Book Review: I am Malala

[Image text: book cover of "I am Malala"]

Last night I finished Malala Yousafzai's book, "I am Malala." As I'm sure you are aware, Yousafzai is a Pakistani activist who, at the age of 11, began speaking out for girls' education rights and was subsequently shot in the head by the Taliban at 15.

Her story is remarkable and yet simple. Remarkable because of the enormous courage/strength it takes to do what she has done. Simple because when you read her words (or listen to her speak in the many interviews she's given) you can see how for her, there was no other path. The importance of education for all people generally and girls specifically is so core to her being that it's abundantly clear this was the only path she could take.

Overall, the book is a quick, compelling read and I enthusiastically recommend it for pretty much anyone. It was an enormous education for me about what's been happening on the other side of the globe for the past 10 or so years, which she spends much more time on than she does on her shooting/recovery. The snippets that we've heard in US news about life under the Taliban, the "war on terror," the killing of Osama bin Laden, etc. of course pale in comparison to the first hand account that Yousafzai gives. To admit my own ignorance for a minute...I knew nothing about the Sway Valley (where Malala is from) or the Pashtun ethnic group. Thankfully, Yousafzai spends as much time educating her Western audience on Pashtun/Pakistani/Muslim customs, culture, phrases, and history as she does telling her own story. Otherwise so much of the context would be lost on people like me, who I imagine are the core readership.

For that reason, I recommend the book for cultural education reasons as much as I do for learning about this amazing young woman's personal journey. If you know a girl who is 13-17, I think this would be a particularly good read to do together. (I believe the reading level is 7th grade, so it's not over teen's heads at all.) As I was reading it, I couldn't help but think about what an incredible unit this book would make in middle school or high school literature classes. It's just so incredibly rich with the opportunity for interdisciplinary learning, building cultural awareness, and opening discussions of racism, sexism, and Islamophobia in our own society.

I am so thankful for Malala Yousafzai. I am thankful for her father who instilled the love of education, activism, and public speaking in her. I'm so thankful that she survived the violent circumstances that she faced and that she continues to speak and educate. I'm deeply saddened that she is as of yet unable to safely return home to the Swat Valley (where she desperately wants to be) and I hope the future holds that opportunity for her.


Please see the commenting policy before replying to this post.

Looking Forward to Wadjda

Have you heard of Wadjda? It's the first movie made entirely in Saudi Arabia, and what's more, it was written and directed by a Saudi woman, Haifaa Al Mansour. I caught a bit of an interview that Michele Martin did with her on Tell Me More yesterday, and I was so intrigued.

As is well known, it's not easy to be a female film director, but the challenges are certainly multiplied when you are making your film in Saudi Arabia, a country that places many restrictions on women. For example, women are not able to drive there and they've only recently been allowed to bicycle in public. Here's what Al Mansour said about directing in Saudi Arabia:

...the country is very conservative, and sometimes when we go outside, we film all the outdoors activities because the country is segregated and woman and woman are not supposed to mix together. I had to film from a van, and I had a walkie-talkie and a monitor and I was always confined in that space.

As I've mentioned, my partner is a filmmaker and I've been on many of his sets. I can only imagine how frustrating it was to not be able to get as close to the action as you might like, but I'm glad that Al Monsour worked around that challenge. She also went on to share with Martin how she created the Wadjda character:

When I was writing "Wadjda," I based her a lot on one of my nieces who has a great sense of humor, who was a hustler. And she's always scheming to earn money somewhere. But my brother became conservative and she changed. And a lot of the girls I went to school with, and I went to public school, are like that. Like they - when they were kids, they had so much to offer to the world, but because the world is very - their families and the small society around them is very limiting. They gave up so much. And I wanted to make a film that tells them that they shouldn't. That they should be true to themselves and continue and embrace their potential. And they - those girls can change the world if they are given the chance and if they believe in themselves. 

That's certainly a film I want to see. I'll be keeping an eye out for it at my local art house cinema.

