It seems a surefire way to success is not graduating. Why didn't I think of that?
Bonnie Raitt was a student at Radcliffe (Harvard) back in the day studying Social Relations and African Studies. She dropped out to follow a community of musicians to Cambridge.
It's all right Bonnie, be cool...you still can't make us love you ...
Source
Monday, March 31, 2008
31 days of....
nothing. Women's history month has drawn to yet another close and there does not seem to have been much discussion beyond coverage of Hillary. There was also the interesting article on sexist vegans by the New York Times. Not that there wasn't ample opportunity. All of Spitzer's transgressions, as well as the weird love triangle in New Jersey offered plenty of opportunity for discussion, yet I'm not bothered. I have the feeling that most other people weren't.
In the discussion concerning which women will vote for Hillary, what has been noted repeatedly is that the age of the shoulder pad feminist has ended. Apparently women nowadays do not want to come off as the crazy feminist or as they're often lovingly called, the "feminazi."
Additionally, feminism probably has had the most issues with inter-sectionality out of any movement. Females of a variety of faiths have expressed issues with the movement. Additionally when it comes to capturing women of different races there seems to be a tension. No doubt, there are powerful pro-women women of every race, and history proves that as well...however, where they fall in the feminist movement is questionable. I wonder how well Susan B. and Ida B. really got along. (Note: I dont even know if they knew each other and I'm too tired to check..but they had similar goals).
While I don't particularly miss the coverage (and maybe there was more and I was just more concerned with Jamie Lynn's engagement) it would be nice for some publication to revisit the issue and look at whats left tooday. Really, there's so many shades of this movement that I've always been a little confused. Feminism vs. Womanism? Sexuality and Gender? Body issues?
What falls in and what doesnt?
Oh well, at least April isnt assigned. And best believe THROWBACK THURSDAYS are coming back (but not this Thursday..Ill be in Paris and most likely internetless).
HAUL,
The Queen
In the discussion concerning which women will vote for Hillary, what has been noted repeatedly is that the age of the shoulder pad feminist has ended. Apparently women nowadays do not want to come off as the crazy feminist or as they're often lovingly called, the "feminazi."
Additionally, feminism probably has had the most issues with inter-sectionality out of any movement. Females of a variety of faiths have expressed issues with the movement. Additionally when it comes to capturing women of different races there seems to be a tension. No doubt, there are powerful pro-women women of every race, and history proves that as well...however, where they fall in the feminist movement is questionable. I wonder how well Susan B. and Ida B. really got along. (Note: I dont even know if they knew each other and I'm too tired to check..but they had similar goals).
While I don't particularly miss the coverage (and maybe there was more and I was just more concerned with Jamie Lynn's engagement) it would be nice for some publication to revisit the issue and look at whats left tooday. Really, there's so many shades of this movement that I've always been a little confused. Feminism vs. Womanism? Sexuality and Gender? Body issues?
What falls in and what doesnt?
Oh well, at least April isnt assigned. And best believe THROWBACK THURSDAYS are coming back (but not this Thursday..Ill be in Paris and most likely internetless).
HAUL,
The Queen
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Yellow Rage
This is an old clip by a female duo poetry group, Yellow Rage. They've received a lot of criticism, and for due reason...but they do give reason to pause.
Check out their performance: I'm a woman, not a flava.
Also check out their blog here: http://www.yellowrage.com/blog/.
Check out their performance: I'm a woman, not a flava.
Also check out their blog here: http://www.yellowrage.com/blog/.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Happy March! (on Washington, to the White House)
It's Woman's History Month. Excited?
I won't promise loads of commentaries, because we saw what happened when I did that for Black History Month. And then I actually did have a plan (it was really good and had tons of issues). But I will promise to trying to be better about posting despite my busier schedule. February was a shame.
I also won't promise extra special attention paid to women. I know it sounds horrible, but I have to write as the issues come.
However, as we do bridge from one history month to another (and they're not mutually exclusive) I do find this Maureen Dowd New York Times op-ed pretty pertinent. In referencing the two bids for the U.S. Democratic party nomination, Dowd not uniquely positions the race as a battle of two historical guilts. Click Here.
(If you want to escape the elections look at Radar's Misogynistic Movies List.)
What is most interesting about the repeated need to cast this race as a battle between America's (and well the entire western world) various wrongs are the efforts to make one group's pains appear more hindering than the other's. Dianne Feinstein, senior senator from California, is quoted as talking about a "no women need apply" standard and two other people banter in the article about who's ancestors pains were greater. "My ancestors came in chains" says one. The other replies "My ancestors were in chains and on their periods." Who knows why Ms. Dowd chose these comments? (I don't regularly follow her column and don't pretend to know any of her politics.)
