Have You Heard of Julia Bluhm?

I'm a little late, but I would be remiss if I didn't give a huge shout out to an 8th grade girl making a big difference, Julia Bluhm. Julia started a petition at Change.org asking Seventeen Magazine to "give girls images of real girls." As her petition reads,

I’m in a ballet class with a bunch of high-school girls. On a daily basis I hear comments like: “It’s a fat day,” and “I ate well today, but I still feel fat.” Ballet dancers do get a lot of flack about their bodies, but it’s not just ballet dancers who feel the pressure to be “pretty”. It’s everyone. To girls today, the word “pretty” means skinny and blemish-free. Why is that, when so few girls actually fit into such a narrow category? It’s because the media tells us that “pretty” girls are impossibly thin with perfect skin. 

Here’s what lots of girls don’t know. Those “pretty women” that we see in magazines are fake. They’re often photoshopped, air-brushed, edited to look thinner, and to appear like they have perfect skin. A girl you see in a magazine probably looks a lot different in real life.

Boys Will Be Boys? Huh?

My love of NPR is well documented and I like to listen to it in the morning, when I'm in my car. However, I moved extremely close to my job, so my only chance to catch a story is when I run to get coffee or other errands, here and there. As such, I can admit I'm falling a bit behind on my current issue awareness. Today, I caught a snippet of Michele Martin's Tell Me More (one of my favorites!) Martin replayed a clip from another NPR program Talk of the Nation in which they were discussing the scandal involving Secret Service agents and prostitution.

The man in the clip, said something to the effect of "boys will be boys."

I rolled my eyes so hard, I pulled a muscle. Listen, I'm not here to discuss the Secret Service scandal, because, as mentioned, I know too little to do so, but I would like to tackle this "boys will be boys" shit.

Who Are All These Bitches on TV?

Have you heard about the new shows "Don't Trust the B in Apartment 23" and "GCB?" There's two things they have in common. They are news shows on ABC and they have "bitch" in the title.

You know, there's something really different feeling about the way Bitch Magazine uses the "B word" and the way that these shows are doing it. While Bitch Magazine feels revolutionary and reclaimatory, the stuff ABC is peddling feels tried and borderline offensive.

Like really? We're still calling women bitches? And it's so routine that it's in the title of television shows now?

Sigh.

Ashley Judd = BAMF

If you haven't heard about Ashley Judd's smack down on the media for making a frenzy about her "puffy face" then you are missing out. Check it:

If this conversation about me is going to be had, I will do my part to insist that it is a feminist one, because it has been misogynistic from the start. Who makes the fantastic leap from being sick, or gaining some weight over the winter, to a conclusion of plastic surgery? Our culture, that’s who. The insanity has to stop, because as focused on me as it appears to have been, it is about all girls and women. In fact, it’s about boys and men, too, who are equally objectified and ridiculed, according to heteronormative definitions of masculinity that deny the full and dynamic range of their personhood. It affects each and every one of us, in multiple and nefarious ways: our self-image, how we show up in our relationships and at work, our sense of our worth, value, and potential as human beings. Join in—and help change—the Conversation.

Yes, yes, yes. Y'all a mainstream celebrity just wrote the words "feminist" and "heteronormative" and "misogynistic." And people are listening (I hope.)

I've written about Ashley Judd before. While her activism isn't always perfect, I have to applaud her for throwing this smack down at the way the media continuously hates on women's looks. I mean, this is the exact reason that I write curriculum for girls that asks them to take a critical look at the messages we are being sent. All too often, those messages are screaming over and over You're not good enough. You'll never be good enough. How can little girls focus on growing up healthy and strong, finding fulfilling career paths, and positive personal relationships when someone, at every turn is cutting down their looks and the looks of other women? It becomes all too much.

So how refreshing to have someone call this shit out. Directly. Using her own voice and feminist words. Unafraid, unapologetic. A big fuck you. A much needed fuck you, in deed.

Size Acceptance...Close, But Not Quite

I feel like I'm seeing more and more of this type of thing: articles/blogs which celebrate bigger women, but sorta miss the mark. The one here, which I randomly stumbled upon (I know literally nothing about the site I just linked) is called "10 Incredibly Hot Women who are a Size 12 or Larger" and it delivers exactly what it promised.

