The Hathor Legacy

A Thursday Interruption: Billy Collins! NATURAL WOMAN! Some classical, IDK.

Maria — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 07:01:47 +0000

www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVu4Me_n91Y

OMG I love how into the poem he gets!!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtYfs4NlQWM

<3 Oh, Joseph Gordon-Levitt. <3 Covers can be such fun.

HERE ARE TWO MORE COVERS OMG.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo_BadXTA54

A classical cover of “Poker Face”

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UlJ69byR3w

And one of “Rude Boy!”

Related posts:

A Thursday Interruption: Marina and the Diamonds, reflecting on Britney Spears, Little Boots
A Thursday Interruption: thecocknbullkid, more on Badu’s “Window Seat,” and some thoughts on Rihanna’s “Rude Boy.” Also: an octopus.
A Thursday Interruption: Janelle Monae’s “Tightrope,” Matt and Kim’s “Lesson Learned,” and some kick ass reflections on Ke$ha and Beyonce

Midweek Media: an anti-rape campaign that focuses on men

Jennifer Kesler — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 17:11:33 +0000

BitterBuffalo has found an anti-rape campaign that focuses on what men can do to prevent rape. This should be the norm, but instead most campaigns focus on what women can do to avoid rape, which is sick not only because it puts the responsibility on the targets of crime rather than the criminals, but also because when criminals are denied one target, they just move onto another. So there is worse than no point in advising the targets of crime on avoidance.

This campaign from MenCanStopRape.org is different:

It shows four couples. Above each couple is the slogan “My strength is not for hurting.” At the bottom is the slogan “Men can stop rape.” In all the images, the men look directly into the camera while the women look off to the side.

The first couple is a young Asian man and woman. It says, “So when she changed her mind, I stopped.” The second couple is a young white man and woman with dark hair. It says, “So when she was drunk, I backed off.” The third couple is a young man of color and a white man, and it says, “So when I wanted to and he didn’t, we didn’t.” The fourth a final couple is a young white blond man and woman, and it says, “So when I paid for our date, she didn’t owe me.”

Related posts:

The choice to wear the niqab or hijab

Jennifer Kesler — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:17:42 +0000

Equality is largely about everyone having equal choices and options. In the US in the 70s and 80s, some (educated, career-prepped, privileged) feminists spoke out against “housewives” and their choice to make a career of managing the household and/or raising kids responsibly. This was wrong. It was fair to point out that some women felt they had no choice but to be “housewives.” It was fair to point out social and economic factors that discouraged women from any other occupation. It was even fair to point out social factors that predisposed women to make that choice. But it was never right to suggest that women who chose to embrace a traditional wife/mother role were some sort of traitors to women’s liberation.

And of course, shaking their heads all along at this ruckus, were the women who never had any choice but to somehow both earn a living and raise kids.

A debate has arisen since France started talking about banning public wearing of the burqa. France says they’re concerned about maintaining secularism and equal rights for women. Is this the same France that condemned the US recently for attempting to extradite a child rapist?

CNN’s “Belief Blog” has up a video article about women in the US who choose to wear the niqab or hijab. It interviews women who say if they didn’t want to wear Islamic face veils, then they wouldn’t, because it’s not required. One woman, Nadia, chooses to cover her face and body because it’s a way to cover those body parts “you don’t want seen by people who are not in your close family… You don’t need to see my whole body to know me. You can just speak to me.”

What a novel concept. In societies like mine, what I wear and how I look in it is constantly assumed to say something about my sexual availability/desirability to the master gender. Every time I attempt to engage socially with another human being, there’s a risk that their ongoing inner dialog about how my body looks will drown out everything I have to say or offer. This woman uses these Islamic garments to force people to either go deeper or leave her alone.

Aliya feels the same way about a hijab forcing people to engage her on an intellectual level rather than a body-appraising sex-object one. But she elects not to wear the niqab or full burqa because she feels it would hinder her professional aspirations (I assume she means by making her stand out more from her peers than the hijab alone).

These women born and raised in the U.S. have been lectured by random strangers at grocery stores about how “we don’t do that here.” Of course, this demonstrates that no matter what a woman does, some people are going to judge her appearance. But there’s nothing we can do about that alone. How different is the choice to wear covering religious garments from the choice to wear a mumu, or spandex exercise wear or whatever else a woman chooses to wear? When comes the part of equality where we get to stop being judged like cattle at a county fair?