Please see the commenting policy before replying to this post.

A Little Dose of Feminist Happiness

I think we can all agree that the past week has been a pretty tough one here in the states. So I thought it might be a nice moment to highlight some of the feminist victories and inspiring stories that have also been taking place:

First, Zimbabweans have approved a constitution that includes gender equality as a principal of the nation. From UN Women:

The draft Constitution approved by referendum opens with provisions stating that respect for gender equality is one of the country’s Founding Values. The Declaration of Rights includes a section on women’s rights, has been expanded to include socioeconomic and cultural rights, and it could be used in legal or judicial proceedings. This means new opportunities for women in jobs, education, finance and credit must be ensured by the government and in national funding.

TIME Magazine has released its list of the 100 most influential people and 15 year old Pakistani Malala Yousafzai is on the cover. As they said at TIME:

The Taliban almost made Malala a martyr; they succeeded in making her a symbol. The memoir she is writing to raise awareness about the 61 million children around the world who are not in school indicates she accepts that unasked-for responsibility as a synonym for courage and a champion for girls everywhere. However Malala concludes her book, her story so far is only just beginning. 

And finally, from West Virginia, we have Katelyn Campbell who protested her schools slut-shamey abstinence focused assembly. As reported at Think Progress,

George Washington High School recently hosted a conservative speaker, Pam Stenzel, who travels around the country to advocate an abstinence-only approach to teen sexuality. Stenzel has a long history of using inflammatory rhetoric to convince young people that they will face dire consequences for becoming sexually active. At GW’s assembly, Stenzel allegedly told students that “if you take birth control, your mother probably hates you” and “I could look at any one of you in the eyes right now and tell if you’re going to be promiscuous.” She also asserted that condoms aren’t safe, and every instance of sexual contact will lead to a sexually transmitted infection.

[Katelyn] Campbell refused to attend the assembly, which was funded by a conservative religious organization called “Believe in West Virginia” and advertised with fliers that proclaimed “God’s plan for sexual purity.” Instead, she filed a complaint with the ACLU and began to speak out about her objections to this type of school-sponsored event. Campbell called Stenzel’s presentation “slut shaming” and said that it made many students uncomfortable.

When the news is flooded with images of violence, racism, and oppression, as it often is, it can be hard to see the small victories taking place each day, all over the world. But the truth is that there is always much to be happy for--it's just that when profit and ratings are your motivation, the happy stories take a back seat to fear. It's important to be informed but it's becoming increasingly clear to me that the major news networks are not able to present information in a way which is not also disgustingly sensationalized. (I know that this is not a revolutionary realization.) I'm finding that news consumption is much more manageable for me when I choose how, when, and from whom I receive updates. That way I can also get the good with the bad and feel much less burned out.

Anyway, here's hoping for a less "eventful" week ahead of us.

This blog has strict comment moderation intended to preserve a safe space. Moderation is managed solely by the blog author. As such, even comments made in good faith will be on a short delay, so please do not attempt to resubmit your comment if it does not immediately appear. Discussion and thoughtful participation are encouraged, but abusive comments of any type will never be published. The blog author reserves the right to publish/delete any comments for any reason, at her sole discretion. 

What I'm Reading

Here are a few things I am currently enjoying...

Today is Columbus Day...a day which has a pretty disturbing past, such that I'm not sure why anyone would "celebrate" it. Mark Anthony Rolo has a piece up about what today really means.

"We should have been wiped out," she says. "It's a miracle Native people still exist. I have never liked the word 'conquered.' We are still here after 500 years. And maybe every time Columbus Day comes around, we should rethink who the real heroes are: the explorer or the survivors?"