Except...there are a few other messages I get with this type of curvy-celebration, namely now ALL WOMEN can be sex objects. YAAAAY!

But don't be TOO big. Or TOO dark. Or non stereotypically feminine. Sigh.

I know, I know. I need to appreciate these efforts for what they are, but I can't help but wish it could be so much more. What can I say. I'm a dreamer.

What I Like About Katniss Everdeen

This is part of my series on 2012 blockbusters. Check out the others: The Avengers, Prometheus, Snow White and the Huntsman, Ted/Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter, Brave, Magic Mike, and MIB3.

I saw the The Hunger Games last night and thoroughly enjoyed it. I'm going to run down a list of things that I really like about the main character, Katniss Everdeen. I feel like a spoiler alert is appropriate, even though the book has been out for years. Although, disclaimer: I've never read it. I'm merely responding to the characterization of Katniss in the movies, which others have said is close to the book.

So without further ado, and in no particular order, here are the 10 things I like about Katniss Everdeen.

Let's Talk About Rihanna

Content notes: discussions of domestic violence, verbal abuse, weight talk

I've been sitting on this topic for a while now because I wasn't sure how to organize everything I'd like to say. I still don't think I have. I first wanted to talk about RiRi when I heard her dad's super shitty comments earlier this month, but I was too mad at first to form a coherent thought. I think I'm good now so I'll get to that later.

I want to start by clarifying this. Despite what some people think in my personal life because I'll be the first to sing Rude Boy in karaoake and nothing helps me work out better than Where Have You Been?, I don't really LOVE Rihanna. I mean, I've got nothing against the girl, but to me she's mostly just a pop princess who's been through a lot and makes some ridiculously catchy tunes.

Well that's not entirely true.

Rihanna's not just another pop star to me. She is someone who I write about fairly regularly, and is no stranger to being covered by feminist blogs in general. Her very public domestic violence case with Chris Brown has been discussed and re-discussed to death. But beyond that, I've also argued that Rude Boy displays healthy sexual communication--a piece which was picked up by a fairly prominent progressive blog and has given me a huge spike in page views, putting it still as my most read post after two years.

So while some of her lyrics are something this feminist can get behind, the truth is I've never argued and I will never argue that Rihanna herself is a feminist. She's made some questionable choices, it's true. But I'm not in the business of creating identities for people, so I'm not here to make the case that she is or isn't a feminist. Rather, I'd like to just take a look at a few things that are going on w/ Ms. Robin Rihanna Fenty.

This will probably get long(er) but if you're in for the ride...

How Twitter Reflects The Themes of Our Society

Let me set this all out from the get-go: I love social media. I'm an early adopter and heavy user of the biggest platforms. I was Facebooking it back in late 2004 when you had to request your college to be added to the network and I've been a regular tweeter since 2008. In fact, I've racked up almost 6000 tweets. I'm even into Tumbling now. All of this is just to demonstrate that the following is not me hating on social media or fearing progress. (We know how I feel about that.)

Besides, Twitter has been proven to be hugely influential in some really big things, like the Arab Spring, as well as many other grassroots, activist movements including Occupy. It also regularly allows me to connect with feminists from all over the country and world, making the theory feel united, my thoughts more widely informed, and allowing me to be supported and lend support.

But the fact of the matter is that for all the good Twitter can do, it is still is a direct reflection of the "-isms" that still exist in our society. A vast majority of its users are not necessarily engaging in activism, but rather sharing "funny" quips or personal thoughts. Unfortunately, racist, heterosexist, classist, and sexist hashtags often are amongst the top trending topics. So much so, that as a self-preservation tactic (read: I don't want to get pissed off all the time) I've stopped regularly looking at them...which is a damn shame, since it could keep me from knowing about the great stuff I just referenced.

Despite my recent decision to ignore trending topics, I took a little glance last night and, of course, one of them was problematic.

Podcast with Kelli of Wear The Cheese

SXSW has descended upon Austin and aside from the annoyance of increased traffic, there's a lot of really cool stuff going on. Yesterday, I had the pleasure of attending one such SXSW event which was open to the public. It was hosted by the women who made Wonder Women! The Untold Story of American Superheroines. It was an awesome clip screening and panel discussion that sparked inspiration between me and and my friend Kelli about female characters and geek culture.

