I'm doing some baking with my brand-new oven. Did you know brand-new gas ovens smell bad when you first use them? According to the technicians at Premier Appliances, this is normal and will go away after the next few uses, but for now, there is this stinky smell in the air. Hopefully the baked potato skins I'm making for a potato skin salad will help make my kitchen smell a little better.
But you know, the stinkiness of the smell my oven is making cannot possibly compare to the stinkiness of an article I just read today. Apparently, Tracy McMillan, a writer for Mad Men and somewhat infamously the author of "Why You're Not Married" (which is now--WTF--a book), has a follow-up article, "Why You're Still Not Married."
Now I could answer that in one sentence: "Because I don't want to be." Easy. I got what I want! Ms. McMillan, on the other hand, has a much longer answer. (Her first reasons were quite the doozy: 1) You're a Bitch, 2) You're Shallow 3) You're a Slut, 4) You're a Liar, 5) You're Selfish, and 6) You're Not Good Enough.) However, she's got some new ones! Apparently...THIS is the reason for my husband-free state!
#7You're a mess. Well, okay, I know I've been in therapy. I make no apologies for that. Lots of people have. Apparently, to be "a mess," one needs to have a secret that they don't wish to share, one that's holding them back. Well, that hasn't yet stopped folks from being interested in me, and I am doubtful that it's going to. And your point?
#8 You're crazy. So McMillan sees "crazy" as anyone who likes intensity? Again, what's wrong with intensity? And if somebody's more intense, wouldn't they seek out someone equally intense or who could tolerate the intense and leave the vanilla folks to find someone else? Again, her point is?
#9 You're a dude. Well, that is really going to shock my parents when I tell them they have a son instead of a daughter. Not sure if I can describe myself as a femme anymore, but hey, if I am a dude, can I have the $0.22 added back to my paycheck?
#10 You're godless. Now, how are the people at devotions going to act when they find that out??? And if that is such a turnoff, why are there still atheists and agnostics who do get married?
Oh, but I digress. Tracy's real point is this: in order to find somebody who wants to marry you, you need to act like you don't have any personality or dreams or boundaries or anything that makes you, well, you. And you have to be straight (again, LGBTQ folks don't seem to exist in her world). If that's what it takes to get married, well, I think being single suits me quite nicely, thank you very much.
Really, I think Tracy should just stick to her day job of writing "Mad Men" scripts. At least that show is fictional. But I will say, I do agree with one sentence of hers, though not in the sarcastic way she meant it: "People are always just trying to make women feel bad, that's all. Misogynists." Yeah. They are. It's called sexist behavior and misogyny. And Tracy has shown that she is happily doing that as well.
Wow, after reading over her screed, my oven stinks a whole lot less by comparison! That's saying a lot!
Showing posts with label love. Show all posts
Showing posts with label love. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
I want a fearless love, I won't settle for anything less
I figured that "Fearless Love" was as good of a title as any for this post. This is the title track off Melissa Etheridge's latest CD, not the similarly titled Taylor Swift one (not too much of a Swift fan). I've been listening to a lot of Melissa's bluesy heartland-rock groove lately, and she is absolutely spectacular.
But all music musings aside, I am going to discuss something a little different in this post. I'm writing to discuss the phenomenon of the mainstream dating book. I know these things are as old as it gets, but I really feel so bombarded with the messages from them. It really seems like a woman with her own mind and own interests and desires is somehow not welcome in these books and that their prevailing message is that we independent and successful women need to subsume our own identities into that of our significant other's. It really makes me wonder how far we have come as a society if books like those can still make the bestseller list (meaning somebody must be buying them) and people still repeat the ideas they promote!
I was curious about a few of them, so I put on an emotional hazmat suit, flipped through them, and immediately regretted it. You have The Rules, which encourages its female readers to play hard to get and let their man decide everything. By playing hard to get, its (divorced!!) authors explained, a woman would have to downplay her own accomplishments or desires and not look for much more than a pulse in a partner. You have books for teens, which are all geared towards pleasing a guy, lest he turn into a potential boyfriend. You have those paragons of ridiculosity Steve Harvey (Act Like a Lady, Think Like a Man) and "Dr." Laura (The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands) who warn that men are "hardwired" to always want to control their wives. And you have what looks like more of the same in The Man Whisperers, which says that there's only room for one personality in the relationship and that personality sure isn't the woman's. I mean, what century are these authors even living in??? In a world where we women have made tremendous strides and most men have come to expect that we are not extensions of or mirrors for them, how is it that drivel like this still exists??? (Not to mention that not every woman wants a man, but in the dating books, gay men and lesbians don't seem to exist.) And how the heck is it that a new book is out almost every year, rehashing the same old thing?