Every time "Half the Sky" gets held up as the greatest thing, I've had a nagging doubt in my mind. That doubt was just perfectly articulated by Sayantani DasGupta at Racialicious:

...I often ask my students to evaluate a text’s ethical stance by asking themselves –"whose story is it?" For example, are people of color acting or being acted upon? Although the film does highlight fantastic on-the-ground activists such as maternal health activist Edna Adan of Somaliland, the point of entry, the people with whom we, the (presumably) Western watchers, are supposed to identify, are Kristof and his actress sidekick-du-jour.

This is a bit older (in Internet years) but if you're interested in fat activism or body positivity at all, I highly suggest you add Fat Heffalump to your Google reader. Last month she tackled myths about fat bodies:

2. Having a fat body is like carrying around a 2o/50/100/whatever lb/kg sack of potatoes/dirt/lard whatever.

Wait, the average adult skeletal structure weighs about 20lbs right? So is having a skeleton like carrying around a 2olb weight?No it’s not. Fat bodies are not attached to us, like some kind of extra luggage – they ARE us. Our whole bodies hold ourselves up – bones, muscle, organs, skin, fat, everything – it’s all part of a complex machine that propels us around our lives. If you hand me 50lbs, I’m going to feel it’s weight, because it is not part of me. But 50lbs of my own body weight (or whatever number you choose) is part of me, and it has it’s own function in my body. The only time I’ve felt like I’m carrying a burden is when I believed I was worthless because I was fat. That wasn’t the physical weight of my body, it was the weight of stigma.

Book Reviews: Little Bee and She's Come Undone

I have a notion that it's sort of hard for me to connect to female characters written by men. While I truly value authentic female voices represented in literature, I'm coming to realize that the more that I think about judging an author based on their gender identity, the more I am treading into assholishness. I mean, do I want more womens' books published? Yes. Do I think that women can most adequately tell women's stories? Yes. But does this mean I should write off male authors? Certainly not.

Luckily to challenge my preconceived notions, I recently had the pleasure of reading two great books by male authors that I'd like to recommend. They are Little Bee by Chris Cleave and She's Come Undone by Wally Lamb. Spoilers to follow.

Swedish Racism is Leaving a Bad Taste in My Mouth...

You'll get my pun in a moment.

Sometimes American liberals like to go off into a kiss-ass-fest with Scandinavian countries. Places like Sweden, Finland, and Norway are touted for being examples of socialism going right: universal health care, quality government day care, and paid parental leave are all waved around as reasons for us to partake in the Scandinavian lovefest. And it's totally valid because those are all areas in which American lags behind.

However, it's really important to remember that no culture is perfect and we've got to continue to think critically about what we see happen around the world. In that vein, Sweden has sent us a big reminder of that with a really racist debacle going down. As covered at Colorlines:

Scarlet Road and the United States

Whelp, SXSW is officially over and all of our lovely visitors are making their way out of Austin. But before we put SXSW 2012 fully behind us, I wanted to drop a quick note about one more film, Scarlet Road. As according to its website,

Scarlet Road follows the extraordinary work of Australian sex worker, Rachel Wotton. Impassioned about freedom of sexual expression and the rights of sex workers, she specializes in a long over-looked clientele – people with disability.

The film is great and is a very compassionate look at Rachel Wotton and two of her clients, John and Mark. It treats everyone with dignity and is hugely eye opening about the sexuality of disabled people as well as sex work in general. I appreciated the story portrayed and think Wotton is an amazing woman. She's even co-founded a nonprofit to bring people with disability and sex workers together called Touching Base.

During the Q&A the topic of feminism came up as well as how the United States' will receive this film. This where I think things get tricky.

International Women's Day!

Happy International Women's Day!



...Sigh.

While I do offer this exclamation genuinely, I can't help but also intend a layer of snark... disappointment... irony... sarcasm... frustration... anger... pain... despair...  sadness... ambivalence...

I truly believe that things have never been worse for women in my lifetime than they are right now. I can't stop thinking about the current war on women and the toll that it is taking across the country and in Texas in particular.

It makes me sick.

Female Bodies Are Not Unprofessional

This post is a part of my “Out of the Kitchen” weekly column at The Progressive Playbook in which various news and pop culture items will be examined through a feminist lens.

