confession four: I don’t feel like a very good Asian.

I mean, I don’t really self-identify as Asian most of the time.  I was adopted by super-white people as a baby and grew up in a super-white community.  So I mostly identify as white.  I worked with a bunch of Asian girls at a restaurant, and they all called me white-washed.  But I mean, obviously I look in the mirror and I see myself and I know that I’m not white.  And I certainly wish I understood more about my heritage–I know all of about five phrases in Korean, and the only one I know how to use appropriately is “I’m sorry.”

The things that both irritate me about being Asian and the things that make me think I’m not a very good one:

1. Yellow fever = super annoying.  I’m sorry, trying to pick me up by mangling any greeting you know in any Asian language is a dead giveaway that you’re a creepy troll looking to score an Asian girl.  Not ok.  The annoyance factor and obviousness is also amped up a notch as I don’t consider myself terribly pretty.

2. Not feeling smart enough.  I mean, I’m smart.  But not in an awesome way like the stereotype has led me to believe I should be.

3. Having not-so-great skin.  Ahh!  Bane of my existence.  I realize every magazine does airbrushing, but I always feel like Asian women in pictures have beautiful skin.  Plus almost every Asian woman I see in real life has great skin too.  Meanwhile my skin is blemish-prone and I suffer from PIH.  Not cool, skin.  Not cool.  And I do know that this is not uncommon for Asians, but it’s still very irritating.  Plus I got super-concerned when picking out a derm, so I went to one specializing in ethnic skin, only to realize that it makes him ridiculously busy.

4. Being told I’m kind of fat…for an Asian.  I have been told by a few people that I am chubby for an Asian person.  And the thing is, I don’t really think I’m fat.  But then people say things like, “You’d be considered fat if you still lived in Asia,” or, “I had girlfriend who was Korean and she weighed fifteen pounds less than you and was five inches taller.”  Thanks.  Because that doesn’t already heighten my paranoia that I’m not actually a very good Asian.

5. Being sucky at piano.  I hear some amazing stories about all these Asian musical prodigies, and I can sort of kind of tap out music on the piano.  If I play one hand at a time.  Of course, I did totally rock at the bassoon.  But I feel like the only acceptable musical prodigies play the piano or the violin.  Maybe the flute.  It’s a cruel world for anyone else.

6. “How do you say ‘______’ in languageofchoice?”  Seriously?  I don’t know.  But I did take four years of Spanish, so let’s try that.

7. “So, do you know so-and-so?  They’re Asian too.”  Do you know so-and-so-number-two?  Because I’m pretty sure they’re white.

8. The awkward, “So where are you from?” conversation I have whenever I meet someone new.  I never know the appropriate answer.  Is the question actually “What country were you born in, as your countenance belies the very Caucasian name you’ve been given?” or, “Where did you grow up, because when meeting someone new, that’s one of the polite things to ask?”  More often than not, it’s the former.  I realize the person is mostly just trying to be sensitive, but it leads to one of two scenarios, both of which are awkward for everyone involved.  A) I ask, trying to be humorous about it, which question they’re actually trying to ask.  They usually stammer a bit (unless this conversation is occurring after we’ve all imbibed a few drinks, in which case nothing is awkward anymore), and then we get down to brass tacks.  Or B) I give the answer to one of the two questions, and invariable it is the wrong one.  “Oh, I was born in Korea.”  “Er, actually I was wondering where you grew up.”  Fantastic.

9) Makeup.  I wish women’s magazines would give makeup tips for Asian women.  Maybe I’m just subscribing to crappy magazines, but their makeup tips (especially eye makeup tips!) simply do not work for me.

Yes, I’m bad.  I’m buying into practically every Asian stereotype there is.  And I get very irritated when anyone else does it.  But it’s rather difficult to tell yourself that it’s ok that you don’t fit the socially acceptable standard for being whateveryouare.

Psychological manipulation is something all of us do all the time unconsciously.   The Pick Up Arts are a study of an aspect of psychology, specifically with turning on members of the opposite sex.

Why fumble in the dark, when the information is there to know what your doing?  Its like learning the gender selection of a baby.  Some parents elect not to know until the baby is born.  And that’s fine, its their choice.  But for must of us, we like to know what we’re getting, and to make choices based on that.  Do we want to buy girl clothes or boy clothes?  Do we want a boy name or a girl name?  How do we want to decorate the room?

There are also arguments for making the child as gender neutral as possible, but I personally am a fan of giving people what makes them the happiest.  I have a little boy.  He likes cars, he’s not into dolls.  Why would I give him dolls when he doesn’t like them?

Likewise, as a man trying to make a woman happy, why would you want to treat your woman at random, when you can know things about what will on average make her happier because of her gender?

As you get better at understanding her, you can fine tune what you do even more, to make her happy as an individual instead of focusing on her gender.  But gender discrimination based on PUA pointers is a good place to start, for you geeky boys to whom female minds are a mystery.

Shannon Friedman blogs about life coaching at Starry Night Coaching.

In one of the first comments I ever received on this blog I was asked to describe how coming to Ethiopia changed the preconceived images of the country I had in my mind. Unfortunately I was unable to do so because I was born in Ethiopia. Fortunately I have some nice friends who were willing to take the time to describe their personal experiences.

The following post has been written by Steve Strauss, a very good friend who lived and worked in Ethiopia for over 15 years.

When I first came to Ethiopia in 1982, I had a lot of preconceived images of the country. Some of those images turned out to be accurate, but many of them needed significant correction.

Because I had been to other African countries, I knew that there would be a mix of wealth and poverty and educated and less-educated. I also knew that I would have much to learn from Ethiopian believers and Ethiopian culture. But what I didn’t realize was how much living in Ethiopia would transform my worldview in fundamental ways. I came to teach, but realizing there was much to learn so that I could teach more effectively. I didn’t realize that I had much to learn—and not just to make me a more effective teacher. I needed to change in very basic ways, and Ethiopia was my teacher.

For example, in Ethiopia I saw true, genuine sacrificial giving in a way I had never known before. I saw people willing to give and share what they had, even if it was very little. I saw a hospitality that went so far beyond what I had previously experienced that the word took on almost a whole new meaning for me.

In another example, I experienced an awareness of God’s intervention in life and a dependence on God to care for us an intervene in our behalf in far deeper ways that I had every imagined. I saw examples of prayer that demonstrated what true faith and trust in God really looked like. I even came to understand Scripture in a more profound way because I felt I was seeing it through the eyes of people who were much more like the original readers, people who had nothing else but God to depend on. Ethiopia, especially the Ethiopian church, taught me about prayer and dependence on God.

A final example: In Ethiopia I learned more about true worship of God, worship with one’s whole being, worship that embraced the whole body—with all its senses—and emotions as well as the mind. Both Marcia and I testify that our experience of coming to know God in Spirit-filled worship would be greatly impoverished if not for our years in Ethiopia.

The change in my stereotype: I came to Ethiopia primarily seeing people as students; Ethiopia, instead, became my life-long teacher.

Steve Strauss

Guys always complain about how it’s almost impossible for them to approach a female when she’s with her “entourage”, guys make it almost impossible, actually, IMPOSSIBLE for a girl to go anywhere without her “entourage”. Don’t get me wrong, some girls do tend to go EVERYWHERE with at least 4 or 5 girls, and THAT can be intimidating. But there’s nothing wrong with having a friend accompany you somewhere. It’s almost a necessity.

There's nothing wrong with having a friend accompany you somewhere. It's almost a necessity.

As a female, when you go somewhere alone, you can almost bet on being approached. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with being approached, I that’s how you meet people. But the unaccompanied female is also the MAIN target for losers. For every 1 “Average Joe” that approaches her, there are 3 losers that will approach her.