Related posts:

FYI: better spam control features?

Jennifer Kesler — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:40:23 +0000

Dear readers, we’ve been aware for some time that Akismet, the default WordPress anti-spam solution, is catching quite a few legitimate comments in its spam filters. We always catch and post those before they get automatically deleted, but it’s no fun having a comment sit in the mod queue until we get to it, when there’s a lively discussion going and you’re trying to make a contribution to it.

We’re currently testing a succession of plugins to see which ones will do a better job. We need your help:

Please tell us if you find you’re blocked from posting a comment at all. Shouldn’t happen, but one never knows.
Please tell us if the site gives you a “second chance” to post your comment. Depending which plugin we’re testing, it could give you a message telling you to go back and try again, or it might give you a captcha form. It will do this if you use certain words, but if we find a particular word is inconveniencing more readers than it is preventing spammers, we will adjust the “bad word list” accordingly.
If you encounter any other problems with your comments, let us know.

Thanks in advance for your help!

Related posts:

Why did the mean admin not post my comment?

Jennifer Kesler — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 18:18:47 +0000

Here’s a newsflash: if you are overflowing with male privilege and don’t realize it, you’ll have some trouble getting your comments through moderation. Why? Because your rights are not more important than the rights of all our other readers, and I won’t tolerate your offending them with your bullshit just because you have been assured all your life that your bullshit doesn’t smell. It does. You have been lied to. Let’s look at an example.

In a recent post about The Tubes’ video “She’s a Beauty”, I mentioned that I considered the only black woman in the video being cast as a cave woman to be a bit of a race fail. One commenter, Janbo, made a thoughtful point about how it could be more a comment on race than a race fail. This gave me pause – Janbo is right. It certainly could be viewed that way, and I don’t doubt that was the band’s intention, so perhaps it’s not a fail. Note that Janbo disagreed with me and not only did I post her comment, but I acknowledged her viewpoint as perfectly valid. I mention this because: what do guys with bruised male privilege always tell us? Say it with me, class: you’re censoring comments you don’t agree with, you horrid person.

Next up we have Christopher, a white guy. What’s about the second thing Christopher says? He assures us that he is not offended by the black cave woman. Yeah? That’s about as relevant as a Democrat saying, “I wasn’t offended when someone said all Republicans were child-molesting, baby-barbecuing serial killers.” I mean, I wasn’t “offended” by the black cave woman, either – I’m a white woman, so her presentation affects no one’s view of me. I was thinking critically about how that character might impact the perception of black woman. Janbo had thought critically, too, and found another way to look at it. Christopher just offered his own white male viewpoint, apparently assuming we would find it relevant and valuable because…?

In Christopher’s defense, he like everyone else has been told all his life that the white male viewpoint is the default. It’s the one that matters. No one really needs to look at things from any other viewpoint. But the whole point of equality activism is to challenge that idea. We folks-other-than-white-men are asserting that our viewpoints matter, too. And sometimes they’re a lot more relevant.

Anyway, I actually let that comment through because I wanted to address the male privilege in it. It was the next comment I didn’t allow. First, some background: the rest of his original comment had interpreted the video as warning men against “high maintenance” women. In my response, I linked him to the article in which I explain that high maintenance is a sexist term I never want to hear again. Does Christopher read that article? I see no sign he did in his response, which is the comment I deleted:

People use the term “high maintenance” to describe certain women for one reason- because they are.

Obvious total failure to engage with the point of my article. Clearly, he’s too special to acknowledge my points, but I should listen to him. Wonder why he would think that?

Women use this same term to describe certain men and to describe other women. Men also use the term to describe other men. It’s not a gender specific term, and not one exclusively used my men.

Quite a reach. I know a few scattered people use it this way, but can anyone produce 6 TV show references to a man being “high maintenance”? That aren’t jokes? It absolutely is a gendered term in pop culture, and our comment guidelines clearly ban the use of gendered terms. Again, the rules don’t apply to Christopher!

These are the folks who may be out with you, but still have one eye on the door; or as Carly Simon lamented “one eye in the mirror.”

And we -men and women- tend to fall at least once for these types. They’re beautiful and seductive; they attract the attention of others. They can have anyone they want, for as long as they want, and they carry themselves as such. They’re fascinating, and we feel more powerful and beautiful just being in their presence.