I’ve been hearing few murmurings around the internet of this story, in which people are upset that the Premier of British Columbia, Christy Clark, had a little smidge of cleavage showing. As one Canadian opinion writer said, Clark should be wearing clothes “that won’t risk compromising her professionalism and stature in the eyes of some.”

This makes me bristle. Perhaps it’s because I had to have some professional head shots done recently, and it was near impossible for me to have them taken without at least a smidge of cleavage showing. Or perhaps it’s because this just smacks of sexism.

It’s well reported that female politicians are continuously picked at for their clothing choices. For male politicians, sticking to a basic dark suit is a fail safe. As long as men make this choice they’re rarely seen as under dressed. Or over dressed. Or inappropriately dressed. In fact, their clothes are virtually a nonissue all together. Read more...

Sexual Assault and Peace--Opposites, Yes?

Apparently not to some people out there.

I just learned on Feministing that Julian Assange has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. Lori, at Feministing, asked their readers this question:

What do you think about Assange being nominated for the peace prize? Is it a slap in the face to opponents of rape and assault? Or a well-deserved nod to his role in helping to spur the Arab Spring, among other things, through information sharing?

I thought for sure--on an extremely feminist website (perhaps the leader of the feminist blogosphere) with full comment moderation, I would see a lot of people saying something along the lines of "Well he hasn't been convicted, but if the allegations prove true, then this is really problematic." However, I saw this comment, which has received quite a bit of support:

There’s nothing contradictory at all about Assange being nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. He did work possibly deserving a Peace Prize and he also possibly raped two women. Doing one doesn’t mean he didn’t do the other; people are more complex than that.

Roman Polanski was a really good director (and won awards for it) and also raped a girl. Mike Tyson was a really good boxer (and won awards for it) and also raped a woman. Julian Assange did some really good humanitarian work (that he may win an award for) whether or not he raped two women. None of that is any kind of insult to their victims because none of that has anything to do with their victims.

I feel like I'm constantly grappling with this critical question: If someone does something really shitty, does it negate the good stuff they've also done? This is undoubtedly an ethical dilemma and I still think there's no clear cut answer. It seems to be much more of a case-by-case personal opinion thing.

But COME ON. Does this commenter really not see that the comparisons he* has drawn don't hold up with this case?

I get that Assange hasn't been convicted and that is a big part of this situation, but let's put that aside for a minute. Let's just take an example in which someone DID rape two women and then won a Noble Peace Prize. Is this not obviously contradictory to anyone else? It's not the same as Roman Polanski winning Oscars or Mike Tyson winning boxing awards, at all. Rape is inherently the opposite of peace, so why should a rapist be honored for peace? I can see how a rapist director could make a good movie. Personally, I wouldn't watch it--I'd avoid his works like the plague, but from an objective view point I can see how it is possible that a rapist could create great art. Or how a rapist could be a really good boxer.

In this way, a rapist could do peaceful things, but to honor him for peace? Seriously...come on. I'm not saying that Assange hasn't done some great things for the world. I'm not saying that his charges mean we should forget that. I am saying we don't have to give him a freaking Nobel Peace Prize.

Ah well it's just a nomination, so I suppose I should just get over it for now. I mean, after all, this also happened...

Adolf Hitler, was nominated once in 1939 by E.G.C. Brandt, member of the Swedish parliament. Brandt changed his mind, however, and the nomination was withdrawn in a letter dated 1 February 1939.

*I say he because the commenter had a stereotypically masculine screen name.

Cori Writes HerStory: Check it Out!

"There's a special place in hell for women who do not help other women." Madeleine Albright

One of my favorite quotes. In that spirit, I don't think I've mentioned this, so here it is. My good friend Cori is doing an internship in Bangladesh. She's learning all kinds of interesting things...and she views the whole thing from a feminist perspective. I thought this one was particularly interesting, so check it out!