For this purpose, a loser can be defined as, someone who has creeper tendencies, someone who is not doing anything constructive with their life, basically someone that NO ONE is interested in any kind of way.

Like most men, the loser does not approach when she is in a group. He might be bold enough to approach when she’s with just one of girls. But he most definitely is going to approach when she’s alone. She doesn’t even have to be alone for long, just a quick separation from her friend at a party is enough time for the loser to strike. And once you’re trapped by the loser, there’s no turning back. And I know you don’t have to give your number to everyone that asks for it, however, the loser uses methods to make it hard for her not to give him her number. This is better explained by examples:

He had been watching her from the time she walked in and he had followed her through the party, hoping to get a moment ALONE to talk to her.

Loser Incident #1:

Rachel and Betsy go to a party. After being there for a while Rachel realizes a loser lurking around. We’ll call him, Brown-shirt. Well Brown-shirt seems to be following her every move. Betsy and Rachel decide to walk around and see who else it at the party. As soon as Betsy and Rachel get split up for .05 seconds, Rachel gets a tap on her shoulder, Brown-shirt has finally found his way over to her. And it all goes downhill form here. 1st question he asks, “why  are you standing over here all alone?” He knows she’s not really alone, but he’s trying to make it up in his mind that she is alone. Then he proceeds to ask the usual, you know, what’s your name? where are you from? stuff like that. Although he seemed like a loser when Rachel 1st spotted him out lurking around the party following her every move, he actually seemed to be pretty nice. So when he asked if he could call her sometime, Rachel didn’t mind giving him her number. But the he couldn’t just get her number and walk off, he then proceeded to tell her that he had been watching her from the time she walked in and he had followed her through the party, hoping to get a moment ALONE to talk to her. So he’s a creeper and a loser. After having her number for approximately one minute, he begins to text her. Things like: What’s your major? What year are you? What made you come to UA? How was your day? DUDE, you just got her number….AT A PARTY. Clearly, she’s still at the party, could these questions not wait until the next day? Geeze! The text continue all night, and even after she stops texting back…he continues to text her. Rachel should have never been separated from Betsy…smh.

"Well let me tell you like this, lil shawty. School isn't for everybody."

Loser Incident #2:

Rachel decides to take an impromptu trip to the mall and do a little retail therapy. She didn’t really think she needed a companion because it was such a last-minute idea, and she didn’t really want to have to find somebody to go with her and then wait on them to meet up. I mean, she would be alright going to mall by herself, right? WRONG! After only being in the mall, she realizes that there is a multitude of losers hanging out there. But trying to ignore that fact, she still continued to shop, alone. Her trip was successful…until she had to walk to the car. In the parking lot she is approached by a Trick Daddy-looking young man/loser, we’ll call him, Trick Daddy.  Trick Daddy asked to walk her to her car, she said she would be fine, the car wasn’t that far. He insisted on walking her, because it wasn’t safe for her to be out there ALONE. So nervously she walks to the car, trying to ignore him and his presence with hopes that he will not continue to follow her. He goes through the basics: name, age, school. Then he proceeds to tell her after she asks what school he goes to, “Well let me tell you like this, lil shawty. School isn’t for everybody. Why I need to go to school, if I can make stacks without even graduating from high school. You give me your number, I’ll have all the hoes jealous of you. Cause I’ma make sure you always looking fly.” WTF? The only way Rachel could respond was, “HUH???” By this time Rachel was getting in her car, she thanked him and attempted to get away before he could get her number. Unfortunately the loser asked again before she could even try to shut her door. He actually begged a little bit. So Rachel decides that she would give him the wrong number…but he must have been reading her mind, because he then tells her, “And don’t give me the wrong number. I’m gonna call it to make sure it’s the right one before I let you shut this door.” UGGGGGHHHHHH….so now she’s going to have to give him her number if she ever wants to leave. She should have never went to the mall alone…smh.

I understand that NOT every guy is like these losers. However, as females we must take precautions when going out to avoid these losers. And main precaution is to NEVER go anywhere ALONE. So guys, the next time you want to talk about females and their ever-present entourage, don’t blame females, blame the losers that make us this way.

dueces.

roxee

I know I couldn’t have just read what I read, but indeed I did.

Fat people are fat because they are lazy. True or false?

Let me tell all  you skinny skanks a thing or ten. And yes if you have this sort of outlook, you do qualify as a skank. God created you just the way you are, NOT to walk around with a camera in an airport to run immediately to your blog to then BLAST people that are different. Be it fat, skinny, tall, short, dumpy, stupid, etc,… the stereo-types can go on and on. Can’t they? Was that an Amish gentlemen? Are you freaking joking me?

I mean WHO laid it out for YOU to judge others in such a harsh cruel manner? Who says you look “normal”, go ahead. Define normal for me. Please. Because apparently I have a huge misconception.

So as I read that post, I’m being told that my daughter is a fat lazy …. what else did she say?

I just read a so called “blog leader”, self proclaimed  from my view point. Take pictures of people of all ages, including teens and post their pictures on her blog for the purpose of other grown so called women to make fun of them! WTH? I’m in awe. I am truly dumbfounded.

Apparently since this pissed me off, I now qualify for being dubbed as a “sensitive whiny baby that doesn’t like a dose of reality that isn’t sugar coated in political correctness. <——–disclosure”

That. From a blogger that was featured on CNN for a drama fit. Horrah? Whatever. The  more I read, the more disgusted I am. She sports “ethical blogging”, and …. what the hell ever. Seriously. Where are there ANY ethics in the nonsense you just posted. I must be totally blinded by your blissful ignorance.

Let me tell you something, if you take a photo of one of MY kids to insult on your Mommy Blog, you are going to bark up the wrong tree. That is one of the most distasteful things I have seen anyone do. Well, you do lately.

Ok so, my daughter is over weight. She’s healthy, I dare you to call her a horse. Now, who wants to tell me she doesn’t eat healthy, she doesn’t exercise, blah blah blah, bull shit. Because I know better, and so do many, many others! In a time for our youth, where they struggle enough with peer pressure, and self esteem issues ……. I can’t find even a remote excuse for your ignorance. Fat people can lose weight, but hunny, you can’t hide from ignorant.

Define normal, because when I showed my husband this post, and a picture of you, he even agrees that it looks like your poor, poor face is misconstrued, or has some type of deformity.

Trisha-admin

November 24, 2009 | Permalink | Reply

ok, so i figured it out now. Everyone has a misconception of what a normal person is supposed to look like. Not a thin person, a NORMAL person. This is overweight for a teenager and not one person can admit that.

CHUBBY? No, chubby is what is on children between 8 and preteen before they get taller. This is fat.

Soda and mcdonalds.

The end.

I’m glad I made my post of What Beauty Means To Me, and am so glad I dropped out. I stand beside it 110%! Now can anyone else please tell me that the rest of the world / blogosphere isn’t THAT stupid?

Updating with others that are blogging in regards to this.

Other posts in regards to this.

A Blessed Mommy

MyLoonyverse

]]> http://saturdayjane.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/top-seven-most-deliciously-amazing-lady-cartoons-ever/ Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:15:25 +0000 Jessica http://saturdayjane.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/top-seven-most-deliciously-amazing-lady-cartoons-ever/

I’m glad some people got a kick out of last week’s list of Top Seven Worst Cartoon Ladies, because now it’s time for the sequel.

A solid female character in animation is hard to find.  If you are able to extract their likes and dislikes from their gender (they like shopping BECAUSE THEY’RE GIRLS!  They hate getting messy BECAUSE THEY’RE GIRLS!) you’re still stuck with having to make them look ‘cute’ or ’sexy’, and have a role beyond Love Interest or Nagging Psychobitch.  These seven characters all have a degree of depth and thoughtfulness in their creation.  Their qualities came first, and their gender second.