So check out my guest spot at the Crashdown podcast over at Kelli's website, Wear the Cheese.

You Can't Teach the Next Generation By Insulting What They Love

So, I finally had a chance to see Miss Representation from start to finish. I liked it, overall. I do think it was very 101 level and didn't delve into intersectionality as much as it could have...but I don't even want to talk about that. Instead, I'd like to discuss my feelings about the Q&A that followed.

In short, it made my blood boil.

"Every" Shape? Looking at Sizesploitation

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.

This morning, I saw this ad floating around which claims to depict what Levi jeans look like on "different" women's body types, with the headline "Hotness comes in all shapes and sizes." (Clearly the subtitle should be: if you wear a size 4 or less.) Seriously, not to snark on these women, because this is not about their bodies...but they're all fairly the same. With the exception of marginally different bust size and butt positioning, they look almost indistinguishable. 

Rosario Dawson is Right

I was cruising through Miss Representation's YouTube videos for funsies and I came across this clip of Rosario Dawson, an actress who I admittedly know little about. But here, she's hit right on one of Hollywood's biggest problems...all too often the stories told are from the male POV. But a real feminist media wouldn't include purely positive portrayals of women. It would strive for well-rounded, non-stereotypical portrayals of women, written by women. That includes women who overcome obstacles, are flawed, and authentic. 

Shorter Memebase: Rape is for the Lolz

I've been mulling over posting this because I think it reveals just how very low my standards are for a laugh on the internet. Despite my reservations, I'm just going to go all in. I read Memebase. It's shameful, and I know it. The jokes are frequently low brow and every -ist ever existed. While I am well aware of this, I skim over the crap as every so often there's a gem in the mix that makes me giggle.

Book Review: Bossypants

Ok, I know that I'm totally that person who is showing up to the bar when everyone is really tired and already saying their goodbyes, but can we just stay out for one more hour and drink in the awesomeness that is Tina Fey's Bossypants?

Oh great, you decided to stay through my extended metaphor!

I got the book for Christmas (a good 7 months after everyone else had read it) and it was utterly my dream read. I think I finished it in about 3 hours of total reading time because 1) I couldn't put it down 2) it's a very smooth, engaging read 3) it's hilarious.

I had no doubt that it would be funny--Fey regularly cracks me up with her work on 30 Rock and, of course, her Sarah Palin impression. However, what did surprise me was the outright feminism of it all. Fey isn't exactly a favorite of feminists, as her Liz Lemon character is quite imperfect. (And not imperfect in an endearing Leslie Knope kind of way.) But at its core, the book is about Fey's triumph over a male dominated field, helping other women, and sexism. Take her chosen title, for example:

Why is this book called Bossypants? One, because the name Two and a Half Men was already taken. And two, because ever since I became an executive producer of 30 Rock, people have asked me, 'Is it hard for you, being the boss?' and 'Is it uncomfortable for you to be the person in charge?' You know, in that same way they say, 'Gosh, Mr. Trump, is it awkward for you to be the boss of all these people?'

Point well taken.

All in all, I highly recommend Bossypants. Not only with it get a genuine LOL out of you, but it will also give you a peek inside the greatness that is Ms. Fey's mind and the struggle women often face in breaking it to the top levels of TV.

Call Me the Grinch

Me, as the Grinch, obviously

So, there has been a lot of buzz about a trend this year. Anonymous people are paying off other customers' layaway bills. All the stories I see about this topic are very positive, as they should be, I suppose. The stories are calling the payers "layaway angels" and writing at length about these do-gooders making "Christmas miracles." One woman, who had her layaway bill paid even said, “God opened up the windows of heaven and poured a blessing on me.”

Hm.

Everywhere I see these stories linked, on various forums and Facebook, people are saying the stories have made them cry, warmed their hearts, and inspired them to do something nice for another person. And that's great. I'm happy that people are inspired by these stories, but frankly, I'm not that moved by the actual acts themselves.