Cori Writes HerStory: Internal Struggles vs. Cultural Experience

I Feel Weird

I was going to write a whole blog about the worst movie I've seen in a long, long time, then this whole Osama Bin Laden thing popped up and threw me for a loop. I'll get to that in a moment, but before I do, I will say that the movie, Super, is a steaming pile of crap. Let me put it like this...if you would like to sit through no less than three extended rape scenes/jokes feel free to go see it. But you'll be making a huge mistake becuase offensive stuff aside, it was also just boring and not funny.

"(Bin Laden's death) should be welcome by all who believe in peace and human dignity." President Obama, addressing the nation yesterday.

Ok...so Osama's dead. Let the masses rejoice.

Um wait, what?

Here's my take on all of this. (And I realize by posting this I am forgoing my chance of ever running for any political office in America, ever.)

It's really weirding me out how people are quite literally celebrating someone's death. Facebook posts about it were pretty chilling. I mean, I'm able to understand that this was a consequence of the war on terror. I'm able to see that he was an evil man. I'm able to see how this can provide the relief of justice for the families of those killed on 9/11. But, to me, none of that excuses celebrating another human's death.

How does this make us any different than the masses over seas burning American flags that we so fully scorn?

Besides, this is not the end of anything. If there is one thing we know, it is that organizations like Al Qaeda are not dependent upon a single, unified authority. And I'm fairly certain that cultural clashes will never be solved through deaths. Is it really our plan to kill all of them? Is it their plan to kill all of us? Where is that taking us? I don't know the solution, but adding more and more tallies to the death count isn't creating the tolerance we need in order for cultures to exist peacefully. Our short time on this planet is unfortunately filled with violence, hate, death, and suffering. I don't see a reason to throw a party about it.

Update: Here's some great reading that says how I feel much more clearly.

On Julian Assange's Charges and our Rape Apologist Society

Trigger warning for detailed discussion of rape.

So if you've read just one feminist blog in the past two weeks, you have undoubtedly read about the rape charges against Julian Assange. It's everywhere...and with good reason. We are currently living through one of the largest media campaigns of rape apologism that I've seen, and feminist blogs can't keep quiet about that!

Here's the background for a brief catch up: Assange runs WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks dropped some info that made US diplomats look bad. Assange also allegedly engaged in a non-consensual sex act in Sweden a while ago (RAPE). All of a sudden Assange was sky rocketed to the top of the most wanted list. So, understandably...people got pissed. They saw the rape charges as an excuse for taking in a guy who pissed off a lot of people in high places. And thus, every schmuck suddenly got in the business of defining rape. The disgusting and creepy phrase "sex by surprise" suddenly became part of our lexicon.

But let me make this abundantly clear:

I agree that Assange is being targeted because of WikiLeaks, but I fundamentally disagree that what he did wasn't rape, if the charges are proven to be true. I think it's sad that he wasn't charged for the rape originally and it took him pissing off the US government for his REAL charges to be uncovered. However, because people don't like the way Assange has been made a most wanted criminal, they've decided to focus on claiming what he allegedly did wasn't rape instead of focusing on the way he's been targeted.

I can't say this enough: a narrow definition of rape/sexual assault doesn't do good for anyone but rapists.

Sadly, rapists actually kind of have the system in their favor, don't they? Think I'm kidding? Sady at Tiger Beatdown shared some stats that really drove this point home for me:

According to RAINN, about 60% of rapes aren’t reported. In those cases, there’s about a 51% chance that the 40% of reported rapes will have an arrest made. There’s an 80% chance of prosecution. And, given various factors including conviction and sentencing, there’s only about a 16.3% chance that someone who commits rape will serve time for that rape. Meaning: If we factor in the rapes that go unreported, only 6% of rapists ever serve time. EVER.