Let’s get rolling, shall we?

7.  Dora The Explorer:  Love or hate Dora, you have to admit that she is a pretty stellar example for young girls.  She’s bright, she’s friendly, she’s willing to scrape her knees and get dirty, and she sticks to her guns in the face of adversity.  And by adversity I mean cunning foxes who steal her monkey’s sandwiches, or whatever.  I put Dora at seventh on this list because her redesign to appeal to an ‘older’ crowd makes me cry tears of rage.  She went from clever adventurer to mall-haunting pre-teen overnight.  Oh, Dora of yore!  How I miss thee!

Dora, before and after. Now she solves mysteries, like Which Boy Is The Cutest Boy?

6.  Gretchen and Spinelli from Recess:  Recess is a show that centers around schoolyard stereotypes.  In the main cast, we have the Fat Sensitive Kid, the Mischievous Kid, the Smart Kid, the Tough Kid, the Sporty Kid, and the Awkward Wimpy Kid Who Is Only Occasionally Useful.  The charm of a show like Recess is that the kids realize their labels, and regard them with a resigned sort of malice.  I’ve picked Gretchen and Spinelli out here because really, out of those main cast members I’ve mentioned, which are the girls?  Guesses?  Guesses?  Gretchen and Spinelli were created as schoolyard archetypes, not as schoolgirl archetypes, and that I can appreciate.

It's a veritable Who's Who of unfair labeling!

5.  Kim Possible:  Much like an aged version of a Powerpuff Girl, Kim Possible saves the world before curfew, trying to do her homework and get a date along the way.  Kim is in every way a girl’s girl.  She idolizes a clothing chain.  She gets embarrassed in front of boys.  She hates her little brothers and uses the Puppydog Pout to get something she wants.  The reason I’m including her on this list is that Kim likes what she likes…because she likes it.  Too often animators will create a character that is supposed to exemplify a Successful Modern Woman.  She’s smart!  She’s capable!  She owns her feminity, and yet, she is completely defined by societal expectations and all of the males around her.  Kim defines herself, and while she has the normal teenage tendency to worry about what other’s think of her, it doesn’t shape her life.

You guys, this plays on the Disney channel at 10:30 PST. Why haven't you watched this, you guys?

4.  Gadget from Rescue Rangers:  Some…times!  Some…crimes!  Go slipping through the cracks, but these…two!  Gum…shoes!  Are picking up the slack, there’s no case too big, no case too small!  If you need help just call…Gadget, apparently.  Rescue Rangers centers around some rodents who solve mysteries.  It’s pretty simple.  The titular characters receive most of the credit, serious Chip and goofy Dale, but every kid who watches that show knows that Gadget is the real hero.  It’s always Gadget who makes the machines that get them out of trouble, Gadget who sees through the scam, Gadget who crafts the master plan to solve the crime.  And you know what’s appealing about Gadget?  They don’t try to hide her brilliance behind a (heh heh) mousey facade.  She is just a genius.  No glasses.  No gimmick.  No social awkwardness.  All of the things that are typically associated with the smart girl are conspicuously absent, and they let her play the hero just as much as the boys do, even if the show is named after them.  It’s a nice change of pace.

Aaugh, Gadget. Why does Google have so many fanarts of you having sex with power tools??

3.  Gosalyn from Darkwing Duck:  Gosalyn, put simply, is a kid.  She’s not a smart kid, or a dumb kid, or an athletic kid, or a sensitive kid, or a tough kid, or a wimpy kid.  She’s just a kid who lives with her dad, who happens to be a Bruce Wayne-esque fly-by-night  crimefighter.  Sometimes she worries about him, sometimes she wants to join in on the fun, but at the end of the day, she’s just…well.  She’s a kid.  The simplicity of her character without relying on overused tropes is what gets Gosalyn on my list.  It’s not easy to craft a character that doesn’t rely on a stereotype that we are already familiar with, while still making her appealing and instantly familiar.  She could ride in my sidecar anyday.

Why is it always ducks? What does Disney have with ducks? People don't even like ducks that much.

2.  Azula from Avatar: The Last Airbender:  I could take almost anyone from Avatar and point to them as a model for outstanding character development, but Azula is here for a very specific reason: she is a crazy bitch.  She is a crazy bitch with fire powers and mommy issues, and she will eff you up the a, if you so much as look at her funny when she’s got her crazy hat on.  I’m a big fan of villains.  It’s tough to make a villain who doesn’t seem like a moustache-twirling Dick Dastardly or a hulking inferno of unspecified fury.  Villains need motivations too, you guys!  Something has to make them interesting, and worth our time.  With lady villains, it is almost always sexuality.  She’s evil!  What else is evil?  Uhh, sex?  Yeah.  Sex is evil.  So let’s make her very sexy and she can even make untoward advances at the disinterested protagonist!  Sounds like a plan.  Gladly, Azula doesn’t rely on these things to make her a stellar baddie.  From the start of the series, her intentions are clear.  She’s not evil, necessarily.  She just went round the bend several years ago, and never came back.  Good for her.

She will grind your bones up and wear the powder on her face like a fine foundation. AWESOME.

1.  My number one choice for awesome lady cartoon comes from a classic conundrum: how to make girls funny.  Sometimes they just aren’t, and that’s okay.  The same things that are hilarious coming from a man may not induce the same belly-laughs from a chick.  Some female comedians have resorted to giving up their girliness to get a more masculine sense of humor, but I don’t think that’s necessary.  A gal can be funny in a skirt.  A purple skirt.  With a yellow sweater, and bows on her ears:

I think I still have a sweater like that.

Babs Bunny was created as one of the two main characters of the Warner Brothers’ hit, Tiny Toons.  The animators noticed a significant underrepresentation of ladies in the original Looney Tunes, and so when its ’sequel’ began, they decide to split the character of Bugs Bunny into two halves.  The male half, Buster Bunny, contains all of Bugs’ sly charisma and mischievous smooth-talking mannerisms.  The female half, Babs, got all the screwball humor, and I couldn’t be happier about that.  Babs is a tornado of comedy, constantly lampooning the other characters in the show, doing spot-on impressions of pop-culture icons, or just inserting a quick, 1930’s era one-liner into the mix.  Unlike her counterpart, the loathable Lola Bunny, Babs can go toe to toe with her male companions and come out with the top joke.  She’s zany, over-the-top, and endlessly appealing.

All while wearing a skirt.  Who’d-a thunk it?

What do most popular – mainstream BW musicians/artists have in common nowadays?

They are lacking in the talent and originality department and usually try to compensate by walking around half naked and grinding in music videos and performances. Even the talented ones seem to succumb to shedding clothing the longer they are around. Whoever these women’s people/handlers are, they seem to convince BW artists that in order to stay relevant or “hot”, they need to strip down to their skivvies, slip into a pair of 5 inch heels and gyrate suggestively to a catchy beat.

It happened with Mariah, Beyonce, Mya, Amerie, Toni Braxton, Ashanti and the list goes on… I am not sure why it’s difficult for artists to understand it’s okay to be sexy or even sensuous, but not necessary for them to be overly sexualized to produce good music. More focus needs to be placed on the substance. To make matters worst, we know these women have legions of fans who are girls and young women who receive a double dose of BW being exploited as video girls dropping it like it’s hot in rappers and the r&b singers music videos AND by those BW singers who choose to exploit themselves! When that is all young girls/teenagers see in every music video, do you think there is no effect? [off soapbox now]

Here are three dignified BW artists stomping stereotypes with their unique music refusing to conform to the booty-shaking of their counterparts, and letting their talent speak for itself.

