The outrage from white people about Colin Kaepernick kneeling vs. the lack of outrage from white people about another innocent black man being killed by police, justifies the nature of Kapernick’s protest.

Please see the commenting policy before replying to this post.

Super Bowl 2015

[Content note: cissexism, death]

I'm a slacker. While in years past, I have dedicated a LOT of time and attention to Super Bowl ads, I barely even watched this year. In fact, for the first quarter I was actually out on a walk and the second quarter I was straightening up around my house. I did catch the Katy Perry halftime show (shrug) and a few ads, however.

I love the Always "Like A Girl" ad (although I had seen it before.)



I'M NOT CRYING, YOU'RE CRYING.

It's pretty damn cool this would air during the Super Bowl, which historically has skewed to being out right hostile to women.

While I do love the overall message of this ad, I know it's an AD and it has to be remembered within that context. As Jilliam Berman wrote at the HuffPo, "The ad may be the first time a [menstrual] care product was advertised during the Super Bowl and is a prominent example of how companies trying to woo women customers are shifting advertising tactics...The idea for the touchy-feely ad campaign came from a common business exercise: analyzing consumer research."

So at the end of the day, it's trying to sell us something. I do support advertisements moving toward this empowering perspective, but we can't ever forget their main motive.

I also caught the pretty horrific "your kid could be DEAD, DEAD I SAY!!!!" spot from Nationwide.




I have a feeling someone was fired over this.

I mean, if their goal was to stir controversy and discussion, they did, but I'm not sure the overwhelming negative response was worth it. It's a pretty classic case study in how treading the line of "in poor taste" can  back fire on you.

Otherwise, I didn't really catch any ads that stuck with me. Was there something horribly offensive that I missed?

Please see the commenting policy before replying to this post.

Super Bowl 2014 Commercial Watch. With Tweets! And Gifs!

Let the annual tradition continue!

I'm going to do things a little different this year. Instead of waiting until the night is long over, I'm going to semi-live blog this thing. (Only semi, because I'm not going to post it as I go, I'll wait until the end.) But it will be much more stream of conscious style than usual. Plus, I'm much more likely to remember who the companies involved if I just write it all up now instead of trying to remember tomorrow.

Let me make sure I put this out there: I hate football. I really, truly do. It's just not my thing. But the Super Bowl is such a spectacle and its ads are a huge artifact of pop culture and are pretty influential and iconic, so I have to do this, ya know? Companies spend so much on their ads tonight and try to have the best one, so let's see what they have.

If the stream of consciousness thing ain't for you, I'm going to put my TL;DR comments above the cut. If you would actually like to see where my brain went during the game, then the stuff under the cut is made for you!

TL;DR: Overall, things weren't the worst this year. If anything I was absolutely underwhelmed. BUT there were still some distinct disappointments. VW's "Wings" ad included both a penis size and sexual harassment joke while totally ignoring women as engineers. How did at least one person in the production of that not say, "Dude, you gotta have a woman engineer get her wings." Axe brought in some racism and sexism with their "Peace: Make Love Not War" spot, which is nothing surprising for their brand. On the other hand, Goldiblox is awesome but I knew that. Coke actually did something interesting. And my old nemesis GoDaddy had something very different to offer, but no one believes they aren't the same old jerks.

Three Dangerous Mythical Creatures

Please forgive the Buzzfeed-ish structure of this post, but I've been thinking about some some various concepts lately, and I realized the connection they all share...they're totally made up, and yet most people believe in them, often to the detriment of other people.

Let's take a deeper look...

Superbowl Sexism Watch 2013!

Ah yes, it is time for my 5th annual Superbowl advertisement sexism watch!

I am happy to say that I declare this year's situation to be...drum roll...STATUS QUO! By that, I mean that gender stereotypes were out in full force BUT there wasn't a single commercial which set us back 50 years. And there were actually a few which were kinda good. Kinda.

Same old stereotypes and problematic content:
-Go Daddy's smart + sexy ad. A hot girl is sexy. A nerdy dude is smart. Together, they equal Go Daddy with a lot of disgusting kissing noises. YAWN. BLAH. OVER IT. I mean...for Go Daddy, it was actually pretty mild. For life, it was annoying as hell. Plus, when would it EVER be a nerdy girl with a hot guy? (Hint: never.)