That's so disturbing. And these black and white statistics don't tell the full story. There's so much more to be known about those 60% that so unreported. When we begin to look into WHY they are unreported, we start to see the sick, seedy underbelly of our rape apologist society that is fueling under-reporting. Every time a victim who steps forward and attempts to press charges is blamed for her own rape because of her clothes, actions, or sexual past, other victims become more and more afraid to tell the truth. They see this woman being dragged through the mud and they think that their private suffering would be a better alternative to public shaming and no justice anyhow.

The act of narrowly defining rape plays a huge role in this. Society tells women that the only "real" rape (or "rape-rape") is a stranger kidnapping them from an alley and violently raping them, while they fight and struggle to get free. Thus, any woman who has been assaulted in a manner which deviates from this situation will be much less likely to recognize her own situation as rape, let alone report it. And the truth is women are far more likely to be assaulted by someone close to them within the complexities of all forms of relationships (dating, family, friendship, acquaintances.) In fact, 73% of women know their assailants.

Denial can be a powerful force; but it is exacerbated by a society that engages in group-think like denial surrounding what is and isn't rape. I have seen this situation play out all too close to home. A friend of mine has recently come to understand that something that happened to her several years ago was rape. For so long she bought into the idea that because her situation didn't fit the scenario described above, it wasn't rape. And I, having heard the story when it unfolded many years ago, also didn't call it what it was. Recently, during a discussion, she told me that she has come to see it as rape. And throughout the course of this discussion, she shared with me the ramifications she feels her assault has had on her life into the present day. She is embarking on a process of healing that she has delayed for the better part of a decade. And while I'm happy that she is seeking out help, I am so angry that because of the culturally transmitted narrow definition of rape, my friend has spent years in denial that could have been spent healing.

So back to Julian Assange. What is so heart breaking for me is how this case is just yet another in the litany of examples where the narrow definition of rape is promoted in our society. In the Tiger Beatdown blog I linked above, Michael Moore's rape apology is examined. It is so excruciatingly frustrating to have liberal champions like Moore letting their personal feelings about a suspiciously timed political attack on Assange turn into rape apology.

There's currently a Twitter war being raged against Moore, and as Bitch Magazine tweeted at him, "An accusation can be all of the following: conveniently timed, political, and true. Real 'progressives' know that." (Check out the hashtag #Mooreandme.)

I couldn't agree more. At the end of the day, the manner in which Assange is being targeted is unjust. But that doesn't mean that he isn't potentially a rapist. And it doesn't mean that the rest of us should be continuing to promote the narrow definition of rape.

Oh, Hi Blog!

So the first weekend of this month, I managed a wee little girls empowerment conference. Needless to say, I was super, insanely busy for a while and now I've just been enjoying my free time again so I haven't bothered to write.

Today won't be any different. I don't have anything revolutionary or amazing or even humorous to write, but I did want to pass along a few of the things I have been reading.

First is the wage gap by state. Pretty tragic, really. It doesn't matter what state you live in, after 40 years men will have made hundreds of thousands of dollars more than women. Maybe that's why the US ranks 19th in gender equity worldwide. Sad, sad stuff.

Just thought I'd pass along that little piece of sobering reality for those of you who stumble across this blog and think that feminism is irrelevant.

OH! Speaking of people stumbling across this blog--I was recently trolled! WOOOOOO! You know you've hit the big time when someone bothers to anonymously comment "Shu up."

Aw, so sweet...you're making me tear up. I've really arrived!

I'm back!

We'll see if I can get this sucker started again, now that my life isn't consumed with summer camp-y things.

Thought I'd just make a note about the local news headline I just heard while watching Oprah. The newscaster said, "The controversy over the gender of a runner. Hear the voice and decide for yourself!"

What? Really?

The story is about Caster Semenya, the 18-year-old South African runner who recently won a World Championship. Upon winning, her masculinity became an issue and her story has been everywhere. It raises some interesting questions, specifically what place do people who do not conform to the stereotypical dichotomy of gender have in athletics?

