The Idiocy of Men's Magazines part 2

So, apparently when Maxim gave Sarah Jessica Parker the "unsexy" label, it was the gift that just kept on giving.

A few months later, and she's still fielding media questions about the "article" with her reaction being carefully scrutinized every step of the way. I imagine she's pretty fucking tired of hearing about it - I know I am. But I do like what feministe's Jill had to say about it:

"That isn’t a sign of personal weakness on her part; it’s a recognition that “ugly” is one of the worst slurs you can throw at a woman (and especially one whose career largely depends on her being perceived as attractive). Maxim’s Unsexiest award also serves as a way of keeping other women in line — if even someone as famous and lovely as Sarah Jessica Parker isn’t sexy enough (because of her long face? her age? her refusal to stay in the role of the vapid pretty girl? her business sense? her stable personal life?), where does that leave the “real” women who date Maxim’s target audience?"

When I consider how men (and women) use looks-based insults to denigrate women, or keep us in line, I can't help but recall some of my own personal experiences. (I'm still told by complete strangers to "grow some tits" as if having a rack acceptable for their ogling should be my goal in life.) It does frustrate me that male entitlement leaves women in the position to be constantly fielding unsolicited remarks ("complimentary," or otherwise) from men they encounter on a daily basis. Most recently, a complete stranger told me that I had beautiful eyes and that it made him "want to see tears in them."

So, here's my statement of outrage:

I'm not here to be attractive to you. That is not my purpose in life. My worth doesn't hinge on whether I turn you on, or off, or into a raging puddle of hormones. I will not be validated through your sexual fantasies about me, nor do I want to be informed of them, unsolicited. My importance is not determined by whether or not I'm "your type." My outward appearance does not need to fit your narrow, subjective standard of "beauty" to be relevant. My mind does not place second to my looks. My personality does not place second to my looks. My integrity is not tied up in how I present myself outwardly. I was not forced to cultivate a sense of humor because I'm not a "bombshell." I didn't develop intellectual interests because "no guy would have me." I do not have a great personality to "snag a man." If I'm pretty, that doesn't mean I'm also stupid. If I'm ugly, that doesn't mean I'm also worthless.

I am good enough, damnit! Deal with it.

Rape Myths

This is posted for the benefit of one of the guys I've always counted as a friend. But if you can't be a friend to women, dude, then you obviously can't be a friend to me.

Earlier, we spoke of my volunteer work and sexual violence against women, and you made the shocking claim that most reported rapes were false accusations, and that women lie, and basically fed me a cute little list of rape culture rhetoric. Here's a thank-you note.

I particularly want to draw your attention to this rape myth:

Women lie about being sexually assaulted to get revenge, for their own benefit, or because they feel guilty afterwards about having sex.
reality: Women rarely make false reports about sexual assault. Acquaintance sexual assault is the most underreported crime in Canada. Only 6% of sexual assaults are reported to the police. As well, false accusations of rape happen no more often than false reports of other types of crime: about 2 to 4%, which means 96 to 98% of the reports are true. (Source: University of Alberta - 'Sexual Assault and the Law in Canada' )

Hopefully, you'll take this opportunity to educate yourself and stop contributing to a women-blaming culture that trivializes sexual violence. Call me only when you're ready to admit you're wrong.

Maxim Magazine: Maximizing Stereotypes of Douchebaggery in Men Everywhere!

Of course I'm not a fan of Maxim magazine.

Anybody who knows me and still finds this surprising has been somnambulating through an entire acquaintance. I'm a feminist - disdaining the type of men associated with the aforementioned magazine basically comes with the territory. But it's not entirely what you think...

The reasons the publication is insulting have little to do with the endless scantily-clad, gorgeous women gracing each cover. Naturally, I try to walk the fine line between accepting female sexuality as something positive and attractive, and loathing the patriarchy's frat-boyish tendency to oppress women as mere sex objects. It's not that admiring a sexy woman is wrong, but to trivialize a woman's worth to something as minimal as her outward appearance is maddening.

They don't do this by photographing women in lingerie and bikinis. It's the condescending, misogynist articles that do it. Articles like, "How to tell your girlfriend she's fat," among others. (Incidentally, Toolish website AskMen.com has a similar article - with a comment section that makes my stomach turn. - A rant for another day, but if you'll click the link, you'll see basically exactly what was in the Maxim article.)