-Audi had a commercial where a teen is going to prom stag, but he takes his dad's car and he feels like such a bad ass that he storms in and kisses the prom queen. I know that people want to pass this kind of thing as romantic or whatever  but I will ALWAYS be uncomfortable with the "sweeping her off her feet" mentality because HOW DO YOU KNOW SHE WANTED SWEPT? Consent is a simple concept and there was none in that commercial. In a perfect world, there's a whole back story that we can't see, but let's be honest, if we don't see it, it doesn't exist. All we (and millions of teens everywhere) see is the story portrayed. At best, it's really problematic. At worst: a contributor to our rape culture.

-The Calvin Klein shiny, ripped dude in underwear caught my, ahem, attention. Ok, I can admit it's a little interesting to see a guy so heavily objectified during the Superbowl, but 1) I don't think we win by having men be objectified too and 2) when a dude is objectified, he's still portrayed as strong, active, athletic, and a human. Women are so often reduced to being passive, idle, dismembered bodies.

-Amy Poehler for Best Buy. It kills my soul to put her on the "same old" side of things because I love her more than I have words for. BUT while the commercial was hilarious, she was kiiiiiiiiiinda being a dumb blonde and that's not my favorite thing ever.

-The Coke race series of ads. The group of women are showgirls while the men are adventurers. Dumb. I mean, yes, the women won, but still. Come on. Plus, it's being criticized for being racist.

-Speaking of racism, what about the VW ad where the white guy is "happy" epitomized by his appropriation of a Rasta/Jamaican accent? WHAT THE HELL? VW, you're better than that.

Interesting takes:
-The Hyundai ad with The Flaming Lips...it was a dad parenting and having a great time with his kids (and The Flaming Lips.) Not bad. Not bad at all. (Hipsters, be damned! I don't care if you're upset that TFL are now "mainstream.")

-Toyota had an ad with Kaley Cuoco where she can apparently grant wishes and they work through what the family wants. It did have a bit of a fatphobic undercurrent to it, but when the little girl wished to be a princess, she became a bad ass warrior one, in a scene that could have been out of Braveheart.

-Jeep had a long RAH 'MERICA ad voiced over by Oprah. (What did that cost!?) I'm not really into the ad in general, but when they show an American soldier at the end, it's a woman of color. So they get points for that, at least.

Like I said, overall there wasn't as much blatant awfulness as usual, but there's certainly so much more progress to be made. At least I can chalk up Superbowl 2013 to being the year where I didn't audibly groan at my TV...at least, not too loud. Ok, I did. Whatever.

Racism: Olympics Edition

Gabby Douglas is an incredible gymnast and now an Olympic gold medalist. But that might be hard to realize, because if you are listening to the media and general Olympics coverage, Gabby is not getting a fair shake. From people criticizing her hair and her mother, to her invisibility in some promotional photos and NBC's coverage, it certainly feels like racism in action.

Due to my traveling schedule, I missed out on all of the gymnastic events so far. But I wanted to round up some of the best coverage I've seen on this for further reading. The linked pieces below get into much greater detail about how Gabby is being treated. Check them out!

Sexism and Body Snarking: Olympics Edition

As I recently mentioned, I kinda love the Olympics. I'm a sucker for them. I'm not sure what it is, because I do not enjoy any other sports related thing. But every two years (winter/summer) I'm stuck at my TV.

I think one thing that I particularly enjoy is that women seem to receive as much attention and almost as much legitimacy as men's competitions. That's a rare thing. For example, I'm so used to people going gaga over the NBA and totally forgetting that the WNBA exists. (PS, why isn't it the MNBA and the WNBA--oh right, men are considered the standard. *Eye roll*)

But NBC is really crushing my spirits with their coverage. Last night, I turned into the late night segment and caught a discussion between Bob Costas, Shaun White, and John McEnroe. Apparently, McEnroe is at his first Olympics and White is there for the first time as a spectator. So they were chitchatting about their experience watching women's beach volleyball. And of course, it dissolved into a dude bro yuk yuk session about the women's bodies. Objectification to the max. (And LITERALLY while I was writing this, another male NBC commentator just talked about how when he went to the beach volleyball game, it was "sensory overload" because of the women's bodies.)