Not only are the books sexist against both men and women (by making men seem as though they expect the world to revolve around them and making women seem like little more than marriage-minded extensions of men), heterosexist, and marriage-centric, they also make me wonder how a relationship they advise could ever be successful. Who would want a relationship that was built on deception and manipulation? Who wants a significant other who was only pretending to be a certain way? And who would really be happy with somebody who didn't care about her accomplishments or desires or anything else that made up who she was? I don't know about you, but those do not strike me as relationships that would make anybody happy or that would be all that successful if I was pretending to be something I wasn't (or following the rules, acting like a lady but thinking like a man, or man-whispering). Perhaps the relationship would work, but it does not seem like one that I would be all that happy to be in. I'm not a man, nor do I usually partner with women, but I can tell you that I would much rather be with someone who was her own person and brought her own personality to the relationship than someone who merely acted like an extension of me!
It also makes me wonder if those books aren't merely extensions of the authors' own prejudices and attitudes as well. Maybe with "Dr." Laura and Steve Harvey, it's a no-brainer, but I wonder about the others. Like, let's keep the ladies in their places by telling them that guys won't like them if they become too strong or successful. Gotta return to those good old days of being chattel. Which then really makes me wonder if the women who wrote the Rules or the Man Whisperers even follow their own guidelines and how that even works for them! Do they even practice what they preach, and if so, does that work? Or if they either don't do it or don't like it, then why in the world are they trying to make other people do it??
It's high time we heard a different voice. Isn't it time for some equality?
But all music musings aside, I am going to discuss something a little different in this post. I'm writing to discuss the phenomenon of the mainstream dating book. I know these things are as old as it gets, but I really feel so bombarded with the messages from them. It really seems like a woman with her own mind and own interests and desires is somehow not welcome in these books and that their prevailing message is that we independent and successful women need to subsume our own identities into that of our significant other's. It really makes me wonder how far we have come as a society if books like those can still make the bestseller list (meaning somebody must be buying them) and people still repeat the ideas they promote!
I was curious about a few of them, so I put on an emotional hazmat suit, flipped through them, and immediately regretted it. You have The Rules, which encourages its female readers to play hard to get and let their man decide everything. By playing hard to get, its (divorced!!) authors explained, a woman would have to downplay her own accomplishments or desires and not look for much more than a pulse in a partner. You have books for teens, which are all geared towards pleasing a guy, lest he turn into a potential boyfriend. You have those paragons of ridiculosity Steve Harvey (Act Like a Lady, Think Like a Man) and "Dr." Laura (The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands) who warn that men are "hardwired" to always want to control their wives. And you have what looks like more of the same in The Man Whisperers, which says that there's only room for one personality in the relationship and that personality sure isn't the woman's. I mean, what century are these authors even living in??? In a world where we women have made tremendous strides and most men have come to expect that we are not extensions of or mirrors for them, how is it that drivel like this still exists??? (Not to mention that not every woman wants a man, but in the dating books, gay men and lesbians don't seem to exist.) And how the heck is it that a new book is out almost every year, rehashing the same old thing?
Not only are the books sexist against both men and women (by making men seem as though they expect the world to revolve around them and making women seem like little more than marriage-minded extensions of men), heterosexist, and marriage-centric, they also make me wonder how a relationship they advise could ever be successful. Who would want a relationship that was built on deception and manipulation? Who wants a significant other who was only pretending to be a certain way? And who would really be happy with somebody who didn't care about her accomplishments or desires or anything else that made up who she was? I don't know about you, but those do not strike me as relationships that would make anybody happy or that would be all that successful if I was pretending to be something I wasn't (or following the rules, acting like a lady but thinking like a man, or man-whispering). Perhaps the relationship would work, but it does not seem like one that I would be all that happy to be in. I'm not a man, nor do I usually partner with women, but I can tell you that I would much rather be with someone who was her own person and brought her own personality to the relationship than someone who merely acted like an extension of me!
