they can see. I doubt they have any friends of colour, I doubt the think critically, or even at all, about race, and I doubt they understand historical context. 

More than all that, though, they don't actually understand feminism.

See, the line 'woman is the (n-word) of the world' does not bare examination. If you just take the quick glance at it, or hear it in passing, and you don't give it too much thought, it is shocking, and it appears to speak directly to the issue of how women are treated the world over.

But once you start to think about it.... you realize something is off.

Woman isn't the (n-word) of the world. Woman is the woman of the world. Because women have been oppressed everywhere, for almost all of history as we know it. Why would we be (n-words) when 'woman' is already a dirty word? Why would you use a slur for one group when 'woman' is already a slur?

 To use that song title as a statement for feminism is the same as holding up a sign that says 'I am a tourist! I don't actually know the first thing about feminism, and I have experienced a lot of privilege my whole life!' because it shows not only that you don't understand the full scope of how sexism & misogyny affects you, but you also don't understand how it affects the whole world. 


These sorts of things always make me wonder how much we could get done if we worked together. I know it's hard to get to a place where that can happen for each individual, but I still believe it could happen. Its one of the things I am enjoying hearing about Occupy Wall Street; while it isn't perfect, there seems to be a lot of openness happening over there, and as a result, the movement is gaining some incredible steam. 

My fingers are crossed that this SlutWalk debacle will open the eyes of at least a few young feminists. And older ones, too. United we stand, right?

Originally posted by gabrielleabelle at Mississippi Personhood Amendment


this s is craycray! via shutter.

Let's start by going back to my post from a few days ago, because I am still thinking about it.

( Trans* is a 'death warrant' for gays & lesbians: not just stupid, but also a seriously homophobic statement.Collapse )

Personally (and this thought will be a running thread through this post), I am fucking offended. I mean, I was seriously fucking offended before, but now I have gained bonus offense. The core idea is that I am less a woman because I am attracted to and sleep with other women, which is incorrect and inaccurate. I am not attracted to women because some part of me is a man, or even because some part of me is masculine. I am attracted to women because I am just attracted to women. That's just my fucking deal. And to make that argument is to buy into the bullshit the majority is pushing.


Moving on, I read this post, and I thoroughly enjoyed it (I also enjoyed this, which is linked to in the post... I mean, jesus christ, first paragraph alone, right?).

( Cut because I personally found this to be triggering, it is that fucking offensive, but I have a funny response, so I am posting it.Collapse )

The thread again: I need people to stop attempting to define my experience as a woman. Things I've read recently- like the comments from the post a few days ago, and the comments from a post I read today, which I will get to in a minute- have reminded me how much of transphobia is related to genitalia. I had forgotten that my own personal privilege of education, experience, and interaction has blessed me with the knowledge that what is in one's pants (including my own) is irrelevant to one's self-positioning in the world. When I experience sexism, it never occurs to me that it's because I'm packing an innie instead of an outie. Because, when I experience sexism, those who are doing it can't see that. They aren't looking at my vagina and then treating me like shit. They are looking at my tits, my face, my clothing, the way I walk, any number of things I have chosen for myself and/or that have been put on me that make me a woman.

( But it's not even just re: sexism...Collapse )

If I refuse to have my experience as a woman be ignored and mangled so that it is about one thing- a thing I find irrelevant to my experience as a woman- then I also refuse to accept that one is not a woman because of that one thing.

If I believe that to be a woman is to experience the world in a certain way, seeing and feeling things in a certain way, that infinite list, then anyone who experiences the world as such is a woman.

Which brings us to what inspired me to post all this in the first place.

I recently started following an LJ of a person who regularly posts quotes she has gathered from around the internet. Reading them today (at 9a, btw, too early for rage, esp on a Sunday, ok), I came across some super transphobic statements. Exactly the same stuff from my post a few days ago.