I stewed for a bit and then moved on. I wish I could say this is the end of it, but of course there's more. The media takes every possible opportunity to comment on women's bodies, and Olympians are not exempt.

Yay, Sarah Robles!

From Sarah Robles' Indiegogo Campaign Page

Olympics season is upon us! I'm going to be honest, I'm a bit of nerd about the games. I think one thing that particularly appeals to me is that it's one of the rare times where we hear about women athletes almost as much as male. Speaking of which--I'd like to talk a little bit about Sarah Robles. Have you heard of her? She's an Olympic weightlifter and all around remarkable young woman. 

I first heard about her last week because of her financial situation. As reported at Feministing:

The twenty-three-year-old is the highest ranked weightlifter in the country, beat out every female and male American at the world championships last year, and can lift more than 568 pounds–which is apparently equivalent to one large adult male lion. And yet Robles scraps by on $400 a month from U.S.A. Weightlifting and donations from friends because she doesn’t the kind of body that secures lucrative endorsement deals.

Think about it. Athletes in other sports, particularly women, who have slimmer physiques are considered more attractive by out societal standards and receive much more attention (such as swimmers, gymnasts, beach volleyball, and tennis players to name a few.) I mean, think for a moment about what type of body we call "athletic"--it's a label we wrongly extend to only slim, toned, and minimal muscled women. And because a woman's worth is so often reduced to how much Joe Six Pack wants to bang her, these particular athletes rise to the top of our national consciousness. This translates into endorsement deals and sponsorships; these deals, if you are an Olympic athlete, are your bread and butter. 


Consider for a moment what Roble's income of $400 a month means.

The Isolation of Boys (another "Sexism Hurts Everyone" Reminder)

(TW Sandusky Trial discussion)

I was listening to NPR this morning, as I am apt to do, and I caught a snippet of last Friday's "Barber Shop" segment on Tell Me More. Michele Martin and the guys were discussing the Jerry Sandusky trial. The coverage of the trial to this point has been disgustingly chock full o' rape apologism. But the discussion I caught on the "Barber Shop" brought up an interesting point. One of the men shared that he felt that part of how Sandusky got so far in preying on boys was the fact that society socializes men and boys to keep away from deep conversations. 

Super Bowl 46: A Shitty Gender Situation as Ever

So the culmination of the football season just happened...and, you know, there's a reason that the Super Bowl has its own tag here...while all other tags are much more general (like "education" or "sports.") It's because the Super Bowl is a yearly reminder that women just aren't that important.

This year was no exception. The whole thing went down in my hometown of Indianapolis. While I was really happy to have the eyes of the world on my old digs, I was epically disappointed that the advertisements are a case of same shit, different year. If an alien civilization had only access to Super Bowl commercials as artifacts of our way of life, they would find a pretty bleak picture of both men (sex driven meat-heads) and women (sexed up, throw away objects.)

We Live in a Rape Culture. And it Hurts Everyone.

Trigger warning for discussions of rape.

Having been wrapped up in a work situation that was ultra time consuming, I haven't had much time to keep up--both with consuming news and writing. It's made me feel a little disconnected. However, one story that hasn't slipped past me is the Penn State child rape story. Now that I've been able to catch up on some sleep, reading, and life in general, I'd like to talk about this for a bit.

I'm sure that anyone who has access to any form of media, like the internet for example, has heard of this story. So if you're reading this, I won't summarize the horrific details. I would, however, like to drive home the point others have made. This story highlights how we live in a rape culture. If you are unsure what this means, I suggest you check out Melissa McEwan's recent piece on the topic. In it, she not only lists many specific, concrete examples, she also quotes Transforming A Rape Culture:

In a rape culture both men and women assume that sexual violence is a fact of life, inevitable as death or taxes.

Much of McEwan's words center mostly on the gendered situation of sexual violence. But the Penn State story, much like the scandals which have rocked the Catholic Church, remind us that rape culture affects us all and is clearly evident here.