It also makes me wonder if those books aren't merely extensions of the authors' own prejudices and attitudes as well. Maybe with "Dr." Laura and Steve Harvey, it's a no-brainer, but I wonder about the others. Like, let's keep the ladies in their places by telling them that guys won't like them if they become too strong or successful. Gotta return to those good old days of being chattel. Which then really makes me wonder if the women who wrote the Rules or the Man Whisperers even follow their own guidelines and how that even works for them! Do they even practice what they preach, and if so, does that work? Or if they either don't do it or don't like it, then why in the world are they trying to make other people do it??
It's high time we heard a different voice. Isn't it time for some equality?
Saturday, October 9, 2010
In memoriam
Although the shocking news about Tyler Clementi's suicide broke last week, I've been feeling an overwhelming sense of anger and emotional draining over it. I did not know Mr. Clementi personally, nor did I know the other LGBT students who have taken their lives as a result of bullying. But as an ally and as a person who believes in the dignity of everybody, I feel compelled to write about it.
I can't get over how people seem to think that bullying and harrassment is somehow OK, as long as it's directed at certain individuals and groups. I just don't understand who decides which people somehow aren't deserving of basic human dignity, and I don't understand how that sort of nonsense just is perpetuated. What is it that marks one group an easy target and another off limits? What is it that gives people the feeling that they can do something this cruel?
Part of me feels it has to do with the de-humanizing of certain groups. If you mark certain people as somehow less than or not even human, it makes it a lot easier to perpetuate cruel acts against them. If you see your own group as the default or the "norm," it makes anyone else come across as different and less than. In my previous post, "Same Old Song and Dance," I described a heartless "fake prom" that was put on to discriminate against the LGBT and disabled students at a high school in Mississippi. Clearly, the cowardly and mean-spirited folks who hosted it saw this group as less than the rest of the student body and wanted them out.
What we need to do is NORMALIZE EQUALITY. We have come a long way, certainly, but we cannot stop. We need to make things like bullying a thing of the past by recognizing that EVERYONE is valuable and EVERYONE deserves respect. It doesn't matter what your political party or holy book or parents may say. We are all people and we all deserve respect.
I can't get over how people seem to think that bullying and harrassment is somehow OK, as long as it's directed at certain individuals and groups. I just don't understand who decides which people somehow aren't deserving of basic human dignity, and I don't understand how that sort of nonsense just is perpetuated. What is it that marks one group an easy target and another off limits? What is it that gives people the feeling that they can do something this cruel?
Part of me feels it has to do with the de-humanizing of certain groups. If you mark certain people as somehow less than or not even human, it makes it a lot easier to perpetuate cruel acts against them. If you see your own group as the default or the "norm," it makes anyone else come across as different and less than. In my previous post, "Same Old Song and Dance," I described a heartless "fake prom" that was put on to discriminate against the LGBT and disabled students at a high school in Mississippi. Clearly, the cowardly and mean-spirited folks who hosted it saw this group as less than the rest of the student body and wanted them out.
What we need to do is NORMALIZE EQUALITY. We have come a long way, certainly, but we cannot stop. We need to make things like bullying a thing of the past by recognizing that EVERYONE is valuable and EVERYONE deserves respect. It doesn't matter what your political party or holy book or parents may say. We are all people and we all deserve respect.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Crazy Little Thing Called Love
Well, with all those posts that were on the angry side, I figured that the best thing to do would be to write about something completely and totally different. So you will get a lesson from me about the wonderful Magic of Love! Yes, that's right! Loooove! So put away your Cosmopolitan magazine and ditch your old novels because the revel's gonna learn ya better than school in the arts of love.
Okay, you're probably wondering, "But why are you doing this?" or "What could an old, cold cynic like yourself know about love?" Good question! You're absolutely right, I have for the longest time been the biggest old cynic around. But now I will turn my act around and dedicate this post in all its entirety to LOVE. And that's not all! Any good academic (or grant manager) knows, you must absolutely cite your sources, so I will tell you the font of wisdom from whence I quaffed to get these pearls of wisdom.
So this is the revel's post about Love. As taught to me by the countless chick flicks and romantic comedies I have been forced to sit through by my friends and accomplices.