Meshelle Ndegeocello

Amel Larrieux

India Arie

Know any others? Leave a comment and share a BF artist stomping stereotypes with good/refreshing music!

People get stereotyped a lot for the sake of learning and simplicity in language classes. The twin brothers, the one with the fiancee, the Japanese guy, the one who likes beer, the tall one. I guess no one can pin me further than American because when asked what I like to do I alternate between hiking and video games. I’m just complex like that!

Sally, Mohanad's father, Mohanad and one of their boys

On Saturday I had the fun experience of visiting some friends from Sudan to eat lunch with them. We had a lot of fun and a lot of good food. It has been my experience that when I visit a friend’s house from another culture that the food is delicious and plentiful. My time on Saturday with Mohanad and Sally certainly fit that description.

When I arrived, one of the first things I noticed was all of the food on the table. I met Mohanad’s father who is here visiting. I also met two young energetic boys who were a lot of fun to be around. We had a great meal and a good time together.

Sally, Mohanad's father, and me with their two boys

After lunch we sat down to talk, drink tea, and eat desserts. Sally is a wonderful cook and Mohanad is a good host. Every time my plate started to get empty Mohanad put more food on my plate. I was so full that I could only eat a little dessert.

me wearing some of their traditional clothing

Sharing a meal is one of the best ways to get to know friends from other cultures. We all had a good laugh when I tried on some of their traditional clothing. Mohanad’s father helped me with the head wear. My time with them made me think about how we need to take time to get to know people for who they are and not stereotype. Mohanad and Sally love their sons, and want to learn English so they can provide a good future for their sons. They may wear different clothes and have a different religion than me, but they want a good life for their family just like most of us do.

me with Mohanad's father

Right before I left, I asked why Mohanad did not have a big stomach like me with all the delicious food Sally cooks. We also got online so we could become facebook friends and so I could show them some pictures. It was a wonderful afternoon with my new friends.

When I first saw this commercial, I laughed. Not going to lie, pretty uncontrollably.

I’m still baffled that commercials like this exist. I immediately thought of Ms. Magazine’s No Comment section. But considering we’re talking about television this week, I thought this would be the perfect place to post.

Rarely have I seen a television ad that offers much in terms of artistic and cultural merit. But, seeing a young woman fall into the arms of her boyfriend at the mere sight of some lightening actually made my jaw drop.

Then, he offers her a diamond necklace and the symbol how he will protect her from said lightening forever and she gets all starry-eyed and as they embrace.

“Now you can surround her with the strength of your love,” says the voiceover.

Gag me.

I mean, come on! What is with this stereotype that women are these delicate little creatures who are afraid of loud noises and need men and diamonds to protect them? Worse, what’s with this whole idea that love can be bought and that a jewel will somehow help your relationship through tough times?

Unfortunately, it’s not just this commercial. It’s so many others that bombard me when I sit down to watch the Amazing Race.

Maybe I need a TiVo. Maybe I need to turn off. Either way, these diamonds need to rethink how they sell to their supposed best friends.

The “Take Back the Night” campaign to end sexual assault and abuse has the best intentions. But it is problematic because it perpetuates the idea that women’s sexual assault and abuse follows the dark night, man-behind-the bushes-with-a-knife narrative. In reality, the “night” is a constructed demon. All too often abusers closely mimic the warmth and appearance of sunshine.

Traditional stereotypes for profiling bad guys completely fail us when it comes to identifying abusers. Abusers come in all shapes and sizes, and oftentimes they capitalize on their normal appearance and normative success in order to persuade us of their goodness. The “Take Back the Night” campaign is a symbolic reduction—an oversimplification—of the experience of assault and abuse. It implies that women are assaulted suddenly by a stranger when they are alone at night.  In reality assault and abuse can be short to long term projects where the predator chips away at the victim’s protective walls. According to Statistics Canada, 80% of sexual assault survivors knew their abusers (Statistics Canada 2003). Assault and abuse are usually psychological as well as physical projects, leaving the victim distressed with complicated grief.

So it isn’t a particular profile or scene we need to avoid in order to protect ourselves. Instead, it is a particular pattern within our existing relationships that we need to look for: a pattern of power asymmetry. Sexual assault and abuse is a function of unequal pattern relations; it happens when the abuser establishes dominance over you. We need to work on strengthening our discriminatory power until we become pros at identifying the problematic power structures that constitute assault or abuse. The fact is that women are not educated enough about their rights. Certainly, we are familiar with and celebrate the equality we are entitled to in politics and law, but many of us forget that we are entitled to the same equality in the relationships that comprise our everyday lives.

Inequality in romantic relationships has become so normalized in our culture that we now romanticize the idea of the man that yields power over us. The popular Twilight Saga by Stephenie Meyer portrays power asymmetry as an enviable relationship dynamic. Bella’s obsession with Edward shows that he yields enormous power over her, and his paternalistic babysitting is patronizing. The idealization of an unequal power relationship sends a negative message to women. Women today should be taught that a healthy relationship should leave them feeling empowered, not disempowered.

In preparation for the traditional rape narrative we have rape whistles. But there is no simple tool for blowing the whistle on everyday toxic relationships. We want to ask you if you have any ideas on how we can help facilitate a better understanding of the importance of power symmetry in relationships. You can suggest a conceptual theory, a slogan, or even a symbolic artefact.

Disclaimer: Some readers my find this post offensive, stereotypical, sexist, misogynistic, etc. Therefore read on at your peril.

There are two types of bosses. The dude and the byatch. Most men are one or the other, and as an employee, you’ll always know which one you’re working with.

The ‘dude’ boss, as I like to call him, is calm, cool and self-assured. He knows that he’s the leader of the pack, and other males (and females) intuitively respect him as such.

He doesn’t need to micromanage anyone or anything, because everyone in the pride knows their role and exactly why they are there. Each member of the pride contributes to the overall health and well-being of the organization, so that the big cheese can attend to more important matters.

The ‘byatch’ boss, on the other hand, acts like a petulant woman (Note: ACTUAL women, please do no take this the wrong way), meaning that their management style, is more likened to the ’stereotypical’ way woman perform are stereotyped in positions of authority (Note: Women, again, I recognize that this too, appears to come off derogatorily. My deepest apologies).

Micromanagement is the order of the day. They’ll constantly ride you, scrutinizing every detail, and harangue you until they feel the job has been done right. If you show any initiative, they’ll automatically take it as a threat to their authority, and dismiss your effort as a waste of time. With the byatch, you’re never quite sure of where you stand, no matter how effectively you do your job.

They’re easy to spot.  How you ask?  Well let’s see…

Dude boss tells you what he thinks directly.

Byatch boss, beats around the bush or worse, tells other people what he thinks, and let’s that information filter its way down to you.

Dude boss makes firm decisions and sticks to them.

Byatch, decides by committee, belaboring every decision as if it were life or death. Once a decision has been made, there’s a distinct possibility that the byatch boss will change his mind.

Dude boss looks you in the eye when he speaks to you.

The byatch can’t bear to make eye contact. He’ll look at your mouth, over your shoulder, to the side, anywhere to avoid your gaze upon his.

The Dude boss is consistent.

The Byatch flip flops.

If you’re a man in a position of authority, and the ‘byatch’ sounds anything like you, cultivate your inner ‘dude’, so that your cojones drop.

PS  If you’re one of my former bosses and this offends you, then you’re probably a byatch. Dude bosses all laugh at drivel like this.