I'm really not sure what the answer is, and I'm not really sure what approach to take about it, as a feminist. On one hand, I don't believe that physical or biological markers are the making of gender, but what if such biological markers give some athletes a distinct advantage? Is that unfair? Does it even matter? Are we going to ban all biological/genetic advantages...(the example a coworker gave is Michael Phelps' atypical proportions which are credited with giving him an advantage in the pool.)

Whatever the decision is about this case and athletics...the point remains that the wording of this news report is so incredibly insensitive. "Decide for yourself." Since when did someone's gender become a matter of public opinion? What is the news story trying to prove? What does her voice have to do with it all really?

It just reeks of mockery.

By the by, I learned of a new term that I enjoy knowing: "Cisgendered" which means, when your gender and your biological sex are in sync. In other words, when you are not transgendered.

Feminism looks very different around the world.

What's in a Name?

So I've written a little bit before about my choice not to change my name and how I'm continuously questioned about this...and how it's one of those "little things" that helps keep sexism alive.

I started to think about this, because when Ronald and I came back into the U.S. from Mexico on Saturday, we had to declare our purchases through U.S. customs. At first, I read the form and it explained clearly that families could declare their purchases together, so long as they reside at the same address.

I didn't even think twice after reading that. It makes sense. They have a written record on the form of the address of the family traveling back into the U.S. and everything they brought. So I proceeded to fill out the form for Ronald and I and that was that...

Until I started watching the channel on the cruise ship where they tell you everything that you need to know about getting off the ship at port. And the guy there mentioned that in order to qualify as a "family" in the eyes of U.S. customs, you have to live at the same address AND have the same last name.

WOW. Really?

Not only is it stupid that to be considered a family by U.S. customs you have to have the same last name, but it's also *SO* "logical," that it's not even worth noting this fact on the form. You should just assume that if your last names are different, then you're not family.

Ok, I'm overreacting, I admit it. But this was annoying, since I had to fill out a whole other new form and Ronald did too...AND since they only give each cabin one form (if you're staying in the same cabin, you must be family, right?) Ronald had to go hunt more forms down.

This wasn't my only run in with name changes on the trip. At our "honeymooners lunch" the other couples started a conversation about what the wives' names used to be and what they are now. (Ronald and I just avoided that conversation...we actually avoided socializing much in general, but that's not the point.)

So I got to thinking about how annoying it is that name changes are so ingrained in our society. The pressure is small enough here and there to be a bother, but taken all together, it's no wonder that so many women, who otherwise might have kept their names, go ahead and make the change anyway. And then i got to thinking about how, as is often the case with inequalities, name changes don't only affect women and keep sexism alive: It's also one of those things that keeps heterosexism alive and well.

It goes hand in hand with the gay marriage problem: all the 1,008 legal benefits that are denied to homosexual couples. In fact, the sexism and heterosexism here are rampant. If a woman gets married and changes her name it costs a nominal fee and requires some annoyances like getting a new social security card and notifying your credit bureau. If a homosexual person, or any man in general (like a heterosexual one changing his name to his wife's) wants to share a family name with their partner, then they must pay a much higher fee and even announce their name change in the paper (an old law that was never changed) in addition to all the other annoyances.

So the message: If you want to fit the "norm" for our society, you better be heterosexual, and you better stick to traditional name changes. And hell, you'll be rewarded with lower fees and less annoyances.

In the case of the stupid U.S. customs form that assumes way too much about what constitutes a "family," I at least had the choice not to change my name when I got married. So yeah, I'm going to encounter some frustrating issues along the way since my name doesn't fit the partiarchial paradigm. But a homosexual couple didn't even have the option to get married and have a legally recognized "family."

I guess I'll count my blessings on this one for now, but I just don't see what U.S. customs stands to gain from their system.

Ah, if only Americans were told the same thing...

Japanese workers are being told to go home and make some babies. Allegedly, correcting the low birth rate in Japan is a way to help their failing economy.

Does just practicing help our failing economy?