Revel's Guide to Finding Love
1. If someone creepy is stalking you, don't give him a restraining order, give him a chance at a relationship with you!
Think stalkers are scary and creepy? Think again! It's not stalking, it's romantic! That creeper is only so concerned about your well-being, so give the poor thing a chance. Never mind that it might be bad for your well-being to worry about being stalked. Look at Twilight. The pasty vampire dude with the fwoopy hair is always stalking his human love interest, Bella. And look where that gets him! Tons of teen girls thinking he's like the greatest thing ever, not to mention the love of Bella. So if you find yourself in that situation, consider yourself lucky!
2. You must be a middle-to-upper-class white, heterosexual female. Your wisecracking sidekicks don't have to be, though.
Look at all the leads in the chick flicks that have come out over the last five years. You'd be hard-pressed to find a minority woman as the lead role. You'd be even harder-pressed to find one that was either underemployed or had another woman as her love interest. It's all the same old, boy-meets-white-straight-girl story. Then take a look at the secondary roles. Wondering where all the gals who don't fit that category get to go?
3. You must also be conventionally thin and beautiful. If you're not, then you must become that way.
Observe how all the middle-to-upper class, white, hetero ladies who are cast as the leads are all conventionally attractive. Consider yourself average or geeky-looking? Well, don't worry, you can always get a makeover to show people that your outer beauty matches your inner beauty! Observe how the protagonists in The Princess Diaries, The Devil Wears Prada, and My Big Fat Greek Wedding all shed their geeky image and wind up getting the love of their lives. Romance is for the pretty! Don't feel like going the distance? Don't worry, I hear that they might still have open slots for the wisecracking sidekick role.
4. There are only two kinds of guys that matter. The guy you are dating who turns out to be totally icky and the icky guy you wind up dating. The guy friend does not exist. Observe the countless films made with a sharp, motivated female lead and a total dunderhead of a date for her: Knocked Up, The Ugly Truth, and The Proposal. Think your guy is great for you? Don't be an idiot! He will soon will wind up having some awful personality flaw, and you can't have that! Now think about that icky guy who gave you some lame pickup line in the dive bar. THAT is your future husband. Go find him now before he passes out in his own vomit at the dive bar.
5. "Career Women" are total harpies.
Note how all the women in the films mentioned in #4 are strong and motivated and have jobs they like. Well, that's why they can't find a man and are thus utterly pathetic excuses for females! They might as well turn in their second X-chromosome! Oh wait, that's why there's the icky guys they must fall in love with to keep from turning into and staying total monsters! Don't believe me? Well, you don't have to read this post to hear it! See my 2008 post, "Why You Should Marry a Doormat" for added info.
6. You must be tamed. By that icky guy who can rescue you from the harpyness you are becoming.
This one goes without saying. And there are many ways to tame you, too! You can learn to love his ickiness and realize that he truly is, deep down, an icky guy worth loving. Or you can wind up accidentally getting pregnant by him and learning to love that. After all, isn't that what happens in these tales, otherwise there'd be no story. But hey, it's what people in love do, right?
That is all. Revel has spoken. Now follow those rules and you will have the mens eating out of your manicured hands! (And you might just find a ring on the left one in due time...)
Okay, you're probably wondering, "But why are you doing this?" or "What could an old, cold cynic like yourself know about love?" Good question! You're absolutely right, I have for the longest time been the biggest old cynic around. But now I will turn my act around and dedicate this post in all its entirety to LOVE. And that's not all! Any good academic (or grant manager) knows, you must absolutely cite your sources, so I will tell you the font of wisdom from whence I quaffed to get these pearls of wisdom.
So this is the revel's post about Love. As taught to me by the countless chick flicks and romantic comedies I have been forced to sit through by my friends and accomplices.
Revel's Guide to Finding Love
1. If someone creepy is stalking you, don't give him a restraining order, give him a chance at a relationship with you!
Think stalkers are scary and creepy? Think again! It's not stalking, it's romantic! That creeper is only so concerned about your well-being, so give the poor thing a chance. Never mind that it might be bad for your well-being to worry about being stalked. Look at Twilight. The pasty vampire dude with the fwoopy hair is always stalking his human love interest, Bella. And look where that gets him! Tons of teen girls thinking he's like the greatest thing ever, not to mention the love of Bella. So if you find yourself in that situation, consider yourself lucky!
2. You must be a middle-to-upper-class white, heterosexual female. Your wisecracking sidekicks don't have to be, though.
Look at all the leads in the chick flicks that have come out over the last five years. You'd be hard-pressed to find a minority woman as the lead role. You'd be even harder-pressed to find one that was either underemployed or had another woman as her love interest. It's all the same old, boy-meets-white-straight-girl story. Then take a look at the secondary roles. Wondering where all the gals who don't fit that category get to go?
3. You must also be conventionally thin and beautiful. If you're not, then you must become that way.
Observe how all the middle-to-upper class, white, hetero ladies who are cast as the leads are all conventionally attractive. Consider yourself average or geeky-looking? Well, don't worry, you can always get a makeover to show people that your outer beauty matches your inner beauty! Observe how the protagonists in The Princess Diaries, The Devil Wears Prada, and My Big Fat Greek Wedding all shed their geeky image and wind up getting the love of their lives. Romance is for the pretty! Don't feel like going the distance? Don't worry, I hear that they might still have open slots for the wisecracking sidekick role.
4. There are only two kinds of guys that matter. The guy you are dating who turns out to be totally icky and the icky guy you wind up dating. The guy friend does not exist. Observe the countless films made with a sharp, motivated female lead and a total dunderhead of a date for her: Knocked Up, The Ugly Truth, and The Proposal. Think your guy is great for you? Don't be an idiot! He will soon will wind up having some awful personality flaw, and you can't have that! Now think about that icky guy who gave you some lame pickup line in the dive bar. THAT is your future husband. Go find him now before he passes out in his own vomit at the dive bar.
5. "Career Women" are total harpies.
Note how all the women in the films mentioned in #4 are strong and motivated and have jobs they like. Well, that's why they can't find a man and are thus utterly pathetic excuses for females! They might as well turn in their second X-chromosome! Oh wait, that's why there's the icky guys they must fall in love with to keep from turning into and staying total monsters! Don't believe me? Well, you don't have to read this post to hear it! See my 2008 post, "Why You Should Marry a Doormat" for added info.
6. You must be tamed. By that icky guy who can rescue you from the harpyness you are becoming.
This one goes without saying. And there are many ways to tame you, too! You can learn to love his ickiness and realize that he truly is, deep down, an icky guy worth loving. Or you can wind up accidentally getting pregnant by him and learning to love that. After all, isn't that what happens in these tales, otherwise there'd be no story. But hey, it's what people in love do, right?
That is all. Revel has spoken. Now follow those rules and you will have the mens eating out of your manicured hands! (And you might just find a ring on the left one in due time...)
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Born
I was born to laugh
I learned to laugh through my tears.
I was born to love.
I'm gonna learn to love without fear.
Pour me a glass of wine
Talk deep into the night.
Who knows what we'll find?
Intuition, deja vu
The Holy Ghost haunting you,
Whatever you got, I don't mind.
Put your elbows on the table.
I will listen long as I am able.
There is nowhere I'd rather be.
Secret fears, the supernatural,
Thank god for this new laughter.
Thank god the joke's on me.
We've seen the landfill rainbow,
We've seen the junkyard love.
Baby, that's no place for you and me.
I was born to laugh
I learned to laugh through my tears.
I was born to love.
I'm gonna learn to love without fear.
--Linford Detweiler and Karen Bergquist (Over the Rhine)
I learned to laugh through my tears.
I was born to love.
I'm gonna learn to love without fear.
Pour me a glass of wine
Talk deep into the night.
Who knows what we'll find?
Intuition, deja vu
The Holy Ghost haunting you,
Whatever you got, I don't mind.
Put your elbows on the table.
I will listen long as I am able.
There is nowhere I'd rather be.
Secret fears, the supernatural,
Thank god for this new laughter.
Thank god the joke's on me.
We've seen the landfill rainbow,
We've seen the junkyard love.
Baby, that's no place for you and me.
I was born to laugh
I learned to laugh through my tears.
I was born to love.
I'm gonna learn to love without fear.
--Linford Detweiler and Karen Bergquist (Over the Rhine)
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Holy matrimony!
Well, you've read my marriage-equality posts, so I'm sure you have a gist of what this one is about. I'm really happy about Washington DC recognizing all marriages, including the same-sex ones, performed elsewhere. I know it's not quite full marriage equality, but hopefully the remaining 45 states will go the route of Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, and Iowa.