Rape culture is particularly evident through the fact that students protested the firing of head coach Paterno. As Jill at Feministe said,

Seriously, Penn State students who are rioting because the board of trustees fired a man who helped cover up serial child molestation? You all should be ashamed. And if the comments on your school’s facebook page are any indication of the level of intellectual discourse (and basic spelling and grammar skills) you’ve got going on over there, I would suggest you spend more time hitting the books and less time bleating about how Joe Paterno is a victim, too.

I know you all like football. I know a lot of people like football. I know it’s fun and culturally important and for some reason people identify incredibly strongly with Their Team, many to unhealthy levels. But it’s football. It is just football. Feeling personally devastated because someone you trusted made a really terrible decision is one thing; being personally devastated because your identity is so wrapped up in your team that the idea of any member of that team being punished for covering up child rape strikes you as fundamentally unfair is another thing. It is something that should make you seriously reconsider your identity and your values. Being really good at coaching football doesn’t absolve you from looking the other way when you hear about child rape; it doesn’t absolve you from encouraging others not to report child rape to the police.

I couldn't agree more. This reaction is disgusting. You see, rape culture not only creates an environment where people choose football over rape victims, but it also produced a group of men who thought it was better to deal with the allegations amongst themselves than to involve the law anyway. It produced a witness in this case who walked in on a man raping a 10 year old boy and not only didn't intervene, but also didn't immediately call the police. It made him actually confused about what to do when he saw a child being raped.

If we lived in a world where rape wasn't normalized through the many things McEwan listed in her explanation of rape culture, this could never happen. No one but rapists benefit from rape culture, so how about we all stop playing along? You can do your part to reject the rape culture in many ways. For example, you can accept that people who are complicit in rape crimes deserve punishment. You can put children above football. You can stop using rape analogies and jokes. You can refuse to engage in victim blaming and call others out.

Edit: Just also saw Eve Ensler's piece on rape culture. Check it out too.

Love Your Body Day!

Why hello there--good morning!

Did you know that today is Love You Body Day? AND it's Fat Talk Free Week? It should be no surprise that I totally support these causes.

Which is why I'm bummed that this picture is all over Facebook...and receiving tons of praise for its apparent hilarity.

Yes, let's all body snark a little girl. I don't even get it.

Update: Meanwhile, on Twitter, one of the top trending topics all day as been #OkUPrettyBut. Here are some "highlights":


#okuprettybut how much did all that plastic surgery cost you tho?
#okuprettybut you're a HOE to the 3rd power
#okuprettybut ya second toe is waaayyy too long baby
#okuprettybut u not the cutest girl out your group
#okuprettybut you still have no business wearing that outfit.

Aaaaaaaaaand there it is. Social media reminding me exactly why we have these days in the first place. For every one voice telling women they are beautiful and worthy, there's about a million more hating on us, putting us down, and mocking our bodies and behaviors.

And as one man noted on the #okuprettybut trend...

and its hilarious that the #okuprettybut topic...is like 95% females hatin on each other. thats y girls cant get along lmaoooo.

Truth. 

The Greatest Spectacle in Creepiness

So, I'm from Indianapolis. Indianapolis is known for very few things, and most of them sports related. Perhaps the most well known is the Indianapolis 500, held this past weekend:

...The Greatest Spectacle in Racing, is considered one of the three most significant motorsports events in the world. The official attendance is not disclosed by Speedway management, but the permanent seating capacity is more than 257,000 people, and infield seating raises capacity to an approximate 400,000.

So in the motorsports world, it's kind of a big deal. It's THE big deal. And in Indianapolis, it has a huge following. In fact, my grandfather went to every race during his lifetime and settled in Speedway to raise his family.

As a result, I grew up steeped in race life. As a teen (from ages 13-17, if I recall correctly) I volunteered at a souvenir stand at the track. I worked the 500, Brickyard, and even the short lived Formula One race. Race culture is fairly divided and I could see a difference between the crowds at each event type. The Europeans brought a relative air of sophistication and worldliness. The Brickyard seemed overall family oriented. And then there was the 500. What the Wikipedia page fails to elaborate upon (especially in the "culture" part of the page) is how very misogynistic and creepy Indy car race fans were to a young teen girl.