Oh, yes, they are. Except, no, wait. I find them repulsive! Despite Christopher’s categorical statement that these people are all this stuff, period, I’ve always found them pitiful because I knew deep down, they were just deeply insecure. I never felt more powerful and beautiful in their presence, because I have always felt pretty damn powerful and, in my own way, beautiful. I never found these people fascinating because insecurity is very boring.

The song “She’s A Beauty” articulates these feelings quite well. Human insecurity draws us to seek acceptance from those more beautiful; and it’s a dangerous trap for both males and females. Notice the expressionless face of the dominatrix which seems to say “I turn you on without putting out any effort. It’s all just a sell, and you’re just another sucker in the game.” Fee Waybill is simply advising us all not to fall victim to the vanity which is beauty.

Once again, opinion stated as fact – another no-no in our comment policy. Christopher doesn’t know what Fee Waybill’s intent behind the lyrics is anymore than I do, but he feels entitled to speak as if he does: that’s male privilege for you. It shouldn’t exist.

Related posts:

McLeod’s Daughter’s

scarlett — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 16:03:35 +0000

Australian drama series McLeod’s Daughters (2001-8) was never going to win awards for its sharp, witty writing (nothing credible at least – the Logies don’t count). In the dozen or so episodes that I watched, it was frequently highly predictable with extremely basic camera tricks. But at the same time, it’s one of the strongest female casts I’ve encountered, with the male characters largely peripheral, orbiting around the women. Imagine Desperate Housewives, only with women you can respect.

It starts off with Tess McLeod (Birdie Carter) going to stay with her older half-sister Claire (Lisa Chapelle) following the death of their father Jack on Drover’s Run, Jack’s farm in South Australia. They spent their childhood together but have barely seen each other since Tess’s mother left with Tess when she was four. The homestead is run by Meg (Sonia Todd) with her daughter Jodi (Rachel Campini) living with her, and shortly into season one they bring in local girl Becky Howard (Jessica Napier). There’s a few men who feature in the series, most notably those belonging to the Ryan family who run the next farm over, but they’re largely used to further the women’s storylines.

There’s initially some friction between Claire and Tess; Tess is ignorant as to the ins and outs of country life (in one of the show’s funnier moments she buys a dairy cow because she wants fresh milk for her coffee, not realising just how much milk one cow produces each day) and she and Claire often clash over the best way to run the farm. Halfway through the first season, where I got up to, they’re slowly working out their differences and forming a closer bond, with Tess learning the nuances of farm and country life. Claire in particular knows a hell of a lot when it comes to running a farm, partly fueled by the determination to prove that one of Jack McLeod’s daughters can run the farm, and Tess demonstrates a willingness to learn.

Meg provides much of the backstory to the show with her memories of Jack, life on the farm and the neighbouring town that stretches back before even Claire can remember. Jodi actually felt a little superfluous, although Campani was one of the last cast members to leave the show, so maybe she gets to do more as the series goes on.

But one of the stand-out storylines I’ve seen so far is when local barmaid Becky is raped by her boss. Becky has a reputation as being promiscuous, see, and while there isn’t a lot of dialogue between her and her boss about it, it’s clear that the guy is both so full of his sense of entitlement and considers Becky to be so beneath him that he honestly doesn’t see that he did anything wrong. There’s some contention between the main characters about whether it actually happened – Meg in particular, while believing Becky was raped, is reluctant to believe that a married man who has been a stalwart of the community would do it, while Tess points out that Becky has nothing to gain by making such an accusation against such a man. But what I liked about the storyline was we, the viewer, know it happened; the writers and producers don’t shy away from the fact that married, stalwart members of the community can do such a thing, or try to excuse the man’s actions on account of Becky’s reputation. In a very cool, if somewhat unrealistic, scene, when Becky is being harassed by a bunch of men, Claire and Tess come riding to the rescue, Tess literally scooping Becky onto her horse and riding off with her. (I say unrealistic because no way could Carter with those spindly arms of hers hoist an adult onto a horse one-handed.) Claire and Tess end up taking Becky in and Becky becomes an integral part to Drover’s Run. (Though I wish they had explained how a barmaid came to be so useful on a farm.)