Layaway programs are typically used this time of year for holding gifts that you can't afford by paying them off in small increments until they are paid in full, ideally by Christmas. Call me the Grinch, I just can't get on board with thinking that paying off someone's layaway bill is the greatest way to help another person. In fact, I don't even see it as amongst the top 5 things money should go to.  Layaway programs don't help victims of a natural disasters or domestic violence. They don't educate children, cure cancer, or provide food and clean water to people who go without.

They provide materials items, most frequently those which are unnecessary. And the money ultimately goes to big businesses, like Wal*Mart. I mean, if you want to do something of this nature, comparable nonprofit programs which help give gifts to needy children seem much less frivolous than paying off someone's layaway bill.

Really, I am happy that people are giving to one another. And I'm glad that this positive story has been highlighted by the media, which too frequently focuses on death and destruction. However, the focus does seem to be on consumerism, which, as I've argued before, is far too prevalent this time of year. My advice is that if you feel moved by the "layaway angels" stories, you check out some of the nonprofits in your community and give a gift which will have an impact beyond a present which will end up under a Christmas tree.

Dear AMC's The Walking Dead...Stop It

Seriously--knock it off. Whatever it is you are trying to do with the gender situation in season two, cut it out. It's not working, and it's pretty offensive.

(Spoilers to follow)

The main crew

Let me back up. So, my friend Danee has been working on a piece about the feminism of AMC's The Walking Dead, mostly season 1. It was really fun watching it with her while considering this perspective, and getting to see the finished piece she came up with. Overall, it gave me a perspective about season one that was mixed.

Basically, the feeling I got was that the characters were struggling to figure out how gender would play out in their new world--one which is very different from our current culture, but is composed of people who were members of our society, and therefore bring with them all the notions of patriarchy that each of us carry on a daily basis. Tasks like defending the group from "walkers," hunting, and leading were left primarily to men, while women took on traditionally feminine roles like cooking, childcare, and foraging. However, as Danee detailed in her piece, there were challenges to the traditional gender structure. It was interesting, complex, and worth analysis.

(Side note: Danee, if you have an electronic version of your article any time soon, I'd like to link to it here.)

Then came Season 2. I honestly feel like the writers this season showed up to work the first day and said, "FUCK IT, let's make all the women somewhat foolish/childish/needy and the men strong leaders. DONE."

I will give you a few examples:

1) Andrea shoots Daryl-- You see, in the episode "Chupacabra," Daryl had ventured into the woods to look for a lost girl on his own. He is significantly injured and comes trudging back to the camp looking a bit like a walker. From a distance, Andrea spies him with her rifle scope and decides to take a shot. Protecting the group might sound like a smart, progressive thing for a female character to do and it would be IF: a) everyone hadn't already been taught a million times that gunshots are dangerous as they attract walkers. b) there wasn't a group of men already approaching Daryl with hand weapons who had CLEARLY stopped short staring at what was happening and figuring out it was him. Wouldn't she wonder why they weren't attacking? But no, she acts foolishly and impulsively and shoots Daryl. But don't worry guys! She's such a mess up that she doesn't even fully strike her target, she only grazes his head. Daryl will be just fine despite tha crazee womern! Now I know some people will argue that the character of Andrea is actually getting stronger simply because she's been wielding a gun more--but let me put it like this, you can put a gun a woman's hands and that does not make a strong character. The summation of her actions make or do not make a strong character. Besides, keep reading and tell me that the gender situation in this season isn't grim.

Andrea learning to shoot from Shane

2) Carol's incessant crying/helplessness--Carol is the mother of the missing girl, Sophia. Sophia's disappearance has been a major plot point this season (which, frankly, is getting old. She's been gone too long. Get over it, move on.) That aside, instead of doing anything about it and helping to look for her, Carol is just pretty much crying and wringing her hands constantly. And blaming Sophia's disappearance on Rick, the group's leader. I get that Carol is an abuse survivor which comes with a multitude of emotional scars. However, when they killed off her abusive husband, Ed, mid first season, it looked like they were creating a turning point for her. When the camp is attacked and Ed is bitten, the survivors have to smash the heads of the dead/bitten people so that they don't reawaken as walkers. Carol takes on the task of smashing Ed's brains out and strikes his corpse over and over again out of pain and anger. At that moment, I thought I might be able to expect something interesting. Carol would no longer be constrained by Ed. What would she have to say and what could she do without him watching her every move? The answer is apparently simple: not a whole lot. Sure, it would be horrifically traumatic to lose your daughter in the woods any time, let alone during a zombie apocalypse. But a strong female character would DO something about it. Not sit around lamenting and running up to the search team episode after episode saying things like, "Any sign?"