For example, you're very, very likely to hear someone shout, "Show me your boobs!" In fact, you'll probably hear it multiple times, and you might be as young as 13 when you hear it...directed at you. Additionally, both my friends and I were hit on and propositioned by multiple older men, including offers to take care of us or take us home. One particularly disturbing situation involved being asked if I was for sale (I worked at a souvenir stand after all.) And the entire time this stuff happened, I was totally underage. I guess I should be thankful that we were relatively stable teens who weren't looking for an escape or a father figure.

At the time we played it off, as teens are apt to do. We laughed and many of the situations turned into inside jokes, but when push came to shove we understood how extremely creepy the whole thing was. Truth is, it set a pretty scary environment for us whether we verbalized it or not. One of those gut feelings you just have.

Now, I'll put a disclaimer on it. These are, of course, just the observations and experiences of me reflecting upon what happened to my friends and I. However, I'd bet that the things we encountered were not limited to us. Besides, it's fairly well known in Indy that race day gets rowdy, especially in the infield, and historically in the "snake pit." (That part of the Wikipedia entry allllmost mentions these problems, but doesn't actually call out the gendered nature of the "revelry" and alludes to things being much more calm by the 1990s.)

Anyway, I haven't been since the early 2000s, so perhaps things have changed, but I highly doubt it. Either way, I'm always going to have a creepy association with the whole thing.

Superbowl...

So last night I watched the Superbowl with three like minded individuals. Typically, there are ads in the Superbowl that I want to scream at. However, this year it was all around boring and stupid.

There was, of course, the Darth Vader Volkswagen ad that Ronald has been in love with. It was, by far, the best ad of the night. However, having seen the full version before the actual Superbowl, it took all the glory out of it. And...I still insist that Vader's a little girl.

That's not an insult. I think he's played by a little girl. Not a boy. FYI.

Anyway, everything else was pretty snooze worthy, which by all accounts, should be good news given the hatred that sports advertisements have typically produced in us around these parts.

All in all, the misogyny was most present through both a Pepsi Max and a Doritos ad that depicted violence against women. Random crap being thrown at them. Oh, and don't forget: Men are single minded morons. Ya know, standard tripe.

I was also really, really disappointed in the Groupon ads which both exploited the Tibetan culture and deforestation in the name of cheap Tibetan food and Brazilian waxes.

Ew.

Eh well, the whole experience was all around blah, save for the fabulous company I enjoyed. And to prevent talking more about Ben Roethlisberger, I'll simply refer to you to my previous thoughts on him. (Short version: ick.)

Confusion about Consent: Bob Dvorchak on Ben Roethlisberger's Suspension

Disclaimer: I don't know the details of what happened in the sexual assault cases involving Ben Roethlisberger, I'm only commenting on what was discussed on Talk of the Nation by Bob Dvorchak.

Late last week I was listening to NPR as I've been prone to do lately. On Talk of the Nation, Neal Conan was talking to Bob Dvorchak about the recent 6 game suspension of Ben Roethlisberger.

For those of you who do not keep up with sports (like me) Ben (who I will refer to as Ben, since his last name is too damn long) has been formally accused of 2 sexual assault incidents and a third which was never legally pursued. In all cases, no formal charges were brought against Ben. However, despite this fact, the NFL found that there had been enough of an issue to suspend Ben for 6 games (4 for good behavior.) Of course sports goons without a care for women, cried out how this was ridiculous, while sensible people commended the punishment and the NFL.

I'd like to jump on this last bandwagon and mention that this has given me a smidgen of respect for the NFL and it's commissioner, Roger Goodell, who made the decision. Regardless of if no formal charges have been brought forward, there is a clear issue here and the NFL would be remiss not to address it.

Anyway, back to Talk of the Nation and Bob Dvorchak. Dvorchak is a sports writer in Pittsburgh and so he was included in the discussion on Talk of the Nation about this decision. That day, I had heard other people covering the story, but from different angles, as none of them were sports people. One discussion was about how if Ben had been black the punishment would have been harsher, and I found that to be a fair assessment.