It's hard to flip through Maxim without ultimately arriving at the conclusion that it's run by - and panders to - immature, sexist men of questionable intellect who hate all women with whom they can't have sex or masturbate to an image of. I can't imagine any of these men actually deigning to speak with a woman unless the intention is to get into her pants.

Don't believe me?

Then what the fuck is this? (Madonna's biggest crime to these losers is having the audacity to age - and to adopt an impoverished child. And how dare Sandra Oh be on TV with a boyish figure? Side note - Don't expect me to believe you watch Grey's Anatomy simply so your girlfriends will put out, Maxim boys.)

Or this? (I love how they praise Jenna Elfman as being as "loyal as a Golden Retriever" for being in a lasting marriage. I guess you can make comparisons between women and dogs that aren't negatively looks-based! And of course they hate Janeane Garofalo - she's a feminist.)

This one is a mixed bag. ("Sorry Helen Hunt, you seem nice and smart, but we'd never have dinner with you because you have a large forehead. Perfect physical specimens of women are the only ones worth fucki - er, talking to. Wait a second - we hate talking to women, anyway. The only things they ever discuss are shopping and Grey's Anatomy. This bugs us because we secretly love Grey's - that's why we never shut up about it - and fear being talked to about it, lest we slip up and reveal the embarrassing truth. Which is only really embarrassing because we're a bunch of macho idiots who get off on ridiculous beer-commercial stereotypes about what makes us men.")

And then there's this. Okay, I'm just going to go ahead and quote it:

"NEW YORK — The top finisher in our inaugural list of unsexiest women has taken news of her selection in gallop—er, stride.

In an interview with ContactMusic.com (now that's how you get the word out!), Sarah Jessica Parker responded to her ranking among our list of The Five Unsexiest Women Alive by saying, "I believe in the old 'sticks and stones' philosophy, so frankly their words don't come close to hurting.

"I don't think I am (sexy) either."

Not only astute, Parker's reaction smashes the stereotype of the defensive, self-absorbed A-list egotist, while upholding the stereotype of the girl forced to have a sense of humor because she's yucky. We commend Sarah Jessica for her resilience—it's a quality that would be downright sexy on a hot woman!"

Sigh. Aside from the utter sexism, "yucky?" So, in keeping with the juvenile mindset, they're using the language of 5-year-olds. How apt.

Fucking Maxim magazine. Evolve already, pricks! Or, at the very least, stick to ogling the women that allow you assholes to photograph and interview them for your unenlightened rag. But keep your misogynist bullshit to yourself. You're about as amusing as a Pap test.

Go "snag" yourself!

Oh, for fuck's sake.

Typically, I have nothing against the "wiki-verse." Wikipedia, for instance, is useful - and can lead to hours of "fascinated clicking" - but what is with some of the shit I've been coming across on Wikihow lately?

"How to Act Around a Guy You Like." Yeah. Nothing except a simple "be yourself" should have fallen under that entry. Actually that entry shouldn't even exist. Why? Because it perpetuates negative, stereotypical attitudes about gender, and relationships, and I'm so fucking sick of "Cosmo" culture that revolves entirely around "snagging a man."

In our "post-feminist" world, all the media geared towards women is still feeding us this constant bullshit that we can't function without a guy, that we must spend our entire existence fitting into cookie cutter after clichéd cookie cutter ideal of What Men Want. How to get a man. How to please our man. How to keep our man.

And it all comes down to shit like this:

"Don't show off - let him do that. While you think you may be "impressing" him, guys don't really appreciate when girls show them up. They need to feel like a man, even if they are just boys."

That tired stereotype is special enough to be offensive to both sexes on many levels. It assumes that men are insecure, sexist assholes who need to feel superior to women. It assumes that there's nothing wrong with men being insecure, sexist assholes who need to feel superior to women. That's just "boys being boys" Ha. Ha. It encourages women to stifle themselves for the sake of male ego. That puts women in a deliberate position of inequality to men. And what the hell is with that condescending final line?