According to a recent study, most children will, by their ninth birthday, be conscious of racism and will understand stereotypes and how they work. This research was conducted at the Rush NeuroBehavioral Center in Chicago and involved 124 children between the ages of 5 and 11. 

The children were told a story about a fictitious place called Kidland. In Kidland, there are Greens and Blues, with the former believing the latter are not terribly bright. Researchers found that at about the age of nine, children began to pick up on the effects of the stereotype, positing that Blues would not be asked to join the spelling team or to become part of a study group. Moreover, most of the older children understood the similarities between the biases in fictitious Kidland and those in real-life.

These results suggest that stereotypes and prejudice emerge early on in life. They may thus be durable and somewhat resistant to change. At the same time, the findings suggest that these attitudes are learned, emerging at a time when children are becoming more conscious of the world around them. As such, racial bias should not be seen as intrinsic or inherent. Rather, prejudices are filtered through our discourse, cultural narratives, stories, jokes, cartoons and institutions. None of these are set in stone, but neither are they easily changed. Importantly, as this study suggests, if we want change, we’re going to have to start young.

The butch exists in the uncanny valley of manhood.

The uncanny valley hypothesis holds that when robots and other facsimiles of humans look and act almost like actual humans, it causes a response of revulsion among human observers. The “valley” in question is a dip in a proposed graph of the positivity of human reaction as a function of a robot’s lifelikeness. [. . .]

As a robot is made more humanlike in its appearance and motion, the emotional response from a human being to the robot will become increasingly positive and empathic, until a point is reached beyond which the response quickly becomes that of strong repulsion. However, as the appearance and motion continue to become less distinguishable from a human being, the emotional response becomes positive once more and approaches human-to-human empathy levels.

The tomboy is familiar and adorable, as is the smooth-faced young man, but the butch, in between, can only be parsed as monstrous — close, too close, and yet so different, so manlike but not male. Because the butch claims masculinity but is unable or unwilling to embrace the seamlessness of masculine manhood, through the binary lens she may look like Frankenstein’s monster: cobbled together, moving where movement should have ceased (masculine where masculinity should not be).

The key is that the grotesqueness lies as much is butch difference (femaleness) as in butch similarity: it is her success at masculinity that makes her actually frightening. As such, women who have some masculine traits but are not (or don’t want to be) butch are forced to constantly compensate — tomboyishness balanced by comforting heterosexuality, or lesbianism balanced by women’s clothes, women’s hair. Some masculinity is considered attractive in girls and women (see Serano’s comments on effemphobia in Whipping Girl), but too much is unacceptable, until the point at which the person is read as wholly male — the point as which ze passes. Obviously, the acceptance of the maleness of the person is conditional; hir status will revert if/when hir sex assignment is revealed.

It is my guess that this applies, to some extent, in the other direction as well, i.e. the kind, nurturing man is considered more attractive than the wholly masculine (in the most conservative sense) brute. It is certainly the case that, when it comes to violence against trans women, it is both difference and sameness that people find so disturbing — trans women seem to be in the most danger when, having passed previously, they are revealed to be trans. Hate crimes against trans women are surrounded with narratives about deceit, because the criminal views trans femininity, in its successfulness, to be deceitful (because femininity it presumed to belong only to the female-assigned). If it were not so successful, it would not be so dangerous.

So:

As a person espouses the qualities associated with the other sex, people’s response to her becomes increasingly empathetic and positive, until a point is reached beyond which the response quickly becomes one of revulsion and disgust. However, as the person becomes increasingly feminine or masculine, the response again becomes positive when she ceases to be read as gender deviant at all (when she passes).

Imagining the above chart plotted with “(female) masculinity” instead of “human likeness,” we can place the tomboy around the point labeled “humanoid robot,” the butch around the point labeled “zombie,” and the presumed-to-be-cissexual man at “healthy person.” (I assume the known-to-be-trans man is at the same place as the zombie and the butch.) Plotting, instead, male femininity, we can place the “SNAG” (Sensitive New Age Guy) with the humanoid robot, the drag queen and the flaming fairy around the zombie, the presumed-to-be-cissexual woman with the healthy person, and the known-to-be-trans woman at the zombie point.

What do people think? Does this hold for your experience? I am aware that it is misleading and problematic to suggest some kind of slippery slope from genderqueer through transsexual — I do not believe that such a slope exists for individual people and their identities. However, I think the slope is a pretty accurate reflection of how gender variance is conceptualized by the majority culture. Similarly, I am aware that I have conflated masculinity/femininity with maleness/femaleness in problematic and inaccurate ways. I don’t subscribe to such conflations, but, again, I do think they are an accurate representation of the mainstream understanding, and therefore necessary in a post discussing the majority perception of gender variant people.

This article made me really angry. Why? Because it tried to talk about a really serious topic and didn’t say anything. It didn’t try to explain why we are so obsessed with sex or mention how many people suffer and die because of the unrealistic and stereotypical ideas and expectations our society in which we live in projects onto us. And most importantly – didn’t mention how these expectations are projected and reassured again and again.

The author is Helen Rumbelow and it is from The Times.

The way we cope with Caster Semenya, the South African athlete of disputed sex, is to tell ourselves that she is nothing like us, nor anyone we know, nor anything we are likely to know. She is, in the court of public opinion, a freak, no matter what the news is from the International Association of Athletics Federations tomorrow.

I am sorry, who did you give the permission to speak for me? Who are those uncanny “we” you are talking about? If you believe that somebody is a freak only because they don’t fit the gender dichotomy, this is only your problem. Please, please do not drag me into this or try to justify yourself pretending that everybody are like you. Because I saw hundreds of blog articles and discussions about the subject and they weren’t calling Caster S. a freak. Or these people do not exist, because they are not interesting enough or do not prove your point? I remember who made the entire show and it was … wait for it… the media!!! What a surprise!!! The media made the whole absurd fascination with C.S., because the topic was so going to sell the newspapers and nobody thought about C.S., so please do not speak about “we” here. It was you. It was you who shaped the public opinion and presented C.S. as a freak and made fun of her life and every person who do not fit the neat little stereotype about femininity and masculinity looks. And please do not try to describe the issue with C.S. as original. For years Serena Williams have been bullied by the media for her looks. And she is woman, she just doesn’t look like Scarlet Johanson. Which apparently is more than enough to make fun of her. So this is so not about being part of the one gender or the other but the way you look and the way you act. (P.P. You make fun of Scarlet Johanson too… interesting, right?)

So would it surprise you to know that every other day in Britain a baby is born looking different enough that doctors cannot instantly tell its sex? Would it make you feel less safe in your opinions if you knew that for 1 in 4,000 expectant parents a year, there is no answer to that first question: is it a boy or a girl? That almost certainly someone you know has started off his or her life like this? That, when you take into account the more subtle disorders of sexual differentiation, it becomes apparent only at puberty or later, as is the case for Semenya, and the rate doubles again? That children with physical problems such as this are one of medicine’s best-kept secrets?

Disorder? Are you trying to tell us that this is a disease? Like small pox or something? GASP! Not looking like male or female… this would mean that the poor baby could have the opportunity to choose for itself when it grows up. Or that even, imagine that, not to be raised according the stereotypes of our society and the incredible useless baggage of expectations? And this is the first question? Boy or a girl? Heck… gender is not the alpha and the omega of our existence. So can you please adopt a language who shows that? Media, please do that. You are trying to tell us that these kids are having a hard time but that is not true. Our society is having a hard time and the fact that the two neat boxes “f” and “m” just do not work.

Sit down and steady your nerves. Because after that first shock, there is another one. The outrage over Semenya has got British doctors angry. For it jeopardizes one of the most progressive medical experiments of the 21st century. Very quietly, very delicately, the NHS has become world pioneers in this unexpected field. And what makes our team of specialist consultants so radical, when faced with a baby of ambiguous genitals, is how little they are doing to alter that, rather than how much.