I tuned in late to the discussion with Dvorchak, so I didn't catch how he felt about the actual suspension, but his participation in the discussion was EXTREMELY problematic and since no one called him on it on air, I will do it now. And I am paraphrasing because I was driving and didn't write down his exact words, but I took some notes the minute I got home because I was so infuriated. Specifically, I take issue with two points he made.

1) The sexual assault allegations fall into a gray area and are more of a case of he said/she said than an actual rape because the alleged victim was too inebriated at the time of the incident to make a statement about what happened.

Saying shit like this is a huge fucking problem and perpetuates our rape apologist society. Let me make this crystal clear: IF SOMEONE IS TOO INEBRIATED TO MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN A BATHROOM WITH SOMEONE AND WE KNOW SOMETHING SEXUAL HAPPENED, THEN THEY WERE TOO INEBRIATED TO GIVE CONSENT.
And no consent = RAPE!

It's not rocket science. It's extremely problematic that this concept is so hard for people to understand and is consistently used as an excuse for rape and victim blaming. I'm not talking about when two people get intoxicated and hook up. I'm talking about when one party is inebriated beyond control of their body and voice and they are taken advantage of. It's the same principal that a child is not capable of giving consent and why statutory rape laws exist. Someone who is extremely intoxicated is not capable of consent.

Case closed.

2) Dvorchak also claimed that Ben could basically get away with despicable behavior and still play in the NFL because a talent as big as him can't be passed up. (If the Steelers drop him, another team will pick him up.) The sad thing is that there is truth to what Dvorchak is saying here. However, Dvorchak as a sports reporter occupies a special place in society where he could critique this idea and call for sports fans to hold their "heroes" accountable for their behavior, instead of reinforcing the idea that sports rapists hold a get out of jail free pass.

Guess what? I'm sure Ben is a super-de-duper athlete. And he's among the elite in his sport. But there ARE other people as good as him who DON'T RAPE WOMEN.

We have got to stop holding sports players above the rest of society. Would you keep going to your dentist if you heard he had been named in three sexual assault cases? PROBABLY NOT! Even if he was the best damn dentist you'd ever been to!

We've also got to stop victim blaming and giving excuses for rape and sexual assault. It's as simple as that. We've got to promote the Yes Mean Yes mentality. And we've got to call people on their shit when they clearly don't understand what consent is. Bob Dvorchak doesn't fully understand consent, and he's writing columns and speaking on the radio, so I can safely assume he represents what a lot of people think...and that's so scary.

Yay Superbowl Time!

So last night was the Superbowl, one of the most fruitful times for feminist fodder. And the feminist world is abuzz about the ads this year.

I don't have to add much. The best points have already been made. And interestingly, the Focus on the Family ad was super blah. (I still insist that the problem is how CBS went about this whole thing and not the content itself.)

But what I will add is that it seems advertising companies responded to the outcry from last year which was one of the raunchiest and most offensive Superbowls I've seen ad wise. (Some may argue that Janet's boob was the raunchiest thing to happen in a Superbowl, but I didn't mind that as much...so whatev.) Point is that the message seems to be, "Ok, you don't like it when we strip women and have them shake their asses and shower for men's pleasure. Prefer not to have *that* form of misogyny? COOL. We'll give you another form: The type that shows what wimps the men are who care about the feelings and societal position of women. You don't wanna be THAT guy do you? GOOD. Now buy our shit and keep your balls."

SIGH.

At least some of us know men who really do care about what women think and feel and experience in life. And they are not beaten down or emasculated. They are actually intelligent, respectable individuals, capable of looking beyond their own experience.

CBS and the Anti Choice Ad

So, the feminist blogosphere is all a-buzz about the Superbowl advertisement which will be telling the story of how Tim Tebow's mother chose* life and now her son is an amazing football star and blah, blah, blah. The real problem, feminist bloggers have asserted over and over again, is that CBS previously held the position of disallowing "advocacy ads" but suddenly changed their position and allowed this spot. In fact, they are a lot more intimately involved with this adverstisement than it first appeared. (Keep in mind that they've denied PETA, MoveOn.org, and The United Church of Christ in the past, and a gay dating website this year.)