3) Maggie's mixed signals--Because so many of the original crew from season one has become zombie food or decided to blow themselves up at the CDC, the writers had to introduce a whole new group of characters, and they did so by having the main crew stumble upon a farm house, owned by Hershel. Hershel's farm and family provide the crew with many things they needed: medical supplies, food, water, clothing, horses, and most importantly, safety. The farm group also serve as an important plot device: potential new love stories. One such story emerges between Glenn, from the original crew, and Maggie, Hershel's daughter. Maggie was a beacon of hope for me for a moment. Could it be? A bad ass chick who rides in on a horse, chops walkers, and leads others to safety? But of course, Maggie's characterization couldn't keep up the hopes I had. In her relationship with Glenn she falls into the stereotype of the woman who sends mixed signals and doesn't know what she wants. I really don't expect any female character to be perfect. I can accept that Maggie is overly emotional in interactions with various characters and that she has to be rescued in one excursion into town with Glenn--but can't she at least stay clear headed and decisive about their relationship?

4) Men are in charge of everything significant--Everything around the camp that matters is in the hands of one of the male characters. Rick and Hershel are the leaders of their respective groups. When it becomes clear that Hershel doesn't want the farm group and the main crew to become too entwined with one another, he tells Rick to get "his people" in order. This interaction clears up any doubt for us at the audience: men are running the show. All real challenges to authority come from other men. Even when Maggie challenges authority, she doesn't do so on her own behalf. Rather, she questions why Glenn isn't more powerful amongst the core group. Plus, everything that needs to be learned comes from men. Need to learn to shoot? Shane's here for that! Need to learn to hunt or track? Daryl's your man. Learning mechanics? Talk to Dale. Need medical care? Hershel's here! Women are, again and again, positioned as assistants and learners while men are the gatekeepers of all "important" knowledge.

Lori

5) Lori's Plan B/Abortion Pill stuff--In the most recent episode, "Secrets" Lori didn't know the difference between Plan B and the abortion pill. This is what really was my inspiration to write this whole thing and the straw that broke the metaphorical camel's back. However, my issues with Lori runs much deeper than this. Lori, much like Carol but to a lesser degree, is constantly inactive. She is someone who had risen to become a female leader in her own right, but when push comes to shove she instantly defers to the judgement of various men like her husband Rick or her former lover, Shane. For example, when decisions must be made about her son Carl, she lets Rick make the final call.

However, the worst moment definitely was last night, when Lori was not only stupid, but delivered a dangerous message. You see, we've known Lori is pregnant for a few episodes, and had a positive pregnancy test, which means she's at least a few weeks along. So in a panic, she asks Glenn to bring her something from town. When Glenn and Maggie return, we finally learn what it was Lori needed as Maggie throws packages that are clearly marked with "the morning after pill" and says, "Here are your abortion pills!" Um, what? Ok, Maggie might not understand what they are, but it becomes pretty clear that at least a total of 4 characters on the show don't know the difference too--and Lori's the worst. Glenn asks her, "Will these even work?" to which she says, "I don't know." But later, in privacy, instead of reading the damn package to get the answer Lori ingests a HANDFUL of Plan B (but don't worry guys, she pukes it up later. Baby saved. Huzzah!)

Wut.

Seriously? I mean, REALLY? This scene only serves to further misconceptions about EC, which for the last damn time, is NOT THE SAME AS THE ABORTION PILL. And make no mistake, this whole medicine mix up adds literally nothing to the story. They could have just as easily had Lori actually request abortions pills, be given abortion pills, take abortion pills, puke abortion pills, and it would have had the same affect on the story, but without furthering the myth that the morning after pill ends an existing pregnancy. Basically, the writers are either really lazy, want Lori to look like an utter moron, or are revealing their own pathetic ignorance about emergency contraception.

Sigh.

Look, I don't expect gender situations to be perfect, but they could at least be a little more nuanced than how season two is shaping up. In a show like The Walking Dead, they have a unique opportunity to reimagine the world, and to reimagine it in a way which is not actually less gender progressive than the world in which I currently operate. I mean, come on. I don't ask a lot. Anything would be better than this!



Disclaimer: My comments are limited solely to the AMC Walking Dead version, as I know nothing about the comics except that they're not much like the show.

Let Me Clear Up a Few Things

There are SO many misconceptions about feminism that I frequently don't even know where to start when people run their mouths. In fact, I could probably write a blog post every day for the next 3 years and still not tackle all of the issues. HOWEVER, here are a few I'd like to tackle right now.

1) Everything a woman does is empowering. No. Women live in the framework of our society and can be and are as anti-feminist as men. Women have lots and lots of eternalized misogyny and behave through this lens on the regular. Just because a woman makes a choice, it doesn't make it automatically feminist. Seriously. For more of my thoughts on this, see here.

2) Criticizing other women is always unfeminist. No. Oftentimes women hate on other women and it is toooootally anti-feminist. However, as I said above, women can make anti-feminist choices and do anti-feminist things. Therefore, if one woman is analyzing or discussing the problematic choices of another woman (her internalized misogyny, supporting of stereotypes, etc.) it is not anti-feminist to CALL THAT SHIT OUT. Calling out non-feminism, is feminist. Right? I'm not advocating for bullying, but it is totally fair to discuss the relative feminism of various choices.

3) Feminists who care about the depictions of women in movies, TV shows, etc. aren't handling "real" issues. No. The media is real. It is very real. It is what young girls consume on a daily basis. And, as someone who has worked in the girl services field for over 6 years, I can tell you that the "silly" things in the media (commercials, TV, movies) are what are most real to teen girls when they are most impressionable. There is so much to feminism, that there is no reason that some of us can't work on analyzing the small stuff. Come on.

Weekend and the Representation of Gay Relationships

This weekend, I saw this movie, Weekend. (See what I did there?)

It was really, really good. I utterly enjoyed it and I couldn't help but get a little excited about watching two super hot dudes and their sexy times. (What? Sue me.)

The next day as I was cruising the webs, I came across this piece of news. It contained a sentence which really gave me pause:

Judy Chiasson, Coordinator for Human Relations, Diversity and Equity for the L.A. Unified School System, the state’s largest, said LGBT topics are controversial because people conflate them with sex — and, for religious conservatives, sin.

“People sexualize homosexuality and romanticize heterosexuality,” she said.

I'll put it out there again, so let it really, really sink in. In our culture homosexuality is to sex as heterosexuality is to romance.

I don't think that this assessment could be more true. When I saw Weekend, I can admit that my initial reaction was definitely to view it as more sexual in nature than romantic. I undoubtedly saw the romantic side...I'm not sure you could miss it...but the sex stood out to me all the more. Now, don't get me wrong. I didn't make up the sexualization. It's there, at times graphic.

But still I had to question myself. Would my impression have been the same if it had been a hetero couple? I have a sinking suspicion that it wouldn't have been. This cultural narrative is pretty pervasive, so much so that it is into the mind of allies like me. And I would say that it is particularly strong against gay men. Because romance is traditionally associated with femininity, a relationship which contains no women seems to be labeled mostly about fucking and not so much about romance.

One of the things that I loved most about Weekend was that it was so aware of what it was doing. One of the main characters, Glen, asks the other, Russell, about how often he sees true representations of gay life in the media. Glen pushes further, asserting that it's almost never because they wouldn't want to "scare the straights." But then, this film, becomes the very thing that Glen wants to see more of.

It is raw, real, and wonderful. I don't think that I would have truly appreciated it if I hadn't been reminded by Ms. Chaisson above that my brain has been conditioned to view things a certain way.

I'll leave with an except from Brian Moylan's review of the film, because I think he's spot on.

This is a modern gay movie, with the woes of coming out and AIDS far in the background and no one having to be a martyr like in Brokeback Mountain or Milk. Everything is normalized but it still isn't comfortable, with men combating not only with acceptance but also the ennui of perpetual Grindr hookups. But it is also a modern movie, devoid of the usual Hollywood trappings and instead creating something moving and deep out of snappy dialogue, real life situations, and brilliant performances...