Meanwhile, in an ongoing arc, Tess is enjoying a flirtation with Nick Ryan, which hasn’t gone anywhere at the point I got up to, but it gave me a few chuckles because the Ryan men exist on the periphery, either to provide an antagonist in the form of the father (the Ryans are far better off than the McLeod’s and the Ryan farm in far better shape) or a potential love-interest for the women. There’s also Terry Dodge, Meg’s friend-on-off love interest, who I can’t remember having a single scene that didn’t involve Meg.

As far as the Bechdel test goes, not only does McLeod’s pass it brilliantly, but it often fails to do the reverse; have two men talking to each other about something other than women. In an ideal world, we want to see media representations of men and women that are equal; men talking to men, women talking to women, men and women talking to each other about every subject under the sun. But in lieu of that, and in light of the amount male-dominated storylines out there – with female-dominated storylines often reduced to romance and clothes – it’s nice to see a show dominated by women where romantic relationships account for a small fraction of the conversation, and discussions about clothes are frequently limited to what’s the most comfortable for that kind of work.

As I said, McLeod’s Daughters doesn’t grab your attention with its sharp writing or layered characterisations. It does, however, feature a strong cast of women who are highly competent at work that’s traditionally considered a man’s job, and who don’t while away the days talking about men and whether or not a certain guy fancies them. (Though they do that sometimes. After they’ve finished discussing the price of cattle and fixing the fences.) And I think that makes them a good addition in the search for good women characters.

Related posts:

Links of Great Interest:Tila Tequila!!

Maria — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 07:00:03 +0000

Mel Gibson’s tirade as a teachable moment.

The Safe Cosmetics Act as is is bad for small businesses.

One report on the abuse Tila Tequila suffered at a recent event. Note the veiled misogyny embedded throughout. Here’re some pics of Tila as she recovers from her injuries. Here’s a write-up at the Village Voice. Quote from this last:

There were several rubber dildos hurled at her–pretty sure the sex toys missed her, but it was hard to keep track at the time– along with beer cans, Faygo containers, Stryofoam cups, liquor bottles, cigarettes, mustard, half a lemon, a pizza slice, a pearl bracelet, a pudding cup, an unopened can of ICP’s self-branded energy drink Spazmatic, part of a watermelon allegedly soaked in feces and urine, a clothed baby doll, a mini Mag Lite, a bag of chicken tenderloin.

More on “Jailing Girls For Men’s Crimes”

Soooooo the song of 2010 argues that women are gold diggers, and are obligated to put out to “Nice Guys?” Hat tip to the Other Patrick.

Dating site for ugly people.

Several AWESOME links from Jha’s linkfest:

Wheelchair Dancer at Feministe on the new Afghan woman image

Stressed thoughts on the Eminem/Rihanna video.

A review of Wonderdark

An article about Australian actresses who are developing are name for themselves nationally and overseas

THIS JUST IN: High heels hurt your feet, but don’t stop wearing them, kk?

This would be a GREAT week to start Heliothaumic, the steampunk/ SF webcomic with POC elves, goblin vampires, and magic.

Related posts:

Alan Simpson should be put out to pasture

Jennifer Kesler — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:50:26 +0000

Obama advisor Alan Simpson likened Social Security to a “milk cow with three hundred ten million tits” recently. In so doing, he managed to piss off Democrats, people who receive or hope to someday receive Social Security, and the National Organization of Women. It’s a disparaging comment, a sexist comment and an extremely privileged comment from someone who’s too wealthy to depend on Social Security.

For those who are unfamiliar with Social Security in the United States: all your life, deductions are taken from every paycheck for Social Security. You pay into it your entire working life. Then, at retirement age, you collect a monthly check, which is for a pretty modest amount. It’s intended to supplement your life savings, not cover all your expenses in old age.

So, you know, after paying your earned income into this system for all these years, you are not just a farm animal lining up at a trough when you expect to, like, actually get the promised monthly check when the time comes. Social Security works just like investment banking: the government gets a nice chunk of my money now to spend as it will or let it earn interest (ha! like they’ve heard of savings!), then Iget the money back in installments (if I survive long enough). It’s a total win-win for them, and I actually debated putting this on What Privilege instead of Hathor because, honestly: I’m less concerned about yet another old fart being sexist (yawn) as I am about my government thinking we ordinary people are selfish entitled grubbers for wanting back the money we paid in, which they used to fucking ruin a once robust nation in just a few years of their own group get-rich-quick scheming. If they’re that deluded, that’s scary.