What bothers me is the way several conservative groups and individuals (Ms. Prejean, I'm lookin' right atcha) have been saying that legalizing gay marriage will infringe on their own religious freedom. Or by saying that they are being "forced" to watch as all these things contrary to their own beliefs are unfolding. Some even say that they should be able to refuse service to a same-sex couple because they personally believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Only.
Well, from the way they talk, you'd think someone was forcing them to follow a state-sanctioned religion or having the state meddling around with their church's affairs. That is, after all, what "freedom of religion" protects against. Or that they're being "forced" to marry someone of their own gender. Sheesh. But no, it's just the heightened visibility and rights of the gay community that bothers them. And honestly, I think their reactions are completely wrong.
What they're basically saying, instead, is that their "right" to discriminate against someone because of his/her orientation is being eroded. If marriage rights are granted for both hetero and same-sex couples, it's making the same-sex couple just as visible as the hetero one. And I can see that that clearly scares some folks. As Harvey Milk said way back in the 1970s, "a homosexual with power...that's scary stuff."
And frankly, I don't think that they have much cause to complain. NO ONE should discriminate, let alone have the right to discriminate, against who they can and cannot serve. The reason why we have anti-discrimination laws in this great country is to make sure that everyone is treated with dignity, that all men and women are treated equal. Should every church have to perform same-sex weddings? No, because that is a matter left up to them (remember the separation of church and state?). But should someone have the right to refuse service to a same-sex couple simply because the couple contains two men or two women? A big fat NO. That's not a right. If you are basically asking for permission to discriminate against people you don't like or whose very existence bothers you, then you don't have that right. Sorry.
Let's look at it in another way. Suppose a Christian photographer thinks that every relationship should be a "good, Christian marriage." Well, if that photographer is hired to take pictures at a Jewish wedding, s/he would be taking pictures of a couple whose relationship certainly isn't a "Christian marriage." Should s/he have the right to say no after taking the assignment? Should s/he be able to walk out if all those yarmulkes and stars of David freak him/her out? Of course not. If you have a job, the most logical (and dare I say it? moral) thing would be to DO that job, no matter who your clients are. And no one is being "forced" to see their "morals" eroding away. If they don't agree with same-sex marriage, well, then they don't have to go to Maine/Iowa/Vermont/Connecticut/Massachusetts and marry someone of their gender. No one is making them do that. They are welcome to believe what they want about whomever they want, but it crosses the line when they try to take that right away from someone else.
What bothers me is the way several conservative groups and individuals (Ms. Prejean, I'm lookin' right atcha) have been saying that legalizing gay marriage will infringe on their own religious freedom. Or by saying that they are being "forced" to watch as all these things contrary to their own beliefs are unfolding. Some even say that they should be able to refuse service to a same-sex couple because they personally believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Only.
Well, from the way they talk, you'd think someone was forcing them to follow a state-sanctioned religion or having the state meddling around with their church's affairs. That is, after all, what "freedom of religion" protects against. Or that they're being "forced" to marry someone of their own gender. Sheesh. But no, it's just the heightened visibility and rights of the gay community that bothers them. And honestly, I think their reactions are completely wrong.
What they're basically saying, instead, is that their "right" to discriminate against someone because of his/her orientation is being eroded. If marriage rights are granted for both hetero and same-sex couples, it's making the same-sex couple just as visible as the hetero one. And I can see that that clearly scares some folks. As Harvey Milk said way back in the 1970s, "a homosexual with power...that's scary stuff."
And frankly, I don't think that they have much cause to complain. NO ONE should discriminate, let alone have the right to discriminate, against who they can and cannot serve. The reason why we have anti-discrimination laws in this great country is to make sure that everyone is treated with dignity, that all men and women are treated equal. Should every church have to perform same-sex weddings? No, because that is a matter left up to them (remember the separation of church and state?). But should someone have the right to refuse service to a same-sex couple simply because the couple contains two men or two women? A big fat NO. That's not a right. If you are basically asking for permission to discriminate against people you don't like or whose very existence bothers you, then you don't have that right. Sorry.