Shocker: Dr. Phil Sucks

Today, I worked from home. I was super productive, and it was wonderful. One of my work from home perks is that I get to work with the TV going. I'm someone who has always enjoyed just a smidge of background noise to best get "in the zone." My TVs on a lot.

Eventually, Dr. Phil came on and this promo played before the episode started. (I removed the embedded video because it automatically started playing when you visit the page...ANNOYING.)

I left my apartment about 3 minutes into the episode so didn't see how the rest played out, but I don't really need to, do I? The misogyny is running DEEP here in just the promo. Firstly, Dr. Phil asks the man who is also an adult film star how he feels about men seeing his wife naked. Seriously? Does he think that the dude needs to protect her from this? Who's looking out for him? He's naked too, I assume! Then, the woman obviously doesn't regret her decision and is proud that they make $62,000 a week (a freaking WEEK! I'd be proud too!) and yet Dr. Phil wants to make her feel like shit and drag their daughter into it. I mean, it'd be one thing if they were making the pornography in front of her, but there's no indication she's in danger.

(Here, I will skillfully avoid the feminism of sex work debate, because that, my friends, is too big a topic for a blog about Dr. Phil.)

Like I said, I didn't see the episode, but this little clip certainly bugged me and it seems like Dr. Phil is employing a double standard in his approach. Obviously, he's not patting the man on the back and giving him a high five for being a pornstar, but he seems to come down particularly hard on the wife. Kudos, DP, so original. No one has ever slut-shamed before.

I know I'm quite late to the party in writing about how Dr. Phil is no good--but truthfully, he just hasn't been a part of my consciousness in a really, really long time. Around my freshmen-sophomore years of college, I didn't have cable and the only station that my rabbit ears picked up was the local NBC affiliate. I watched NBC any time I was watching TV, which was often, since I like my TV on while doing homework and such. So yeah, Dr. Phil was on, as was literally every other show that NBC ran. I didn't religiously watch him, but I was quite, quite familiar with him.

I was a wee little budding feminist at the time and I didn't think too critically about too much, but I do remember him rubbing me the wrong way more than once. Now that I've been reminded he exists and I see this clip, I totally get why he was starting to bother me. (And that was in 2005! When will he go away?) His show is all around pretty damn sexist, and as far as being a "doctor" goes, he's shady. I mean, even his Wikipedia page is riddled with lawsuits and controversies.

So yes, I'm stating the obvious--Dr. Phil sucks. But one question remains. Dr Phil, the whole misogyny thing, how's that working for ya?

I'm In Love and It Ain't With a Manic Pixie Dream Girl

Thanks to my friend Danee who pointed me toward this piece, in which EJ Dickson describes her issue with Zooey Deschanel. I am absolutely enamored with her thoughts. Some highlights:

I hated her Hanes cotton ads, where she preened in front of a mirror while her pigeon-like warbling played in the background. I hated that her website was called Hello Giggles, and that she regularly posted Facebook status updates that said inane things about Muppets and baby animals and mirrors. And when I see her in the promos for New Girl — which describe her character as "adorkable" — I picture a bonfire of every flower and rainbow and Lisa Frank notebook I've ever seen.

But of course, these reasons were all secondary to why I really hated Zooey Deschanel: the nebbishy, bookish dudes I dated had no compunction about advertising how much they wanted to fuck her. Although I don't usually get jealous over my partners' crushes, it offended me that they thought their attraction to Zooey Deschanel was somehow higher-minded than wanting to fuck someone like Megan Fox, or Lindsay Lohan. Did they really think that this chick had depth and meaning because she had big blue eyes and tweeted about mirrors? Did they think that her vagina had magical, restorative powers that would make them want to live life to the fullest?

I knew, of course, that I couldn't compete with Zooey Deschanel — or her magic vagina — on any real level, because the whole point of MPDGs is that they're DGs; no girl on the planet can ever be like that, even if they cut their own hair and post pictures of their feet on Tumblr. But when you first start dating, and everything you know about relationships comes from romantic comedies, not being like Zooey Deschanel didn't stop me from trying. It's embarrassing to admit now, but I wanted to be worshipped for my uniqueness and lusted after for my adorkableness; I wanted to be the girl who made sensitive neurotics want to change their lives.