The absurdity of these comments does nothing to actually aid the actual issues at the base of the discussion and only inflame zealots. At best they point out the double burden of specific groups over times: If no women could apply, and no Irish could apply in general, then the 19th century was probably a bit more rough than Gangsters of New York could ever portray. Even more if blacks were in actual chains, and women were in metaphoric chains and on their periods, and patriarchy exists across races, black women must have had one bloody ride...eh?
Can injustices be weighed? In some cases yes and in some cases no. Getting a paper cut is different from getting a hand chopped off. But losing you're left eye or your right ear both pose difficulties that are more orange and apples. The women vs. every other American minority case is flawed and in most cases if not always, women (as a general group, but particularly meaning white women) have carried less of the burden than other minorities (in general). Still the issue of who's journey to the gate was easier does not mean anything if neither person is guaranteed access beyond the gatekeeper. An admission through the back door should also not be the accepted concession. This is not to deride gendered spaces (like a sorority or fraternity) but to pause and think about places where the analogy may make sense.
In speaking about the Democratic race, the idea of competing historical wrongs enforces the idea that the election of one or the other will be the saving grace and eradicate that issue.
NO, it will not. The fact that both Hillary and Barack have gotten this far in the race with Edwards bowing out does indicate that there have been positive changes concerning the isms. It does not however immediately change the way society operates or rewrite the discourses that dictate the way we function.
And to whoever made the comment about the menstrual cycle, that's like Tyra burning her bra even though its 2008 in her breast episode to make some point about ill fitting bras. Stupid.
Haul,
The Queen
I won't promise loads of commentaries, because we saw what happened when I did that for Black History Month. And then I actually did have a plan (it was really good and had tons of issues). But I will promise to trying to be better about posting despite my busier schedule. February was a shame.
I also won't promise extra special attention paid to women. I know it sounds horrible, but I have to write as the issues come.
However, as we do bridge from one history month to another (and they're not mutually exclusive) I do find this Maureen Dowd New York Times op-ed pretty pertinent. In referencing the two bids for the U.S. Democratic party nomination, Dowd not uniquely positions the race as a battle of two historical guilts. Click Here.
(If you want to escape the elections look at Radar's Misogynistic Movies List.)
What is most interesting about the repeated need to cast this race as a battle between America's (and well the entire western world) various wrongs are the efforts to make one group's pains appear more hindering than the other's. Dianne Feinstein, senior senator from California, is quoted as talking about a "no women need apply" standard and two other people banter in the article about who's ancestors pains were greater. "My ancestors came in chains" says one. The other replies "My ancestors were in chains and on their periods." Who knows why Ms. Dowd chose these comments? (I don't regularly follow her column and don't pretend to know any of her politics.)
The absurdity of these comments does nothing to actually aid the actual issues at the base of the discussion and only inflame zealots. At best they point out the double burden of specific groups over times: If no women could apply, and no Irish could apply in general, then the 19th century was probably a bit more rough than Gangsters of New York could ever portray. Even more if blacks were in actual chains, and women were in metaphoric chains and on their periods, and patriarchy exists across races, black women must have had one bloody ride...eh?
Can injustices be weighed? In some cases yes and in some cases no. Getting a paper cut is different from getting a hand chopped off. But losing you're left eye or your right ear both pose difficulties that are more orange and apples. The women vs. every other American minority case is flawed and in most cases if not always, women (as a general group, but particularly meaning white women) have carried less of the burden than other minorities (in general). Still the issue of who's journey to the gate was easier does not mean anything if neither person is guaranteed access beyond the gatekeeper. An admission through the back door should also not be the accepted concession. This is not to deride gendered spaces (like a sorority or fraternity) but to pause and think about places where the analogy may make sense.
In speaking about the Democratic race, the idea of competing historical wrongs enforces the idea that the election of one or the other will be the saving grace and eradicate that issue.
"As it turns out, making history is actually a way of being imprisoned by history. It’s all about the past. Will America’s racial past be expunged or America’s sexist past be expunged?"-Dowd
NO, it will not. The fact that both Hillary and Barack have gotten this far in the race with Edwards bowing out does indicate that there have been positive changes concerning the isms. It does not however immediately change the way society operates or rewrite the discourses that dictate the way we function.
And to whoever made the comment about the menstrual cycle, that's like Tyra burning her bra even though its 2008 in her breast episode to make some point about ill fitting bras. Stupid.
Haul,
The Queen
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