My nerves are perfectly fine. Why do you imply that not specific gender is going to freak me out? Is it because if you didn’t tell me I wasn’t going to think that I have to freak out?? Pioneers? Ahem… right…

Britain is the first to base treatment on the assumption that it should be acceptable for boys and girls to look far from “normal”. That doctors may be better off doing nothing to “fix” the kind of confusing genitals that incite laddish, locker-room bullying. This approach asks provocative questions of the rest of us. What makes us the sex we are, and what makes that so normal in the first place?

Because there is nothing more normal than being altered through our society brainwashing system only on the account of our gender. And using the world normal to describe being male or female. There is nothing normal in the way we perceive it.

“These conditions are relatively common,” says Professor Adam Balen, consultant gynaecologist at Leeds General Infirmary. “I wouldn’t say they are hidden because that is an emotive term, but we’re obsessed by sex, and whenever sex is raised all of a sudden a prurient angle comes into it. We are not open enough in our society to discuss the variations that come with disorders of physical development.

Sooo… instead of making this an open topic and changing our ways of dealing with it and may be, changing our ways of raising and perceiving gender it was easier just to hush it up? Wow… way to go doctors, hypocrisy For The Win! What was that funny little thing called the oath? Oh, never mind…

“How do you define your gender? Is it defined by sex chromosomes? Not always. Is it your sex hormones? Not necessarily. Then what?”

Then it is our society. What a shocking news.

Victorian doctors studied “hermaphrodites”, but that term is outlawed now, not only because of its offensive whiff of the circus freak but also because it is medically inaccurate (they have male and female genitalia, whereas often it is more complicated). Then, in the 1960s, the term “intersex” was coined. It’s still championed by some today despite unhelpful associations with “transsexual” (intersex conditions are biological rather than psychological — genetic or hormonal, or both).

I am sorry but why people were paying to see two-gendered people again??

It was at this point in the 1960s that a US doctor called John Money, when presented with a baby boy with a botched circumcision, decided to make “John” into a “Joan”. It was, as surgeons put it, simply easier to “make a hole rather than build a pole”.

Yes, thank you for setting the facts clearly for us. Female gender is a hole, male gender is a pole.

Money’s experiment was fictionalised in the prize-winning bestseller Middlesex, by Jeffrey Eugenides. Money’s theory — that the child would develop a sexual identity that would fit whichever shape the surgeons fashioned its genitals into — was to dominate the world’s medical establishment for the rest of the 20th century. Until it was challenged by UK doctors.

So… the gender is make-believe then?

When Sophia, 45, from Brighton, was born with a genetic condition (called 5-ARD) that made her sex initially unclear, her parents were told nothing. This secrecy by the medical teams was absolutely standard. “They didn’t know what I was, but all they said to my parents was, ‘there’s a problem, we’re doing some kind of repair’.”

Apparently gender is a problem. You know what? It is… everyday hundreds of women and men are assaulted because of the way we understand gender. And instead trying to change this doctors thought it would be easier just to “fix” it, changing the lives of children without telling their parents. This is an utterly bad idea and it will have bad consequences.

She was sent home to an almost impossible life. Her parents were told she was a boy, but they “picked up something strange was going on”. Meanwhile the botched “repair” made life as a boy utterly miserable.

See? Gender is more complex than “hole” and a “pole”.

In adulthood Sophia now lives (“exists” is the word she uses) as a woman, campaigning passionately against surgery to “normalise” babies. Wouldn’t it be kinder, I ask, to make a child less different in the eyes of their peers, to spare the taunts? “That argument is countered by the messiness the surgery itself causes,” she says.

Yeah, wouldn’t it be?

Laurence Rangecroft, a recently retired consultant pediatrician who specialised in these cases at the Royal Victoria Infirmary in Newcastle, remembers the days of the hush-hush operations. “Surgeons used to think, ‘There’s a problem, we need to correct it’, and that’s what they, with the best of intentions, enthusiastically set out to do. But with any operation that is complicated and difficult to perform, you’re not always going to get good results.”

Let me see… they are making people wait for years to change their gender even if they are adults and understand what happens with them and that gender is not about body parts, but with babies they did whatever they want? How was that right?

Then, in 1997, Money’s star patient, “Joan” went public with his story. Not only had he reverted to his male identity as soon as he could, but his life had been blighted by Money’s treatment. His male twin had died of an overdose, and he himself committed suicide in 2004.

One of the “consequences” I understand? One of many?

“In the US, surgeons got very scared,” Rangecroft says. Corrective surgery looked risky, but so did the alternative. “With fears of litigation, with either course of action, I had one surgeon say to me, ‘It’s reached a state of paralysis, people don’t know what is the right thing to do any more’.”

Well… duuh.

Enter Sarah Creighton. As a gynaecologist at University College Hospital, she was the first to set out to compare those whose doctors had, at birth, attempted to “normalise” their genitals, and those who had no surgery. Nobody had followed up on patients in the past, as, cloaked in secrecy, doctors had concealed the truth from parents and child.

Yes, change their gender, than leave them to the wolves (and by wolves, I mean society and by leave, I mean say nothing and do not help).

But she tracked them down and her groundbreaking study in The Lancet found that those who were left as nature made them fared as well, if not better, than those who had been normalised. Being yourself was more important than being like others.

Again… duh? Still, imagine how much better there people would be if they weren’t presented as freaks or pushed to behave in one specific way or another but left them be?

Take Gordon, a man who lives on the north coast of Britain, who “was a male child with ambiguous genitals”. Unusually for his time, he escaped surgery. He was raised as a girl until the age of 3, because of a genetic condition that drastically lowers testosterone levels. Then he was brought up, unhappily, because of changing-room bullying, as a boy. “I always had this idea that I had sisters that I was detached from. It has occurred to me that, since I was dressed as a girl as a baby, I was feeling detached from myself.” His condition was diagnosed and treated only in his middle age, after a lifetime of struggling to succeed in a macho family, school and workplace — never “feeling or acting right”. “Typical males would consider me a sad specimen. But my girlfriend thinks it’s great.”

Ah, yes, the beautiful and sweet life of the extreme two-gendered society. Again we receive hints from the author that it is not just body parts but also the way we are supposed to act. Hm…

So, on reflection, he is glad he was not “corrected” at birth. “I see a society that doesn’t want to admit variation exists.”

Well, society is not made my martians, you know? Society is made by everyone of us and we wouldn’t understand something that is hidden and denied and presented as a mistake or as incorrect. We are making ourselves miserable. You remember the first time you received the talk about how little girls/boys do not do this or that, that this could only be done by little boys/girls. Kids do whatever they feel it is right and always it is not gender connected. And it continues to happen. It is even worse. Have you been in a kids store recently? No? Well, go and check it out.

Creighton’s findings were to start a British-led revolution: first, telling parents the truth about their child’s ambiguous-looking sex and, even more radical, saying that perhaps he or she could stay that way. Creighton backs the statistic from the Scottish study: that one baby in 4,000 is sexually ambiguous at birth. “It is difficult, as the first question any couple ask at birth is, ‘what have we got?’” she says.

Interesting proof of how far we’ve got with all this gender thing, isn’t it? Girl or a boy? Well.. for starters – a human being.

Now, instead of paternalistic bluster, the doctor is trained to reply, “We’re not sure yet”, and refer to one of the major centres — University College Hospital, London, for the South of England; Balen’s team in Leeds for the North — for a battery of tests and genetic analysis.

Oh… so… it’s not about leaving the child alone. Just digging harder for the answer. Shit, so it is ok folks, nothing is changed, we sill live in the world of denying reality.

This is a shocking time for parents — a 2006 survey by the Scottish Audit of Genital Anomalies found that 95 per cent of parents were desperate for more information on the condition after the birth. Most were extremely worried about “ridicule and stigma” for their baby and the difficulty of discussing it with friends or relatives.

Quick question… who is going to stigmatize your children parents? Oh… that’s right, it is you. Way to go parents. If you can raise that child the way it is and show that person is a person despite the gender it would change everything. But it is easier just to mutilate your child, because what everybody else would have said if you didn’t have done it. Well you are creating the problem, not these mysterious “others”.

“It can take days or weeks to determine the sex — the limit on naming a child is six weeks and sometimes that has to be extended,” Creighton says.

Nobody learned their lesson obviously. And naming is so important.

What about relatives, clamouring to know the baby’s name?

Relatives??? Are you serious? You put the opinion of the relatives as important enough to alter your baby life? Please government, make everybody who wants to have a baby to take a test or a parentship course. Obviously being able to accomplish the physical part is not a proof for their skills to raise the kid/s.

“We advise parents to say the baby’s poorly, they are awaiting tests. All children are then allocated boy or girl, but much more controversial is: do you proceed to surgery? That is hard to undo. We tend to think that surgery is all-powerful and by having surgery you have a cure. These aren’t conditions that you can cure.”

Boy or a girl. Because we do not see everyday people who do not feel like a male or female only because they have the matching parts. And we do not see them struggling.

So for the past ten years British parents have been discouraged from surgery purely for reasons of social acceptability, thereby allowing the child a decision when they are older. It’s not always easy. One surgeon said the parents of a genetic girl, with an enlarged clitoris, were begging him for surgery, “rather than the other way around”. Creighton says that the risks have to be carefully explained — surgery will affect any future sex life, for example.

Oh My God! You are saying that the surgeries are not for the sake of the children and they never were but only for their parents to feel “good”? What a shocker.

“We are leaders in this field, worldwide, in terms of disclosure to the parents and child, and challenging surgery,” she says.

Leader is not the word that comes in my mind.

So a generation of children, now coming up to puberty, are facing their own choice about whether they want to look like a normal man or woman, or remain as something far more unusual. They are pioneers.

So what you are saying – normal is what society thinks is normal. And society thinks that normal is two-gendered society because the fact that people are more complicated than that is kept a secret and being something else than male or female presented as humiliating. Hmm.

“It is now as adolescents that they are getting the full information. It’s a stormy time for all teenagers, but it’s really difficult for them,” Creighton says.

“Sweety all your life you didn’t feel good in your skin. Well… it is because of the gender stereotypes. It is not you, it is the society. Please change your gender now, so the society feel again comfortable with you, please?

Everyone I talk to believes that the new strategy is right, after many decades of getting it wrong. But it is uncharted waters. A few years from now the first of the new generation will be able to tell their own story. Are we ready for what they will say?

At the end of the novel Middlesex, the mother of the hero tells her it would have been easier to hide her condition, remain the way she was. “This is the way I was,” is the hero’s reply. When I ask Sophia, in my blundering way, which sex she is, genetically, she replies: “Genetically, I am me.”

Aaaand that’s it. May be the author of this article tried to tell us this but I think she did a poor job.

The most ludicrous term has recently come to prevalence in the collective western vocabulary. It is ‘Reverse Racism‘ a phrase that is applied to the act of a ethnic group who discriminate against or deride a racial majority. The phrase has also been applied to the perceived positive effect of being part of a minority group such as an increase in the likelihood of winning a scholarship (the instances of which have not been clearly quantified). However, this article will discuss the term as it is used in the contemporary Australian context and that is when the phrase is used to describe an ethnic minority discriminating against a majority.

Here’s a simplistic worked example demonstrating the perceived difference between racism and reverse racism.

Racism: ‘You black folks aren’t allowed on this dance-floor, go somewhere else or we’ll get rough with you.’

Reverse Racism: ‘Give up playing the drums now son, you know white people don’t have rhythm.’

Any distinction between the two is ridiculous; you can reverse the races and the same derogatory quality remains.

Reverse Racism: ‘you white folks aren’t allowed on this dance-floor, go somewhere else or we’ll get rough with you.’

Racism: ‘Give up playing the drums now son, you know black people don’t have rhythm.’

The implications of the term are terrible in that they suggest that racial discrimination and derision are somehow justified by the oppression a race has suffered in the past. This simply isn’t the case. Racism is defined in a literal sense as: ‘a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others. ‘ There is no limit to which races can be labeled racist when they deride another. In light of this definition it is clear that ‘Reverse Racism‘ is a misnomer that only serves the purpose of deepening rifts between different cultures and ethnic groups by creating a fundamental distinction in acceptable behaviors. Racism can literally propagated against anyone, regardless of their race.

You will probably remember in December 2005 there was a series of riots south of Sydney in Cronulla. These riots were initiated by a group of deluded bogans who allowed a few negative instances inform their perspective on an entire race. These nationalistic riots (which were in actuality a bit more like an angry BBQ) were universally condemned by the media and definitively labeled racist. Interestingly when the middle eastern community responded in a similar angry manner where they demeaned the Australian identity and defaced the Australian flag the violence was rationalised in terms of an offended cultural identity and the riots were popularly referred to as ‘Reverse Racist’. I’m not talking about justification for the riots because that has no bearing on the issue at hand, rather I’m talking about the acts perpetrated by both factions throughout the period, all of which can be termed racist. Both instances are terrible occurrences that are affronting to a sense of decency. No faction was better or worse than the other, there is no distinction between what was termed ‘Racism‘ and what was called ‘Reverse Racism.‘

The term ‘Reverse Racism‘ effectively suggests that what is OK for one group of people may not be acceptable for another; effectively facilitating segregation. It might have be true that what is OK for for one group of people is not OK for another if one looked at the issue in a more general abstracted sense as many factors (such as cultural context, and age) contribute to acceptable social behavior. However, this issue of racism transcends the subjectivity inherent in the consideration of cultural context, it is a question of moral absolutes. Is racism OK or isn’t it? I think we all realise the answer to that obviously rhetorical question. If it isn’t OK then neither is the term ‘Reverse Racism‘ which dehumanises people and aggravates existing racial tensions.

Its probably important for me to say here that, I realise that Caucasian races haven’t suffered throughout history as much as other racial groups and I don’t intend to belittle the achievements and incredible progress that has been made in achieving racial quality universally. What I am saying is merely that the phrase carries some profoundly negative inferences that are probably best left un-inferred.

Racism is racism, no prefix changes that.

UNICO, an Italian American organization is blasting MTV’s new reality show Jersey Shore that “relies on crude (Italian) stereotypes and highlights cursing, bad behavior and violence…”. Or Guidos for short.

Unico also criticized the Sopranos for the same reasons. Is this anger justifiable? Or does MTV have a right to depict obnoxious subcultures?

see Douchebags, Stand Proud for additional reference.

How would you define me. Go ahead, think of a few words before you keep reading.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Ok, were any of those words related to my sexuality? If you answer yes you are going to surprise me and we really maybe need to sit down and talk a little more. But if I can take a guess, I’m going to take a stab and say that didn’t even come up in your top five.

So tell me why so many individuals that I know, literally define themselves based on the individual they are dating. It’s perfectly reasonable for me to assume there really is a mystic answer out there, and I just haven’t found it yet.

But for the most part, when people do that, it drives me crazy.

I can not let myself believe that a person as no other basis or spec or individuality that the only thing they can hold tight to or define themselves as is by their sexuality.