( 132 comments that all deserve the response of WHAT, & surprise guest, Camille Paglia!Collapse )

Now let's go allll the way back to the beginning of this post, to the intersection of things. Where my head is now, so many hours later, is on the fact that everything is connected. Did you see how a post about misogyny by a man who is trans led to comments that were not just transphobic, but also racist AND sexist. And to be fair, we're just talking about some snippets here. Going through the comments, I saw PLENTY of ableism, and TONS of classism, and that's just what I paid attention to in my pursuit of quotes I could adequately make fun of.

It's all connected. We are all connected. Transphobia harms all of us.

recently, i had a moment related to the following that made me really ragetastical, so i appreciate this coming along right now so i can be adequately angry.

“Regurgitating every transphobic trope of the last 40 years”


there are so many amazing things happening, but these are my favs:

• Instead of being a butch dyke, I’m now being told I should become a man.

what

• Bad things happen to women at the hands of those with penises (i.e. men).

what

• So why is it ok to label women as transphobic for not wanting people with penises in women-only space?

what



but my favfavfav forever is bit:

to me, a birth certificate is an official document issued to record someone's birth. If someone is born a certain sex and the certificate states that, then that's what happened.


well, damn. i did not know BCs were the final say on things. EXCUSE ME, EVERYONE, I HAVE TO GO MAKE SOME PHONE CALLS.

"hi, mom? i know you're on vacation and everything, but i've got some bad news... remember how, for the past 30 years, you've been telling people you have a child? you've been lying. sorry gotta go bye!"



you want to talk about birth certificates? thats where you want to go with this? really?

and they do. they really, really do.



fuck your birth certificate. and while we're here, what's my birth name? it's  fuck you, bitch, that's what it is.


wait, bonus rage:

this is in response to someone saying that accepting trans people is A DEATH WARRANT FOR GAYS & LESBIANS, which is fucking insane to begin with, but then:

If the medicalization of gender stereotypes continues, I worry the treatment for gay and lesbian kids will be to become the opposite sex and thus not be gay.

clearly, friend, you don't know anything about anything.

see also: WHAT

OH AND ALSO! it only just not occurred to me, like 4 hours later, that this whole 'transness is a death warrant for homosexuality!' bullshit is also homophobic.

caramel coconut cake.

my lj friend wendy/demure is trying to make one of her dreams come true. she would like to win a speaking role in neil gaiman's american gods audiobook, and i would also like her to win, because she is awesome, and also bc she would get to come to nyc, haha.

so if you could do both her & i a favour, please go here: http://neilgaiman.bookperk.com/engine/Votes.aspx?contestid=29933&PageType=VOTING&incrementnumber=1&HasRegistered=Y

search for 'wendy', and she is listed as 'demure', and then vote for her.

you can use fbook to sign up quickly, but i also just did it the analogue way, and it wasnt terrible (they also have not bothered me since, fyi).


this is a little karma boost for you! so... yay to that!

smooth.

I want to take a minute to examine the Suckerpunch posters.

Here's one that I saw on the train platform today:



What do you see here? Or rather, what DON'T you see?

Closer:



No T. No A. Seriously, look at this poster. Look at their chests, their faces. Both are fully or partially blocked. And look at the 'skimpy' outfits. The most you see are stomachs, and Babydoll's (the blonde in the front) isn't even straight on. It's to the side, in the middle of an action.

Do you see any men? There were definitely dudes in this movie. In the background are the silhouettes of some of their enemies, but technically they weren't human (or even living).

Here are the other ads featuring women on the same platform:



One woman. Sexy pose. No T&A, but def suggestive. No action.

Also: lol graffiti. Sorry, Edie Falco! You deserve better.



Jackie O. One woman. No action. Not suggestive, per se, but look at her eyes, and then look at the eyes of the girls in the SPunch poster. Their eyes are looking up and away from you; Jackie's are looking at you.



This one was my favourite. Look, more than one woman! Oh... except, one of the women is in a tight embrace with a dude, and the other is... naked. And you can't really see her face.



Ok! 5 women, no men. 4 women with their back to the viewer, asses in full view, faces in total shadow. Then we have the woman's face above, doing the sexy Lolita glasses move with her face partially obscured, and her lips redredred with a slight smile.