Naturally, I found this annoying, so when I saw friends posting a link on Facebook for people to write to CBS standing up against this choice, I sent the email and also posted the link. Then the opposition on Facebook started to speak up...even though the article I posted said:

"CBS has decided to air an anti-abortion ad during the Super Bowl, despite years of refusing to run "advocacy ads" by progressive groups. Whatever your opinions, the Super Bowl is not the time or place for an abortion debate. Please take a stand with me and go here: www.amplifyyourvoice.org/SuperBowl"

Here's what the central thesis of the outcry against this posting was...followed by my ideas on why these theses are foolish.

1) CBS can air the commercials of anyone who is willing to pay. It's their decision.

What's wrong with this idea is that it supposes that CBS is simply catering to the money provided to pay for the ad (which is a reported $3 million spent by Focus on the Family. Think what $3 million could have done if it was actually spent helping women...) However, the fact of the matter is that in the past CBS has denied the groups I mentioned above the opportunity to air their advertisements. Was their money not as good? Was CBS some different kind of business then that didn't care about profits? CBS is clearly picking and choosing when and when not to air ads and promoting a particular agenda over others. That's what the problem is.

2) CBS is a business and will act in their best interests...

I quote, "the Superbowl has a bigger demographic of Christian families [than] leftist feminists." This argument rests on the premise that CBS is just being smart and catering to the interests and beliefs of the people who watch the Superbowl. (Now I might actually believe this when it comes to vetoing material they might see as damaging to their image, like...oh...say tons of advertisements with scantily clad women in them. But that's not what CBS is doing, is it? They're actually specifically promoting certain material, but I digress.)

I can hardly wait to address everything that is wrong with this perspective:
A) First of all, are you really suggesting that someone cannot be both a leftist feminist and a Christian? Or be pro-choice and a Christian?
B) If we are going to agree that the majority of people who watch the Superbowl are "Christian families," (and let's go with the assumption that a majority of them are already anti choice) then do they REALLY need an advertisement extolling the virtues of not getting abortions? I thought advertisements were to persuade someone to buy a certain product, believe something, or do something specific, that they might not otherwise do. Then isn't the Superbowl an incredibly silly, and perhaps even inappropriate place to air this? I mean, there aren't public service announcements telling people to breathe air, for a reason. Hmm...something just isn't adding up.
C) Furthermore, if we're going to start talking about the demographic that actually watches the Superbowl, (and let's continue with the theme of extremely sweeping generalizations) then couldn't we say that the majority of people watching the Superbowl are actually most likely MALE and therefore have no legal say in the actual decision to carry a baby to term or not (according to legal precedent.) Doesn't this make this an even more foolish choice as far as catering to your demographics go? Unless, maybe, you have a certain agenda and you want to promote a very specific viewpoint. Hmm again...

3)...It's not like they're the government, after all!

This follow up to #2 is under the argument that CBS can cater to their audience while the government would have to be more diplomatic to all viewpoints and people. This is laughable, because it rests on the premise that the government does treat all people fairly. (Because, you know, access to education and legal marriage, to name a few, are the same for ALL people, right?) But beyond that, I don't think that CBS is like the government, or should be held to a government like standard...but I do think that the media holds a special place in American society, CBS included. They are part of the long standing tradition of at least attempting to be partial and unbiased. (Even though we usually know which way each media source slants.) It's just sad to me when the media is so incredibly transparent about its political agenda and isolates already marginalized groups.

So while I'm on the topic...I thought I'd mention the Sarah and Bristol Palin In Touch magazine cover, that proudly declares they chose* life. Of course, I would wager that most women who do choose* to have their babies don't regret their decisions and love their babies and would never come out and say "I wish I had an abortion." On the other hand, however, I know there are women who also do not regret their abortions, despite the fact that we are told that all women who have them do. Just some food for thought.

Point is they had a choice...

*Special emphasis on this particular word :)

UnsportsLADY Like Conduct

Lately this story of the New Mexico soccer player, Elizabeth Lambert, has been all over the news for her incredibly poor sportsmanship which included punching, hitting, and pulling the ponytail of opponents. (BTW WHY isn't there a gender neutral term for sportsmanship?)

It was disgusting. If you watch the footage of the acts, it is really disturbing. Seriously, I in no way condone her actions and her suspension was absolutely just.