There’s this group of homosexuals I know (now let’s be honest, ALL of them are not this way) but a big portion that I’ve run into (which is certainly not saying there are a whole lot more I haven’t met) spend so much energy defining themselves by their sexuality that they almost leave no room to get to know anything else about them.

They’ve adopted their own lingo so as not to say words like “straight” – I got scolded while giving directions that the correct word is “forward” I almost slapped her. All they talk about is their sexual history, things regarding sex, how they are viewed because they are a homosexual, all they’ll watch is shows about homosexuals and listen to music by people in the “family.”

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m all for taking up a cause. I think it’s extremely important, and I might add attractive, to do so. But that’s not what I’m talking about in these instances. These individuals are purely defining there life by this.

Since I started dating this new individual (1 month baby) people have started defining me by that. I’m sorry, when did the core of me change based upon the person I’m dating? Pretty sure I’m still the same person.

It’s been interesting.

I made my second voyage to London last weekend. My first was as a pre-teen, when I had dreams of princes and princesses dancing through my head. In middle school, London was a place full of mystical history, royalty, and those funny little guards in weird hats.

As a college student, I saw a distinctly different side of London. Of course, my friend Laura and I still made the typical London circuit, eating fish and chips:

gawking over the city’s telephone booths (does anyone actually use these things anymore?):

checking the time at Big Ben:

and walking Tower Bridge:

But this time around, I saw that London goes deeper than the crown jewels or those funny little guards (which, come to think of it, neither of which I actually got to see). This time, I got to experience London as a modern, truly international city

Laura and I, in typical poor college student form, spent the weekend sleeping in our friend Geysha’s tiny flat. She graciously let us make makeshift beds (I’m pretty sure I slept under her desk the first night) and shared her Frosted Flakes in the morning. But more importantly, Geysha gave us the true London experience, which we embarked on with her friends from all corners of the globe.

Geysha avoided the Tube, preferring instead to ride at the top of London’s famous double-decker busses. She said it was the thrill of watching drivers juuust miss brave bicyclists, but it was also a fabulous way to people watch and become acquainted with the life of the city. Except when a drunk, 40-year-old Englishmen threw up all over  his seat on Saturday night. That was gross.

We visited one of Geysha’s favorite coffee shops in London (which didn’t stop us from having Starbucks three times), ogled over way-over-my-credit-limit fashions, and, for the first time in three months, I saw an American movie from the comfort of a movie theatre.

On Friday night, Laura, Geysha and I transfixed her German classmates with descriptions of prom (yes, Facebook photos were unearthed). In return, Geysha’s friends recounted their own high school years. Turns out some teenage woes transcend all cultures.

As a grand finale, Geysha brought us to her favorite pub, a relaxed Dutch place with a diverse clientele. I found myself high-fiving an Irishman for his support of Hillary Clinton and belting the lyrics to “Love Shack” with an eclectic group of Americans, Australians and French. A middle-aged Englishman asked me for my opinion on a beer (my father would be so proud).

Where else but in Europe?

I’ve worked nearly every shift in the world in the myriad jobs I have had the pleasure of toiling at.  Swing?  Early AM?  Graveyard?  Splits?  Late Evening + Early AM?  3 hours?  4 hours?  12?  8?  I feel like I’ve done them all.  I found though, that I really do like the full 12 hour graveyard  Why you ask?  First, less bullshit.  No management, PT, OT, social work or docs.  This of course has it’s disadvantages too, but you soon learn to deal.  Second, the mood is different.  Many of my night shift colleagues and I figure we have 12 hours to get everything done and the pace kind of reflects that.  Third, it starts with a bang, then usually calms by morning.  Though some nights you start with a bang and it never stops.  Did I mention lack of management in the house?

Thing is with nights is that it is completely opposite from the rest of the world and our natural circadian rhythm.  Nature did not mean for us to be up all night when we should be sleeping.  Guess that’s why night shift work is considered a carcinogen.  After 2 weeks of flip-flopping back and forth from nights to days made me realize that I may have what works for me to help me “survive” the night shift.  I’ve seen severl post around the blogosphere talking about this, so I figured to add my voice to the fray.

Wanderer’s Tips to Night Shift Survival, volume 1.

1  Pick a millieu.  Say what?  It’s simple:  decide if you are going to stay on nights or are going to flip back and forth.  I know that I function better when I’m more consistent.  I plan my schedule to cluster my days and work a 3 on, 2 off, 3 on, 6 off rotating schedule.  During those 2 days I stay a night owl and don’t flip back to days until the 6 day stretch.  But I don’t have a long stretch like that, you say.  Bribe your scheduler.  Seriously, having a block of time to be “normal” will make you feel better and more apt to stay fresh when you’re back on nights.

2.  Don’t rely on caffeine.  I know that’s heresy to say to night shifters, but too much caffeine only makes you shaky after awhile.  And you’re still tired.  I usually have some sort of caffeine at 2am or so but I’m not mainlining it all night long.

3.  Stay hydrated.  I know that leads to the need to pee which we never seem to have, but it will make you feel better.  Plus you have to counter the diuretic effect of all that caffeine.

4.  Eat small.  No big meals.  It will only make you slow and tired as you digest.

5.  Get some sun if you can.  I know during the winter it can be tough, but I swear getting some sun in my face makes me feel better.

6.  Exercise.  A little bit of something to raise the heart beat before bed can help you sleep better.  I ride a bike every day I can and on those days where I don’t I miss it.  Plus it helps me drown out the night prior.

7.  Black out curtains and a face mask.  Best money I have spent on things to help me sleep.

8.  Pharmaceuticl help.  I have an issue sleeping on my non-work days so I have turned to the occasional help of Ambien.  I maximize sleep when I can.  Things like Benadryl/Tyelonl PM/Unisom/Melatonin can leave you with a bit of a hangover effect, but they work.  Caveat emptor.

9.  Realize that you’re going to miss out on things and make peace with that.  Sleep is needed and you have to guard it jealously.  A favorite story of mine is a friend who worked nights and their mother kept calling at 1pm, when they were asleep.  She would say, “I thought you would be awake.” So my friend decided to turn it around and call their family at 2am…they should be up right? It only took one time for their mom to get the point.  Your family, friend, telemarketers etc. all need to know that you sleep in the day,just like they sleep in the night.  It’s hard if you have kids though…good luck.  So turn off the phone and crash out.

10.  Understand that you will get tired of nights at one point and decide to go to the “Light Side.”  Truly you are a sell-out, but the reality is that those who stay on nights are just jealous…

Hope this helps.  I swear by all of this and has kept me “sane” for nearly 3 years.  Granted that “sane” is a relative term…

Hip hop has been one of the most influential forces on the world since its popularization in the 80’s. Its ability to sway the masses and develop a culture has surprised and disappointed many who did not want it to last. Though its inception had many benefits to venting youth; through time its development was halted and formation redefined. Hip hop music is bad for African American youth due its cultural misrepresentations. So many rappers are liars and their ways are further displays of how false and misleading they are. The ambiguous messages and deliberate glorification of a detrimental way of life is another way they exploit the music and people they ”lead.”
Hip hop has made significant progress over the last 25 years and the art took a long time for its acceptance and expansion. In the process of growing it began to define a people instead of an art form. Unfortunately, this hip hop culture has been demonized by the corporations who puppeteer the most influential artist. In the process of investing in an art that related to youth, the perceived culture of hip hop was stigmatized and used as a profiling mechanism of African Americans opposed to a voice for a silent people. In addition, the messages delivered through the art were not accurate or dispelling this popular ideology either… stay tune there’s more to come.  

BJW

To Be Continued…