She continues,

I blame my behavior during this period on Zooey Deschanel. Zooey Deschanel made me think that falling in love was an Olympic decathalon in quirkiness. Zooey Deschanel convinced me that I looked good in dark-rimmed nanny spectacles when I really just looked like Ira Glass in drag. Zooey Deschanel led me to believe that guys would want to go out with me if I dressed like a menopausal librarian, when I probably would've gotten laid more if I'd followed my instincts and dressed like a total slut.

But now,

I no longer hold her accountable for any of my relationship fails, just as I don't directly blame Vogue for eating disorders or Hunter S. Thompson for making college boys want to become violent alcoholics.

But it still would be nice to see her in a movie where she plays someone quirky without being brain-dead, or dorky without being adorkable. And after hip, quirky twenty-somethings see this movie with their equally hip and quirky girlfriends, they should go home, eat a bucket of chicken wings, and have sex, without a unicorn or rainbow in sight.

This is the kind of stuff I was talking about when I wrote my piece on getting over Deschanel-hate. See, it's ok to actually look at the message that Deschanel's persona and characters send out into the world. Just because a female character represents something intended to be counterculture (in this case "quirky" and "weird") doesn't make it any less oppressive to women than more traditional female stereotypes (ie the hot chick, the vapid supermodel, etc.)

While I can readily admit that I have an issue w/ girl hate involving one Ms. Zooey, I can also understand her culpability in the whole thing. A list celebrities rarely are "just being themselves." Rather, they represent a brand, which is typically specifically designed to send a message out into the world. The message they choose to send is their own and that's fine; but that doesn't exempt them from being subject to critique about the character they choose. For example, I'm going to call out Johnny Depp on a rape analogy. (Sure he'll never see it, but whatev.) When a celebrities' chosen persona and roles directly replicate a tired trope, people are going to say something about it.

I guess what I would love is for guys to just understand what a joke the whole Manic Pixie Dream Girl (MPDG) thing is. Like Dickson says when she tried to play the MPDG role, "Sometimes, it seemed like guys were disappointed that being with me fell short of their expectations, because I didn't make them want to go bungee-jumping or sing Hall and Oates songs." Of course they were disappointed. No one is really like the MPDG characters. Sure, there are hella quirky, nerdy, cutesy, hipster girls out there. They are aplenty. But they will not really solve your live problems and take your creativity or life purpose to a whole new plane of existence. Women are not tropes; they are actual people who have actual relationships. And in actual relationships everyone is going to be dealing with actual issues.

I can't help but invoke Clementine's iconic line here: "Too many guys think I'm a concept, or I complete them, or I'm gonna make them alive. But I'm just a fucked-up girl who's lookin' for my own peace of mind; don't assign me yours."

I can't say that I've ever actively tried to play the MPDG role. I've been weird for the sake of being weird and having fun. In high school I did a few of the things Dickson admits to doing (like wearing animal ears in public.) However, around then, Deschanel was playing roles like, "gas station girl" and was just about to appear in Elf, so I can't say that she had any influence on society--yet. I'm dating myself, but it's true. Then, the indie/hipster thing wasn't mainstream (yes, I just said hipster-ness is mainstream. How meta...) Quirky girls weren't the sought after ideal of the dating world for indie guys. The ideal woman was still more like the stereotypical ideal. (For example, the top 5 Googled women in 2002 were Jennifer Lopez, Britney Spears, Shakira, Halle Berry, and Jennifer Love Hewitt.)

So in some respect, I like that there is a lot more flexibility in personality types. Trust me, I'm all for quirky-ness. One of my catchphrases is "normal is boring." But as I said before, the pressure to fit a MPDG mold is not much better than the pressure to fit the vapid, hot girl mold. A mold is a mold and any relationship founded on the expectation that one or both parties should fill predetermined expectations is bound to fail. Besides, I feel like with the pixie part of MPDG there's this whole petite body expectation anyway--but that's a complaint for another day.