However...(you know there was a however) I really feel that this story has received an extremely high level of coverage simply because Lambert is a woman. Overly aggressive behavior is present daily in most male sports (at both the collegiate and professional levels) and we rarely see this much coverage about it. I'm actually surprised that the feminist blogs I follow haven't picked up on this.

My position is that we shouldn't tolerate violent behavior from any sports players, regardless of gender. But the prevalence of this story just highlights sexist ideals surrounding women's perceived role in sports and what is "appropriate" for men and women in general.

Jessica also brought the discussion about "Guyland" by Michael Kimmel and feminist pundit Courtney Martin's thoughts on it to my attention. I have some thoughts about this...but I've got to do some more reading before I officially comment.

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.

Apparently the objectification of women is necessary in order to sell burgers.

While watching the NCAA Championship basketball game this evening (yes that's relevant), I saw two...yes two...offensive commercials that made my jaw drop to the floor. For expensive perfumes? No. For tight jeans? No. For hair products? Absolutely not. For fast food joints. Yes...apparently the objectification of women is necessary in order to sell burgers.

Here is the first that I saw...



Oh...where to begin? First of all, the song...don't get me wrong...I, too, like big butts and I cannot lie. I also have been known in my anti-feminist past to play Sir Mix-A-Lot's *only* hit quite loudly in my car. However, never in my wildest dream could I imagine creating any type of media aimed at CHILDREN and incorporating this song. Even in the provocative 2000's...no. Secondly, as children become teenagers, we warn them of the oh-so-appalling music videos that are full of profanity, hyper-sexualized women, and drug and alcohol abuse. Parents and teachers alike shout of their disapproval with the classic, "Kids these days..." attitude. I also shout of such disapproval (with less of the latter mentioned attitude), but in addition to my rants about how horrible they are...I do something about it...that's the difference. And then...here comes Burger King replacing the profanity with Sponge Bob and the drug and alcohol abuse with Kid's meals. What remains? The hyper-sexualized women. The song is a version of, "I like big butts" obviously and replaces 'big' with 'square.' They give the back-up dancers (who are only women!) huge, square butts. At one point, the King is even measuring the angles of a dancer's ass! Now, you tell me, what message is this sending to the kids watching this commercial? More specifically, what is this communicating to the little girls watching this? I'll tell you. They see their daddies laugh at the commercial and think it's quite alright. Am I man-hating? No. Gender specificity will be explained...keep reading.

Here's the second commercial...



At first I had mixed emotions about this commercial, because they're making eating sexy. That should do *some* good for the eating disorder pandemic in our country, right? Maybe...doubt it...probably not enough to justify all of the misogynist implications this commercial has. Once again, the hyper-sexualization. Why, why, why is this necessary to sell a burger? And why, why, why are the only people being objectified in order to sell products, completely unrelated to sex, women?! Okay, maybe not all...just a humongous majority...I do remember the Diet Coke guy. It was the last line in the commercial that put the fire in my stomach, though. "Hardee's western bacon thickburger...more than just a piece of meat." Woooooow. No words. I really am just going to leave it at that.

Now...why was it relevant that I was watching the NCAA Championship basketball game? And what justifies the fact that I was not man-hating in my mention of "daddies." Did I see these commercials while watching my fav Lifetime movie? No. Did I see these horribly misogynistic commercials during The Rachel Maddow Show...during Rachel Ray? No. It was during a basketball game, and probably one of the most watched basketball games of the year. Who is likely to be your key audience here? Men. Heterosexual Men. Who is drooling over the woman eating the thickburger and who is buying the kids' meal? It's no surprise that advertisers know what they are doing. Moms, teenage girls, or even women-loving-women (like myself) are not going to pay attention to or like these commercials. In fact, this women-loving-woman is going to protest this shit no matter how hot that girl in the Hardee's commercial is! Because I want my daughter (or son) to grow up in a safe world for women...and these thirty-second tragedies aren't helping.

So, please join me in writing Burger King and Hardee's expressing your disapproval of these ads.

Burger King Corporation
5505 Blue Lagoon Drive
Miami, Florida 33126

Hardee's
100 N. Broadway, Ste. 1200
St. Louis, MO 63102-2706