First, let me sidebar and openly wonder why they didn't write 'STORIbook WedDEANS'. I mean... cmon.

Second, one woman, with a man. No action (on either of their parts), and this has been clearly photoshopped. Tiny waist, chest visible, legs in front in her short skirt. Also, this dress is not much different than the outfits the girls wear in SPunch. Does this count as skimpy?



Three woman! One man! Now we're cooking with feminism! This is a better poster than the others, for sure. The catch is that this movie is kind of trainwreck for women. Mirren (on the far left)- who is a motherfucking GODDESS btw and should be playing second fiddle to Russell Brand, of all fucking people- plays, and i am not making this up, Brand's NANNY who takes care of him and placates his whims and wants him to marry his OTL. Garner (on the far right), plays the 'harpy'- she's some super rich woman who openly tells him their marriage is for business only, and forces him to do shit he doesnt want to do. At some point in the trailer, she chases him around in dominatrix gear and gets STUCK BY MAGNETS TO HIS BED, which causes him to quip at her, instead of offer help.

BECAUSE GOD FORBID WOMEN ARE ACTIVE DURING SEX.

Sorry, raged out there for a second. But yeah. The woman in the middle plays his OTL, a manic pixie dream girl who is, you know, poor but quirky. Or whatever is the nerdboner standard nowadays.

This won't pass the Bechdel test.




And finally... one woman. Who has been murdered. Staring vacantly at you with her dead eyes.




Suckerpunch 4ever, right guys?

The other thing about the poster is that that's not controlled by the director, or even the producers. Marketing is totally a studio thing. So either somehow, Snyder & his crew got their hands on this and made it right, or the studio did it this way on purpose.

Or maybe I'm just crazy.

Regardless, I think my reading is obvious. I am willing to concede to others' feelings about SPunch, at least as far as to say that everyone views art differently, so what can one do, but on this poster, I think it's just facts to say that it's feminist.

Anyone else seeing it differently?

you know what i just realized? there's no love story in suckerpunch. at no point is any woman in the movie in love with any man in the movie. there isnt some 'love conquers all!' or 'love validates who you are' storyline. it was strictly men as villains, women as saviours. and, awesomely, they were self-saviours and sister-saviours. it was all about them, and their relationships with one another. you could go a little farther and talk about how they all used their sexual wiles to entrap men and get what they want. they used the one thing they were being used for against their oppressors.


see, this is what i mean. there's this perfect world that we want, and then theres the real world, which isnt perfect, but is workable. we want a world where women arent sexual objects, but that world isnt this one. suckerpunch is an example for girls & women of how they can make the imperfect world work for them.

in the final scene, you see a character in totally vintage, 'normal' clothes. its a dress, but it is very, very classy. simple. her hair is pulled back, shes not wearing much makeup, and shes in the real, real world (not either of the 2 fantasy worlds), and shes scared. but she holds her head up. she holds her head up, and she escapes.

thats the crux of the movie. thats what the 2 hours before it were about. you wear the costumes to get to a place where youre just you, and youre safe. thats the payoff, both for the movie's plot, and for real life.



fuck i loved that movie.

What to say about Suckerpunch? I don't even know where to start.

I liked it. Actually, I loved it. I've taken the time to finally sit down and read everything people have been saying about it, and I can't say that there isn't a part of me wondering what my deal is that I love this movie so much.

I don't know what being a woman is like for other people. For me, it's a war. I've always thought of it that way; every moment has been a battle against outside forces who want me to surrender. And it is a war that I am mostly losing, honestly. I know that no matter what I do, no matter how much weight I lose, how charming I become, how well I write & direct, my movies will still be treated like shit. But I keep at it because I don't know if that means I will lose. In fact, it gives me more inspiration to try really fucking hard to win.

This is me, though. There are a lot of layers to being a woman, I get that. I don't really know much about makeup, but I don't look down on my sisters for whom that is a serious and satisfying hobby. I love my body, and I love wearing dresses and skirts, but I don't look down on my sisters who prefer boy clothes, or baggy jeans and oversized t-shirts.

Ultimately, what I want is a world where whatever is ok for everyone. I want a world where what one looks like has no bearing on how they're seen. I want a world where I don't have to critique every commercial, TV show, and movie to gauge how much it's fucking up everyone & everything.

How we get there is debatable. And just as I strive to be loving about the choices others make, whether they're the same ones I would make or not, I don't want to shit on other people's plans for a better world.

I don't always do this. I know I don't. I, like every other human being ever, walk around and judge others. I have been, and I will most likely continue to be harsh to others. It's just the biology of the thing. But I will work to cut it out of me because I feel very strongly that a house divided cannot stand. If I am sitting around, crapping on others, I will never see the world I want to see take shape.

So this is where I'm coming from when I say that I think people are wrong about Suckerpunch. The math is correct, but the answer is off.

Number one, this movie is about a group of girls who have crazy artillery, and use it to kill their enemies in a post-apocalyptic fantasy world. It is accurate to say that this- girls fighting- does not equal feminism. However, I do think it equals equality.

This movie made me think a lot about A League Of Their Own. That movie is amazing. It was just great on every level. Good story, good message, good music, good dialogue. And you know it's good because dudes love it, too. Not the same way my friends & I do, where you can start singing the All-American League song and they all start singing along. But it's very, very watchable.

The thing is... well, one, that movie is underrated. It's always relegated to the 'women's movie' category, with a sort of goofy, culty wrapper around it. Like it would be impossible for this movie to mean anything. Two, it's blatantly (and there is nothing wrong with this) a woman's movie. It stars a primarily female cast, it deals with primarily female issues, and it was helmed by a female director. Again, nothing wrong with any of that, but is that equality? It is feminism, but, in the arena of Hollywood, did that movie bring us any closer to being seen as equals?

Suckerpunch is the same, in a way. You have a group of women who are thrown together in a time and place that is restrictive, and they are always trying to get out, whatever way they can. They are sexualized, both from a film perspective, and from a 'world of the movie' perspective, and they openly hate it. There is one character who shines above the others, because she possesses things the others do not, including a positive, we're-gonna-make-it-afterall attitude. There are girl friendships, and sister friendships, and banding together to fight a patriarchy. There is action, with women moving their bodies in ways that seem to defy logic. The constant theme is that it's hard being a woman, but we can work through it. We can be more than they say we are.

If this was 1992, and Suckerpunch was opening beside ALOTO, I would shit on Suckerpunch because, relatively speaking, Suckerpunch is a step back.

But it's not 1992. It's 2011, and it's been years of stepping back.

Mars Needs Moms. Flopped, but it still got made. A group of people- not one person, not two, but a GROUP- got together and ok'd that 1950s soap commercial of a movie.

Something Borrowed. A blonde woman steals the dream guy of a brunette who is SUPPOSEDLY her bff. And then the brunette steals him back! HUZZAH!

Smurfs. It's been how many fucking years since that show was relevant, and there is STILL ONLY ONE GIRL SMURF? Really? We couldn't even write in like a Smarty Smurf for Tina Fey?

5ast, 5urious. Instead of a modest group of international thieves who are smuhmazing with cars, it is now a sprawling group of like 8 people, 2 of whom are women. Yay! Finally this franchise is acknowledging it's target demographic! Guess which 2 character had no lines in the trailer?

Bridesmaids. If I hear one more person call this 'The Hangover for women', I will go ballistic.

Prom. What the fuck is this 10 Things I Hate About You knock-off? Is that a guy up in a tree, spying on a girl? PROM! WOMEN! They always be shoppin', AMIRITE GUYS??

Pirates of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. Penelope Cruz is Jack's old flame, and the noble daughter of the villain. The whole movie is virginity innuendo, and some Pocahontas myth bullshit. At least PotC1 had Knightly saying that bit about corsets.