And then there's this classic:

"If you think that he is interested, show him a little that you are interested too, like a little flirting, but not to over the top, you don't want him to think you're desprate! Trust me, that's not the way to get things done."

This type of neurotic advice is common and stupid. Flirt, but don't flirt too much! Be forward, but don't come on too strong! Make him take notice, but not too much notice! Second guess, second guess, frantically try to achieve some arbitrary balance, blah. It's the manufactured, phony dance of calculated courtship, the likes of which Jane Austen would have scoffed at. "You don't want him to think you're desperate!" - Well, if you're consulting a list like this, then you clearly are. And if you're desperate for a man, then a man is the last thing you need.

And this last one actually took me by surprise:

"Once you got him, don't let go unless he's acting like a real ass. It won't get you a good reputation at your school or whatever if you just go around dumping guys left and right."

The fuck? It is actually being suggested that a young woman in a relationship should stay in said relationship, even if she wants out (for whatever reason), just for the sake of saving face? This pisses me off for so many reasons.

For starters, why shouldn't a girl "[dump] guys left and right" if she sees fit? I'm tired of this bullshit "slut" double standard that flies around all the time - and usually from girls about other girls. I blame the patriarchy that female sexuality is still subjected to such scrutiny, and connotations, and ass backwards notions of acceptable behavior. It's 2007 and women enjoy sex. Get over it.

Secondly, nobody should ever remain in a relationship if they no longer want to be in said relationship. And they certainly shouldn't have to justify their decisions to outsiders. Besides, if you'll see above, only assholes make the kind of judgments the advice-giver is so concerned about.

Third, what exactly constitutes "acting like an ass," anyway? It's very subjective - what might be shitty behavior for one person, another might find perfectly acceptable. To me, "acting like an ass" is writing hackneyed advice about "snagging a man."

This is so beyond overdone, by now. Enough "You need a man" brainwashing. Enough clichéd flirting and dating tips. Can't we move on from these stupid, juvenile games and just be real? I like myself the way I am, and if I want to be with somebody (I will never need to), why should I have to slip into some bogus gender role and proceed to manipulate? Worthwhile guys are not interested in all the stupid trappings. They want to get to know you.

... And people wonder why the only "Women's" magazine I read is Bitch...

The Privileged People's Government

I noticed today, as I was cleaning behind the microwave, that some unopened mail had fallen back there, apparently recently. (Yes, my family tosses mail on top of the microwave instead of some more appropriate designated spot. Old habits). Among other items of junk mail, I found a letter from the House of Commons - specifically, the office of Jim Prentice (Conservative M.P. here in Calgary, for those not in the know).

Yep. Like many Calgarians, I, too, was treated to a boastful letter packed full of gushing Conservative sentiment from a government official just tickled over the super-terrific job Harper et al have been doing since coming into power a year and a half ago. Here's what he had to say about the fantastic things that have been happening in Calgary:

"Recently our government:

• fulfilled its promise to maintain Gas Tax funding for municipalities... This funding will be used to fund environmentally sustainable municipal infrastructure projects, such as Calgary Transit expansion projects;
• pledged to refund all the GST cities pay to the Federal Government. Last year, over $23 million was returned to the City of Calgary which was used to fund capital projects in order to improve the lives of Calgarians. These projects include expansions of Heritage Park, Fort Calgary, the Calgary Zoo, the new central library branch, and the Calgary Science Centre;
• allocated $25 million inn new funding for Alberta to address local infrastructure priorities; and
• announced the consideration of up to $25 million in new funding for the Calgary Exhibition and Stampede Western Legacy Expansion Project."

Great. But, I wonder why, in the midst of all these impressive numbers and makeover promises, I see no mention of ways to improve the lives of the 3400+ homeless Calgarians. Or the 22 000+ Calgarians who live below the Poverty Line (Hi!).

Why do I see no mention of money towards subsidies, or any programs to address the needs of these people? Why is there no talk of "funding" towards the ridiculous rent prices the city has recently seen in these "prosperous" months - an issue which has put countless Full Time (minimum wage, or slightly more) workers on the street. Rent Control? Shelters? Where's the money to address our educational needs?

The Calgary Zoo? I assure you, the Calgarians below the poverty line won't be sharing in any "improvements" to it - not at $18 admission. Heritage Park? $13.95.

I went through the entire letter, and a notable portion of Calgarians - and their needs - weren't mentioned at all. I guess they just don't exist to Mr. Prentice's Grand Government.

I'm reminded of a Political Cartoon I clipped out of the paper while I was still in High School. It was during the time when Calgarians - and our leaders - were in a tizzy over the possibility of our city losing our precious Flames (Hockey Team). We were all encouraged to buy season tickets as soon as we could to feed the pocketbooks of a group of indulged, egomaniac athletes, to prevent the dismantling of one of our proudest sources of entertainment. And, in the midst of all of this, one shrewd artist gave us a cartoon that stays with me even to this day: A billboard screams, "Save Our Flames" while directly below, the crumpled form of a homeless man sleeps sitting up on a bench in the cold.

An Open Letter to the Fuckstick who Almost Killed Me...

Dear Asshole,

I know you are among friends; the incident which took place earlier has happened to me on many prior occasions to the point where my faith in humanity is practically obsolete. What makes that so fucking ridiculous is that it is a simple 5 second courtesy, unobserved by douchebags such as yourself, that continues to advance the notion that the human race is doomed. When I see jerks who have no concept of the very real suffering on this planet, and who scoff at the very idea of thinking beyond their lives and circumstances (particularly where doing something about it is concerned), it's true that I become irate. But when I can't depend on those I share said planet with to concern themselves with even the most basic appearance of civility, I can no longer restrain myself.

SO. I'm left with no other alternative but to express how unequivocally, intolerably vile I find you, prick in the white Honda Accord who gleefully sped up at the pedestrian lights while I was crossing the fucking street, only to miss me by a goddamn hair. Hey! Those flashing yellow lights? Are there for a reason, you unbelievable piece of shit. I don't care what kind of a rush you may have been in - you have wheels! I, on the other hand, am walking - and quickly, mind you, out of motherfucking COURTESY for drivers such as yourself.

By the time you decided to gun it (you bloody degenerate), I was already half way across the street. In the middle of the fucking road. Placing my life in the hands of countless strangers casually wielding thousands of pounds of metal capable of crushing me at the right speed. So what in the name of fucking hell caused you to speed towards me while I was stuck in such a vulnerable position? Apart from your complete and utter lack of respect, courtesy, and just common decency, I mean. Asshole.

Perhaps one day your dickishness will serve to actually kill somebody, and if that indeed ever takes place, I hope you're punished to the full extent of the law.

Sincerely,

The Girl Whose Family Would Have Enjoyed Suing Your Dirtbag Ass

And so it goes

I casually mentioned to my family that I was a feminist, and received a full day's worth of righteous indignation of the "you're so misguided and we feel sorry for you" variety. Apparently, I've been sucked into a "cult-like" movement that, apart from turning perfectly nice women into shrieking harpies, has no further relevance in today's world.

I don't know what annoys me more; the very notion of "post-feminism," or the misinformation that led to the dredging up of these tired, old stereotypes (not to mention having them applied to me). My brother actually said, two or three times, that "as a man, everything [I] say offends [him]." I had no choice but to take this as hollow party line, considering I can think of nothing I've ever said to him that should be offensive to any free-thinking Liberal - which he claims to be. Not even a single, idle "I hate men" uttered in a moment of frustration. (And because feminism is not about man-hating, he could not even rightly attribute the aforementioned statement to my "joining the dark side" if I'd said it).

Hmm. I'm not pristine, so I'll qualify: nothing I've said should ever have offended him as a man. I'll cop to calling him a douchebag from time to time for reasons wholly unrelated to feminism and gender. But, I digress.

I am a feminist simply because I'm a woman. Because of the constant challenge to reproductive rights, because of every double standard, every stereotype, because of the word "slut." Because of oppressive religious dogma, and because women aren't allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia. Because a shocking 96% of Egyptian women are said to have undergone Female Genital Mutilation. Because "Working mother" is a title, but "Working father" is redundant. Because I have always had one name and I don't think marriage should change it.

Because feminism IS a social justice movement, and social justice is what I live for.

And just because many, many women out there ARE feminists, but say things like "I'm not a feminist, but..."