Let's look at it in another way. Suppose a Christian photographer thinks that every relationship should be a "good, Christian marriage." Well, if that photographer is hired to take pictures at a Jewish wedding, s/he would be taking pictures of a couple whose relationship certainly isn't a "Christian marriage." Should s/he have the right to say no after taking the assignment? Should s/he be able to walk out if all those yarmulkes and stars of David freak him/her out? Of course not. If you have a job, the most logical (and dare I say it? moral) thing would be to DO that job, no matter who your clients are. And no one is being "forced" to see their "morals" eroding away. If they don't agree with same-sex marriage, well, then they don't have to go to Maine/Iowa/Vermont/Connecticut/Massachusetts and marry someone of their gender. No one is making them do that. They are welcome to believe what they want about whomever they want, but it crosses the line when they try to take that right away from someone else.
Friday, December 12, 2008
True love, you can't buy it
Ran through my presentation for my conference yesterday. It is good, but waaay too long! I have to shave about ten to fifteen minutes off of it or else run the risk of crowding out the other speakers. We did a mock conference yesterday with the GWS and AAS (that's Gender/Women's Studies and Asian American Studies) people, where we practiced our speeches and prepared for questions the audience might have. The other ten presenters and I all are looking forward to our capstone conference on Monday (or as we like to call it, Our Big Fat Undergrad Conference).
Made me realize how enamored I am with the study of feminist scholarship and women's studies. It sounds silly, to be this enthralled with an inanimate program of study, but I just get such a rush out of debating gender norms, challenging standards, and looking at the perspectives of marginalized groups. I just can't get over it. Hell, when one of my friends called me today to ask what I was up to, I responded, "Oh, just fighting hegemony and smashing the patriarchy. And you?" It was partially meant to be facetious, since I'm the one who got him interested in feminism, and partially true (I'd been practicing for the conference). But I love it so much. That's why I'm applying to get my M.A. in it (hopefully!) or my Ph.D. in Women's History. If I could get something beyond an M.A. (like a Ph.D. or if I thought I'd be good at social work, an M.S.W.) I so would. I could see myself spending years and years on it and not having much of an issue with the amount of time. But most colleges don't offer much beyond a bachelor's in it. Three colleges I'm applying to will give me an M.A. if I am accepted. And hopefully they will take me (fingers crossed). Sadly, my school does not offer anything beyond a bachelor's degree in GWS. I wish it did. I would go the full way with it if they did offer that.
Wow, I just realized I sound like some silly fangirl or like I was talking about a person. But this is one thing that just will not go gently into that dark night. I need more. So much more.
And if you're in the area, please come to my Conference on Monday! I think I'm one of the first ones to present. Yes, my paper is about crisis intervention (another passion of mine), not the happiest topic, but it's gonna totally rock! And the other papers deal with all kinds of neat topics: online gaming, theme parties, gay rights, anarchy, the concept of white trash, childbirth, natural disasters, and prisons. Lots of topics for everyone's tastes.
Made me realize how enamored I am with the study of feminist scholarship and women's studies. It sounds silly, to be this enthralled with an inanimate program of study, but I just get such a rush out of debating gender norms, challenging standards, and looking at the perspectives of marginalized groups. I just can't get over it. Hell, when one of my friends called me today to ask what I was up to, I responded, "Oh, just fighting hegemony and smashing the patriarchy. And you?" It was partially meant to be facetious, since I'm the one who got him interested in feminism, and partially true (I'd been practicing for the conference). But I love it so much. That's why I'm applying to get my M.A. in it (hopefully!) or my Ph.D. in Women's History. If I could get something beyond an M.A. (like a Ph.D. or if I thought I'd be good at social work, an M.S.W.) I so would. I could see myself spending years and years on it and not having much of an issue with the amount of time. But most colleges don't offer much beyond a bachelor's in it. Three colleges I'm applying to will give me an M.A. if I am accepted. And hopefully they will take me (fingers crossed). Sadly, my school does not offer anything beyond a bachelor's degree in GWS. I wish it did. I would go the full way with it if they did offer that.
Wow, I just realized I sound like some silly fangirl or like I was talking about a person. But this is one thing that just will not go gently into that dark night. I need more. So much more.
And if you're in the area, please come to my Conference on Monday! I think I'm one of the first ones to present. Yes, my paper is about crisis intervention (another passion of mine), not the happiest topic, but it's gonna totally rock! And the other papers deal with all kinds of neat topics: online gaming, theme parties, gay rights, anarchy, the concept of white trash, childbirth, natural disasters, and prisons. Lots of topics for everyone's tastes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