The Collector. IDEK. She says no lines in the trailer, which may mean it's not in english, but when that's put over shots of her going through dudes in some backroom, and NOT STORYLINE OR PREMISE IS GIVEN, you know that trailer was cut to titillate.

Beastly. A Beauty & The Beast revisioning (because fairy tales aren't at all fraught with issues) where a popular, arrogant guy gets his comeuppance when Mary-Kate Olsen (!) casts a spell on him to make him 'ugly' (read: tattooed). This, of course, leads him to a beautiful woman, who helps him learn how to ~*~*love*~*~.


So, yeah. For me, to me, Suckerpunch is amazing.

No, the plot wasn't great, but that's just how movies are sometimes. It's a Zach Snyder original; I didn't go in expecting this super-quotable movie with nuances I would dwell on for the rest of my days. I went in expecting awesome CGI fight scenes, slo-mo to the max, and maybe some dialogue that, while not the best in the world, still made me feel something.

Actually, there was something else I was expecting: T&A. T&A out the A. The characters in the trailer and the stills are always wearing skimpy ('skimpy') outfits, and I thought about Hit Girl in her completely covering, logistical ensemb. The whole 'brothel' fantasy world storyline played into it, too, so I assumed they would spend the whole movie wearing nothing, while the camera focused in on their thighs & chests & asses as they fought dragons and nazis and gyrated for John Hamm.

But there wasn't any T&A. I mean, they do wear brothel gear & fighting uniforms that make you wonder how they don't get injured constantly. That was irrelevant, however. You saw them full-body most of the time, or in poses & positions where they just looked bad ass. In the moments when they were being sexualized within the film's world, it was actually pretty tame. Ballet outfits, or silly costumes. In fact, each character only had 2 costumes each, really- one for the brothel stuff, one for the fighting stuff. They didn't even have multiple hairdos. It simply wasn't about that.

On top of that, there is this whole plot point that the main character can do this dance that puts men into a trance. But you never see the dance. You never see it. She starts to move, and then... you're thrown into the fighting fantasy world she retreats to. You're brought back at the very moment she completes the dance, and you see her: completely clothed. It's not even a strip tease.

I feel like, when people harp on the costumes in this movie, it's the same as saying 'well, she was wearing a short skirt, so she was asking for it'. Again (againagain), I get that this may just be me, but I don't think there's anything wrong with women dressing up in what most people may consider 'sexy' clothes. I really enjoy it myself, and I think it can be empowering and fun. When it stops being fun is when others (men, I guess) make it gross for you. I walked out of my house yesterday in a big boots and tiny skirt. I do this, because, as mentioned, I like it. I always end up feeling a little weird when I'm out and about in that kind of outfit, though, because I can feel people looking at me. I start to wonder, how do I look? Is my skirt up in the back? Is this outfit to 'risque'? Do I actually look good, or do I just THINK I look good?

I want it to be ok for girls & women to wear whatever the want, even if, by some standards, it may not be 'demure'. I recognize, of course, that that last little bit- that it ends up being more about how others are seeing you- is what people are really talking about when they knock this film's costume choices. But at the same time, I think it's important for us to band together and protect our sisters who want to look & feel good. We shouldn't fault them for wearing things OTHERS find stimulating to the nether regions. We should stand around them in a circle, blocking the way for those eyes, so that they can exist the way they want to.


So... yeah. I loved Suckerpunch. I will continue to love it, with its low rating on Rotten Tomatoes and reviews like "hands-down the most nightmarishly awful film of the year" (that's the Philly Inq, btw, which is notorious for its really fucking harsh reviews) I will buy the DVD when it comes out, and I will save it for my kids. I will take the movie's tagline- 'you have the weapons... now fight', and I will internalize it, and quote it, and carry it with me everywhere I go. I will cross my fingers that maybe, just fucking maybe, this gets out to some girl, somewhere, and she sees it, and she decides that she wants to make a movie just like it. And then, when she does, she does it better than this film ever could, because she's smarter.

Also because the plot was kind of heinous. But hey, you can't win 'em all. Whip It was not much better, to be fair.