Why are we not having a revolution already? Are people that cowed? Oh, that’s right – the government has the nukes. Jesus.

People are calling for Obama to fire Simpson, but he won’t. It would be the classy thing to do, but privileged folk stick together. Mark my words. I would love to be wrong about this, and I’ll give Obama full dues if I am.

Related posts:

A Thursday Interruption: Aaliyah! Be Alone! Fight like a Girl! RAY BRADBURY! The Bed Intruder

Maria — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 07:27:56 +0000

First, Aaliyah…

RIP

From the Other Patrick:

From MC:

“Just stand and be strong and fight like a girl…”

NSFW, peeps, NSFW. A lusty ode to Ray Bradbury.

IN CONCLUSION: “Bed Intruder” rant earns family a new home.

Related posts:

Midweek Media: You’re in Misogynist Hands, With Allstate

sbg — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 01:53:18 +0000

Some background: Allstate Insurance has a newish ad campaign which features a scruffy-looking, bruised and unshaven white man in a rumbled dark suit as a character named “Mayhem”. For all intents and purposes, he embodies all those random things that can and do happen to car owners – accidents, a tree branch falling, what have you.

Now, on with today’s ad.

The scene opens up with a shot of parking lot of a shopping mall. There’s a big sign on a glass-fronted building reading Cinema and Food. We see a large pink SUV, license plate number LP 527, pulling down the aisle toward the camera, and hear the distinctive ding of an incoming text message. The camera cuts to an interior shot of the SUV, at the driver directly. It’s the Mayhem character. He’s got a cell in his right hand and that same hand kind of clumsily holding onto the steering wheel. The left hand is firmly in place on the wheel. He’s got several cuts, one butterfly-bandaged near his left eye, and a bruise on his face. Large, pink-framed sunglasses are perched atop his head.

“I’m a teenage girl,” he says to camera. “My BFF Becky texts…” The phone dings twice, and he pulls his right hand slightly to look at the screen. “And says she’s kissed Johnny. Well, that’s a problem because I like Johnny.”

He tosses the phone over his shoulder, into the back seat.

“Now, I’m emotionally compromised,” he says, the words going to voiceover as the camerawork pulls back to the exterior of the SUV swerving in the parking lot. At the bottom of the screen reads: Demonstration only. Do not attempt. Cut back to the inside of the vehicle, and Mayhem widening his eyes and careening the vehicle to the left, saying, “Whoopsies!” as he swipes into a parked vehicle. The front bumper of the SUV crumples and falls away. The car it hits, a nondescript sedan, has its front bumper torn halfway off. The car is forcibly moved until it is askew in its parking space. We are back to an interior shot. Mayhem, speaking to camera, with an affronted array of expressions on his face, “I’m all, OMG, Becky’s not even hot.”

Cut to a scene of the damaged car’s owner, a black woman wearing a blue cami, blue buttoned shirt, worn unbuttoned, and black trousers. She’s carrying several shopping bags, and darts toward her vehicle, inspecting the damage. At the bottom of the screen appears the words: Coverage and savings based on policy features selected.

“And if you’ve got cut-rate insurance, you could be paying for this yourself.”

The woman looks around the parking lot, a look of shock and disbelief on her face. And then we cut back to half screen interior of the SUV, with Mayhem framed in it, and in the other half of the screen we can see the smashed car. Message at the bottom of the screen now reads: Coverages subject to availability, terms and conditions. Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Co. & Allstate Fire and Casualty Insurance Co. & their affiliates; Northbrook, IL Copyright 2010 Allstate Insurance Co.

“So get Allstate,” Mayhem says. “You could save money and be better protected from mayhem like me.” He winks. The next shot is of the pink SUV tearing out of the parking lot.

Allstate’s name and logo (a blue circle – inside, two hands folded palm up as if to catch or hold something) appear on a black screen. Below it, their URL and a 1-800 number. Voiceover: Dollar for dollar, nobody protects you from mayhem like Allstate.

Fade out.

See also, if you dare: this other Allstate commercial

PS, the title is a tongue-in-cheek play on their motto, “You’re in good hands, with Allstate.”

Related posts: