Wow. Just...wow.
Last night's episode will be discussed in infinitesimal detail, so if you haven't seen it, and don't want any spoilers, move along...
Lost Open Thread
Wow. Just...wow.
Last night's episode will be discussed in infinitesimal detail, so if you haven't seen it, and don't want any spoilers, move along...
Fatty Boom Balattys and Their BIG STUPID FOOD!
So. Second only to "headless fatty" imagery, one of my most loathed characteristics of OHNOES Obesity CrisisTM reporting is stock footage of oversized food. I don't mean just a big serving of food, but food challenge-sized food, the sort of food that would be featured on Man v. Food or served up at an eating competition. Food-that's-going-for-a-world-record kind of food.
As if fat people eat that kind of food all the time. Which is why they're fat.
(The truth is, even fat people who are fat as a result of disordered eating aren't eating five-pound cheeseburgers and three-foot diameter pizzas, for chrissakes. It's just wrong, apart from anything else.)
Last night, Rachel Maddow ran a segment that was breathtaking in its use of clichéd oversized food stock footage, and truly shameless in its implication that people are fat because they eat this kind of food in mass quantities. Their "big, stupid food."
[Transcript below.]
Sometimes people ask me why I don't watch Rachel Maddow. Well, one reason is because the few times I have watched her show, I've gotten the distinct impression that she has nothing but contempt for the disgustingly fat losers who populate small towns in middle America. You know, people like me.
[H/T to Shaker Kate217.]
Maddow: One lesser-known part of the health reform bill that President Obama signed into law this morning requires restaurants with twenty or more locations nationwide to display nutritional information on their menus. That means you'll be able to see the exact number of calories in that burger or pizza or extra super-ginormous really quite large bubbly drink before you order it and put it in your mouth. New York City restaurants have already been displaying this type of info for a couple of years in an attempt to make people—to help people make healthier choices when they order. Expect conservatives to start seeing Maoist numerological plots in the calorie counts on menus at any moment. But while legislation might now be helping us become a slightly less obese nation, it turns out that art has been no help at all in this fight against the fat. Kent Jones has the story. Hi, Kent.
Kent Jones, MSNBC Correspondent: Good evening, senator. [Maddow laughs.] You know, art looks at life and then says back to us, "Eat more carbs." [Maddow laughs.] Here's the scientific proof right here. [Maddow laughs.]
[Begin videotape, showing stock footage of gigantic burgers, pizzas, and sundaes, segueing into stock footage of headless fatties, segueing into images of "Last Supper" paintings, all set to zany music and cut in a sort of terrible 1980's music video style.]
Jones, in voiceover: We live in the golden age of big, stupid food. Portion sizes have ballooned and ballooned until…voila! We are absolutely flab-ulous. Professor Brian Wansink of the Cornell Food and Brand Lab wanted to know if this craving for more and more food was a new phenomenon or something that's been expanding over time, like we have. So, he analyzed the food shown in 52 of the best-known paintings of "The Last Supper" from 1,000 AD until today.
Wansink: We measured the size of the food, and measured the size of the plates, and measured the size of the bread. We indexed them based on the size of people's heads.
Jones, in voiceover: And he found that the main courses shown in the paintings grew by 69 percent, the plate size by 66 percent, and the bread size by 23 percent. As it was written in the Gospel, according to Olive Garden. Said Wansink, "I think people assume that increased serving sizes, or portion distortion, is a recent phenomenon. But this research indicates that it's a general trend for at least the last millennium." So basically, more food in the real world means more food in the paintings. And that means more food for Jesus and the apostles. It's a miracle!
Clip from Life of Brian: I think it was blessed are the cheese-makers.
Jones, in voiceoever: Amen.
[End videotape.]
Maddow: I love that they based it on head size.
Jones: Yeah.
Maddow: That was the index.
Jones: Yeah. Don't—don't eat anything bigger than your head, right?
Maddow: —bigger than your head. That's the rule, right? I broke that rule in Arkansas. [Maddow laughs.]
Jones: We heard about that. But anyway— [Jones laughs.]
Maddow: I'm sorry. Burp! [Jones laughs.] All right. That does it for us tonight. Thank you very much, Kent. We will see you again tomorrow night. Until then, our new blog at maddowblog.msnbc.com is awesome. We hope you check it out.
Happy Ada Lovelace Day: Telling Our Stories
Happy Ada Lovelace Day, everybody! Yesterday, Historiann wrote about the new report issued by the American Association of University Women called “Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics” (STEM). (Here is a pdf of the entire report.) The post is great and you should read the whole thing. Historiann ends with an invitation to women in STEM fields who have likely experienced some level of gender bias: “Tell us your stories.” Seriously, don’t miss this thread! My entry is long, so I’m posting it here instead of clogging up her comments:
My 71-year-old mother wanted to be a petroleum geologist when she was a kid. But her fancy private prep school did not allow her to take math beyond algebra I. None of the girls could, because they would "distract the boys". Instead, she took two extra years of sewing. I think it was all of the spatial reasoning involved in dressmaking that made Mama's IQ score so high that the school re-tested her. At 16, my mother could look at a woman’s dress on the street, mentally reverse-engineer the pattern, draw it out, and construct the dress in time for the school dance. Meanwhile, my dad has to think twice to tell left from right, and was a very successful research physicist for 40 years. (Hint: you don't need brilliant mental-rotation scores to be a good scientist). In 2007, Feng et al. demonstrated that the famous gender gap in spatial skills disappears if female subjects play just 10 hours of Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault (pdf; see also Spence et al. 2009). But my mother insists, “Boys are better at spatial relations.”
I took all of the math and science my high school offered and then some (I ran out of AP calculus and took a course at Berkeley my senior year). Still, when I got to college my assigned advisor said at our first meeting, "What are you going to do with a degree in neuroscience—teach high school biology?" At the end of the meeting he asked me if I was a ballet dancer, adding that I "looked like one". My next advisor was better. I questioned one of my male classmates who stayed with that first guy: "What did he ask at your first meeting?" "Oh, you know: 'where do you see yourself in five years? Ten?'" Ah. No, I don’t know.
Even for women without such stories, the subtler, unconscious expression of attitudes like my ex-advisor's provide a real drag on women in the lab. Both male and female supervisors expect and accept different behaviors from men and women. Hence the female supervisor who chided me for being "aggressive" when I took initiative and succeeded, while she praised my male colleague for "being a go-getter" when he took initiative and screwed up. Over time, who will the manager promote—the gung-ho, learn-on-the-job guy who everyone likes, or the competent woman who is "aggressive", and therefore makes people wary?
Women can't walk a fine line between "doormat" and “bitch” because one doesn't exist. People (male and female) feel more comfortable imposing on women's time to ask for favors or additional work. If a woman complies, she's swamped with extra work for which others take the credit, and can rightly be criticized for not drawing boundaries. If she does not comply, she becomes a poor team player, or worse.
I’ve tried to walk the non-existent line. During my first full-time job out of college, a scientist who was chatting with our post-doc told me that I was “naughty” and "needed a spanking" when I asked him to please stop interrupting my work with personal questions. I looked straight at the post-doc and said, “why don’t you take your friend out for a drink?” and they left. I had work to do, and I did not want to set a bad precedent. Guess who got told she was "no fun" and "had a bad attitude"? At this same job, I dealt with men from other labs—principal investigators (PIs), no less—dropping in to "chat" (and ask more personal questions), and one professor who found my number in the directory and kept calling the lab to ask me out. When I complained to my PI, he said that I “obviously was way too nice to the guy” the first time and that was it—I was on my own.
The campus pub was a crucial networking spot, but if I went there to shoot the breeze and some pool, there were always jokes—in front of men I respected—about “bending me over the pool table”, or exclamations of, “you play pool?!” (That pub was also the scene for this hilarious anecdote.) I still loved working there, but I am not surprised that it’s the same institution where Barbara Ehrenreich got her PhD in cell biology.
These extra burdens on women’s time and our marginalization in networking are no mere annoyance. Is the PI going to promote someone to lab manager, or recommend her strongly for a grad program or fellowship when there's a vague feeling floating around that she's "difficult" or spends too much time “socializing” (read: fending off advances)? If she takes the “jokes” in stride, is she really serious enough for the job? After all, she’s the girl everyone wants to bend over the pool table!
Disablism at work also hits women harder. Gender discrimination can slow down a career, but it is my chronic illness that derailed mine completely. Anyone who faces health issues with self or family is up against barriers at work. But these barriers are even higher for women. First, women are still expected to be the primary caregivers of children and elders. If a man does these things, he is going beyond the call and may be lauded for the effort these days (though it would have killed my father's career). Women must do the work and hide the effort. Second, women are thought to be weak and to lack passion for the work anyway, so any appearance of weakness or request for legal accommodation reinforces those low expectations, both for the woman who asks and for other women too.
Many of us go into the workplace thinking that it’s a meritocracy, that the quality of our work will carry us to success. Because we are different. Better. It’s “exceptional woman” syndrome, and I’ve been there too. About ten years ago I attended a dinner party in Chicago at the home of a friend who worked for cognitive neuropsychologist Jerre Levy. As Levy and I talked, she told me the story of how a certain famous scientist with power over her career threatened to blacklist her if she didn’t sleep with him. Ashamed as I am to admit it now, I expressed disbelief: surely he couldn’t do that! Her work would speak for itself! Well, she fixed me with a look worthy of the great Bea Arthur and said, “One disparaging letter is all it takes. Do you think a man like that couldn’t end my career—or yours—with a stroke of the pen if he decided to?" I haven’t doubted women’s experience since.
So, on this Ada Lovelace Day, I say: thank you, Dr. Levy. I’m glad you made it to the top anyway, and I recognize your struggle to get there. And thanks to all the women who are brave enough to tell their stories.
Eating Vegetables Will Turn You Into a Limp-Wristed Nancy Boy
Unless you give it a MANLY new name, of course.
Thus, "Heganism." That's right, they're not vegans, they're HEGANS. Seriously, how insecure do you have to be? I love how the existence of male vegans is somehow this weird new phenomenon, too.
Coincidentally, I was just thinking earlier today about how fucking stupid the word "Manscaping" is. Like, if you just said "I shaved my balls," you'd somehow forget that you're a dude.
As Melissa said to me earlier when I sent her this article, calling yourself a vegan won't give you a "vegina," doodz.
Make Some Noise Against Trans Exploitation at the Tribeca Film Festival
[Trigger warning.]
Yesterday, Shaker Eastsidekate sent me the link to (emphatic trigger warning re: transphobia, violence, and exploitation) this piece by Gina at Skip the Makeup about a film set to run at the Tribeca Film Festival titled Ticked Off Trannies With Knives.
This work of film discusses the sensitive issue of violence against trans women and the plot involves 'Trannies' extremely violent revenge against men who abused them, but you'll be happy to know it's all been done with a lot of humor. As the director stated, "I don't consider myself an advocate. I'm not really a protester or anything like that. All of my films feature comedy."There are many more details about the specific tone and content of this film at the link, where Gina provides a comprehensive deconstruction of the many, many things that are wrong with this piece of
Over at her eponymous blog, gudbuytjane provides another swell quote from the director, a cis gay man who wanted to do a revenge film but thought films about "male gay bashing victims" were overdone, thus his appropriation of trans lives:
[My film's] like Grand Theft Auto. If you have a bad day at work, you can shoot some people, kill some hookers, trash your car and feel better. It's the same with my movie.Classy. Did I mention that this Tarantino-wannabe asshole uses the names of real victims of real murders not only in the movie, but right in the trailer? "Denver, CO. Angie Zapata, a transgender teen
is bludgeoned to death by a man she met online," reads the trailer. Yeah. Even Grand Theft Auto doesn't have the gall to use the names of real life murder victims to justify its gleeful violence. Fury.
Register your polite but firm disappointment that Tribeca would not only be screening this film, but promoting it as their first film to feature transgender people in transgender roles, by contacting Tammie Rosen at (212) 941-2003, or trosen@tribecaenterprises.com. There is also a Facebook group.
Well, Well, Well
Researchers find that high-fructose corn syrup prompts considerably more weight gain:
A Princeton University research team has demonstrated that all sweeteners are not equal when it comes to weight gain: Rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than those with access to table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same.Insert a caveat about expanding categories to include ever more people as "obese" during that same time period. Nonetheless, leaving aside the labels in favor of nutritional health, the average American's consumption of HFCS over the same time period has increased by "an alarming 12,250%." !!!
…"Some people have claimed that high-fructose corn syrup is no different than other sweeteners when it comes to weight gain and obesity, but our results make it clear that this just isn't true, at least under the conditions of our tests," said psychology professor Bart Hoebel, who specializes in the neuroscience of appetite, weight and sugar addiction. "When rats are drinking high-fructose corn syrup at levels well below those in soda pop, they're becoming obese -- every single one, across the board. Even when rats are fed a high-fat diet, you don't see this; they don't all gain extra weight."
…In the 40 years since the introduction of high-fructose corn syrup as a cost-effective sweetener in the American diet, rates of obesity in the U.S. have skyrocketed, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 1970, around 15 percent of the U.S. population met the definition for obesity; today, roughly one-third of the American adults are considered obese, the CDC reported. High-fructose corn syrup is found in a wide range of foods and beverages, including fruit juice, soda, cereal, bread, yogurt, ketchup and mayonnaise. On average, Americans consume 60 pounds of the sweetener per person every year.
As I've mentioned in several previous threads, having a diabetic in the household has made me keenly aware of the ubiquity of HFCS. It's in everything. And it's in everything because corn is subsidized to the tune of billions of dollars in the US every year.
The OHNOES Obesity CrisisTM, sponsored by the US Government.
Which now, hilariously, demonizes fat people as lazy layabouts, after ensuring that virtually every processed food produced in America is rich with a government-subsidized product that promotes weight gain. Awesome.
[H/T to Shaker Carol.]
Constance McMillen Wins... Sort Of
Late last night, via a friend's twitter post, I heard that a federal judge had decided that the Mississippi school district that canceled prom rather than allow Constance McMillen and her girlfriend to attend as a couple had violated McMillen's First Amendment rights.
The school district does not have to reinstate the prom, however. Parents have planned a private prom, instead.
The Clarion-Ledger article linked above noted that "all junior and senior students would be allowed to attend, although it was not clear whether same-sex couples would be allowed to attend together." On other sites, I read that McMillen was not invited to the private prom.
If that is the case, the school board wins, too. They relied on an old southern tactic I described in a piece I did for The Guardian's Comment Is Free:
The prom cancellation is reminiscent of tactics from at least a half-century ago: rather than integrate public pools, parks, and schools, southern municipalities often closed them. Sometimes, in lieu of closure, they turned over such accommodations to private enterprises. In defiance of school integration orders, they opened private schools and segregation academies. Such acts allowed them to continue de facto segregation long after de jure segregation was outlawed.If you're so inclined, please go check out the whole piece!
Disney's New Pirates Movie Will Have Women Jumping Up and Down
by Shaker TheLadyEve
A March 21st article in the New York Post recently described part of the casting process for Rob Marshall's upcoming Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. Apparently, the casting call for female extras was very specific in one department (emphasis original):
The filmmakers sent out a casting call last week seeking "beautiful female fit models. Must be 5ft7in-5ft8in, size 4 or 6, no bigger or smaller. Age 18-25. Must have a lean dancer body. Must have real breasts. Do not submit if you have implants."Okay, where to begin? I'm not certain why the casting director is so preoccupied by casting women without implants; if anecdotal evidence provided by previous Pirates installments teaches us anything, it's that the women in the film are just going to be crammed into costumes that make their breasts look preternaturally high, firm and big anyway. But the casting agents involved make it clear that they are concerned with authenticity, the hallmark of any effective period piece. And those fight scenes need to look authentic all the way down to the breasts, apparently.
And they warn that there'll be a "show and tell" day.
To make sure LA talent scouts don't get caught in a "booby trap," potential lassies will have to undergo a Hollywood-style jiggle-your-jugs test and jog for judges. If there's nothing moving from the waist up, they're saying, it's a dead giveaway that you're not all flesh and bones -- and you're out.
Apparently, the bouncier the better, especially for sword-fighting action sequences, according to the Sunday Times of London.
"In the last movie, there were enhanced breasts to give that 18th-century whorish look and men were pretty well padded too, and no one worried," a former casting agent said. "But times are changing, and the audience can spot false breasts."
Notice that they do not strive for authenticity by casting women of all sizes, or by casting women with disabilities, or by casting women with the imperfect teeth and skin that one would expect to see in an era that came before modern medicine and plastic surgery and that was rampant with malnutrition and disease. There will be no women with scurvy or pellagra in Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. No, they must all be tall, beautiful models with "dancer bodies" but their breasts must look authentic, because women are defined solely by their breasts.
And fake breasts mean you're a "whore," according to the casting agents. After all, fake breasts in an 18th century pirate fantasy film would be the equivalent to the Roman soldiers wearing wrist watches in Spartacus—unthinkable for an true auteur churning out pablum for the nefarious Disney octopus.
I'm more than a little irked by the wink-nudge style of this article. It comes complete with a pun using the term "booby!" It is positively creepy how the author lightheartedly recounts the painful extremes to which Keira Knightley was forced to go in order to look "well-endowed," joking about how she was spared a "breast exam." It all boils down to women, yet again, being held to an unattainable standard of beauty. While this standard is to be expected in the U.S. film industry, it is particularly despicable when it is shrouded in the guise of supposed "authenticity."
Question of the Day
I’m doing research for a paper on the unlikely friendship between two seemingly opposite characters in a play, and I’m finding a lot of common bonds between them that both enhances the drama and makes the characters more real. So naturally I’m translating that into real life to ask: How opposite are you to your best friend/partner?
Chicken. Egg. Chicken. Egg. Chicken.
A new study has found a correlation between happiness and substantive conversation:
It may sound counterintuitive, but people who spend more of their day having deep discussions and less time engaging in small talk seem to be happier, said Matthias Mehl, a psychologist at the University of Arizona who published a study on the subject.Mehl believes that "by engaging in meaningful conversations, we manage to impose meaning on an otherwise pretty chaotic world," and wants to investigate in a subsequent study the possibility of "a cause-and-effect relationship between the kind of conversations one has and one's happiness."
"We found this so interesting, because it could have gone the other way — it could have been, 'Don't worry, be happy' — as long as you surf on the shallow level of life you're happy, and if you go into the existential depths you'll be unhappy," Dr. Mehl said.
But, he proposed, substantive conversation seemed to hold the key to happiness for two main reasons: both because human beings are driven to find and create meaning in their lives, and because we are social animals who want and need to connect with other people.
...The happiest person in the study, based on self-reports about satisfaction with life and other happiness measures as well as reports from people who knew the subject, had twice as many substantive conversations, and only one-third of the amount of small talk as the unhappiest, Dr. Mehl said. Almost every other conversation the happiest person had — 45.9 percent of the day's conversations — were substantive.
Interesting. I'm generally a very happy person, and I have almost nothing but substantive conversations. No office, no coworkers, no smalltalk.
But I don't know that I'm happy because, or primarily because, I have substantive conversations. Having substantive conversations is indeed something I frequently enjoy, but that's because I'm predisposed to enjoying substantive conversations and have people with whom to have them.
Personally, I loathe smalltalk (because I'm not particularly good at it; it's a skill, and it's not one I have in abundance). But there are people I know who love nothing more than to smalltalk with strangers, people who are not disposed at all toward substantive conversations and actually try to avoid them.
So. I'm dubious about the potential for finding causation here. I'm guessing that the type of conversations one has reflects one's communication style, and that happiness is more closely related to how well one's life provides opportunity to utilize that style.
And I eagerly look forward to discussing these ideas with you in comments!
Help the First Nations University
by Shaker Claire, a student of literature & language, who is a feminist—and will not apologize for it.
[Video Transcript at the end of the post.]
Funding cuts are threatening the First Nations University of Canada. Check out their website here to find a form letter to send to Chuck Strahl, Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, and to PM Stephen Harper. Below is my slightly altered version of the form letter available on the Fund First Nations University Now! Blog. Please think about taking a few minutes to send an email or a letter. It doesn't take much effort, but it sure can mean a lot.
Dear Mr. Strahl and Mr. Harper,The CBC wrote about First Nations University here.
The recent Vancouver Olympic Games seemed to celebrate the cultures of Canada's Aboriginal Peoples. But the decision to cut funding to the First Nations University reveals a different, more troubling position: Does the Government of Canada only invest in Aboriginal Peoples when the world is watching? The First Nations University should be a source of Canadian pride. Where else can students learn from such a large concentration of Aboriginal instructors? What other school can put Aboriginal culture at the centre of the educational experience? No other school in Canada has such a wealth of indigenous knowledge.
First Nations University is a unique, and important institution. I am deeply concerned at the seeming indifference the Government of Canada is displaying toward the faculty, staff, and students at First Nations University who will be casualties of your irresponsible decision to close down the only Aboriginal university in Canada. I fear that the closure of First Nations University could reflect deep-seated racial antipathy toward First Nations people.
The Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations has shown good faith in initiating the changes required to bring the governance structures at First Nations University into conformity with those of other universities. A working group with representation from all stakeholder groups is currently developing a revised funding and governance model for First Nations University. The University of Regina has expressed its willingness to support First Nations University.
The continuation, and indeed the future success, of First Nations University should be of the utmost concern to the Canadian Government. Funding higher education, particularly at a school with no other Canadian equivalent, is essential for the economic strength of Aboriginal Peoples, and indeed, all Canadians. Please, do not let First Nations University close.
Yours sincerely,
Claire Lacey
---------------------------
Video Transcript:
Title: FOUR FRIENDS - SAVE THE FIRST NATIONS UNIVERSITY OF CANADA
A variety of students, of different ages, genders, and ethnicities, are shown one by one, talking about First Nations University.
First Nations University of Canada is about to shut its doors. Maybe forever. And this should concern me because? Our First Nations University is the only First Nations university in Canada. Because First Nations University helps people succeed in university better than any university in Canada. Because First Nations University has over one thousand students right now, and over three thousand graduates. And First Nations University has helped over ten thousand students complete their programs.
I came to First Nations University to be a journalist. I came to First Nations University to complete my minor in Indigenous Studies. I came to First Nations University to study leadership. I came to First Nations University because I believe that every community deserves safe drinking water. I came to First Nations University to give my son a better life. What about other people? Anybody can come to First Nations University of Canada, learn about First Nations cultures, languages, histories, business. People of every colour, race, and religion. Yeah, people from every direction.
Thousands of non-Aboriginal people have studied at the First Nations University of Canada.
Universities don't just shut down, right? It could be the first university in the history of Canada to close its doors. What will happen if it just shuts down? Students will just go to another university, right? Some will. But some won't. I waited and planned for years so that I could come to the First Nations University, where I could learn about my culture. From Aboriginal teachers. From Elders. Where there's no racism in the classrooms. Do First Nations Peoples have enough education already? Hardly. Only three percent of First Nations People have university degrees compared to eighteen percent of the entire population. If the education gap between Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals were to close by 2017, an additional 71 billion dollars would be injected into the economy. How's that for stimulus? And most of that money would be taxed.
So, what makes First Nations University so special? Well for one thing: It has the largest concentration of indigenous programming in the world. And the largest concentration of Aboriginal teachers, and the most Aboriginal teachers with PhDs. I don't get it. Why does the federal government want to shut down the First Nations University of Canada? The federal government says it will stop funding First Nations University on April 1st. The Department of Indian Affairs is cutting funding to First Nations postsecondary education? Don't they care about the future of Canada? Don’t they care that we're the future work force? [Man holding a toddler] Especially in provinces like Saskatchewan, where over thirty percent of the kids in school are aboriginal. [Woman holding a young child] And we are the fastest growing population in Canada. If you care about the future of this country and our communities and our cities and our future maybe you should care about the First Nations University. Would you rather your tax dollars spent on education, or incarceration? Then maybe you should support the First Nations University of Canada. All you have to do is go to fnuniv.wordpress.com [man pointing to the web address fnuniv.wordpress.com on the screen] It's right here. On your screen. I can see it, do you see it? There, you’ll find the success stories of this university. You will also find a link to a letter. Please, print out the letter and mail it to your MP. Mail it to the Prime Minister! Fax it. And call them. Tell them that First Nations University needs to be expanded, not downsized. Tell them: The First Nations University has a contribution to make to the future of Canada. And tell them now, because funding for the First Nations University ends on April 1st. That's less than a month away. So we need you to support the First Nations University of Canada. Right now! If you don't have a printer, email it!
Now, we need you to do one more thing. You need to send this to four friends. Four directions, four friends. Send it to four friends, four friends from the four directions. And the four colours: white, black, red and yellow. Four friends, so they can send it to four friends, and they'll send it to their four friends, and Ottawa will have letters coming from all directions. [Couple with young girl] Don't wait. Her future depends on it.
[On screen: GO TO: fnuniv.workpress.com Produced by: Students at the First Nations University of Canada Music composed and produced by Thomas Roussin]
Today's Edition of "Conniving and Sinister"
See Deeky's archive of all previous Conniving & Sinister strips here.
[In which Liss reimagines the long-running comic "Frank & Ernest," about two old straight white guys "telling it like it is," as a fat feminist white woman and a biracial queerbait telling it like it actually is from their perspectives. Hilarity ensues.]
De-Friended
(Trigger warning)
So, I'm catching up on email and facebook stuff after returning home from a conference. As I scroll down the FB chatter, I notice one "friend" has linked to this article.
His comment?
"Wow, I guess he finally had enough."
Enough of what?
Photo of the Day
President Obama signs health care legislation into law on Tuesday. [Doug Mills/The New York Times]
"Greased Lightning"
Okay, so every once in a while I go to the library and pick up a stack of CDs to put on my iPod. Sometimes I'm searching for something specific, sometimes I just browse hoping to see something mildly interesting that I would never ever actually pay to own, but hey, if it's free, that's a different story.
This is s how I ended up with Olivia Newton-John's Greatest Hits. And just now some stupid ass Grease megamix shuffles up. A bit of it was "Greased Lightning." which I am sure I've heard more than a few times, even if I've never much paid attention to it.
Well, I paid attention to it today. Check out this bit of chorus:
Greased lightnin', go greased lightnin'
You are supreme, the chicks'll cream for greased lightnin'
Really?
But what got my attention was this:
With new pistons, plugs, and shocks, I can get off my rocks
You know that I ain't braggin', she's a real pussy wagon, greased lightnin'
Yeah, "she's a real pussy wagon." That's a line in the song. "A real pussy wagon." WTF?
[Cross-posted.]
Kindergarteners, YOU'RE DOOMED!!!!
One of the things I most hate is hearing my younger cousins (always female, and I mean elementary school age) bemoan their "fatness" or their need to lose weight. I want to keep them from falling deeper into the pit of despair that is the fatphobic-and-dieting culture.
As of today, I think I have finally lost. I just learned, via the NY Times, that "Baby Fat May Not Be So Cute After All."
Scientists are worried that their efforts to "end childhood obesity" aimed at school-age populations "may be, if not too little, too late." Too stop the horrible, horrible curse-of-fat, we must begin at birth:Things are starting to change: late last year an Institute of Medicine study committee was charged for the first time with developing obesity prevention recommendations specifically for the 0-to-5 set. The report, due in about 18 months, will look at the role of sleep and early feeding patterns, as well as physical activity.
I don't have much comment, except to note, there is always room to blame mamas:Many doctors are concerned about women being obese and unhealthy before pregnancy because, as they point out, the womb is the baby’s first environment
I think this could quickly take on class and color connotations as well, in a society in which the mothering of poor women, particularly poor women of color, is constantly assailed and called into question. One of the doctors quoted worked on a study that asserted "compared with their white counterparts, black and Hispanic children exhibited a range of risk factors related to child obesity."
[snip]
“The intrauterine environment of a woman with diabetes overnourishes the fetus,” said the study’s author, Dana Dabelea, an epidemiologist at the Colorado School of Public Health. And that, she added, may “reset the offspring’s satiety set point, and make them predisposed to eat more.”
One of the "solutions" suggested for lowering the "risk of obesity" was breastfeeding. Black women (in the U.S.), in particular, have much lower rates of breastfeeding than other women. This might be tied up in a number of factors like the fact that many black women have low-wage jobs which don't allow for purchase of expensive pumping equipment (or breaks to pump) or the historical stigma attached to forced wet-nursing. But this could fuel the sometimes-present argument in the to-breastfeed-or-not debate that mothers who don't breastfeed don't care as much about their babies' health.
Given the blame-the-fat-mother meme, we can expect the continued condemnation of poor mothers and black mothers, who are more likely to be fat than mothers in other socio-economic and racial groups. Also, poor mothers might be eligible for programs like Food Stamps and WIC (which will provide infant formula), putting them in a position in which many people feel that their food choices should be scrutinized and judged.
Obviously, this is just what we needed: another way to assess how horribly mothers fail.
And, another way to tell kids, at an even younger age, that they fail, too. It isn't as if schools or scientists or Michelle Obama are couching their programs or suggestions in any other terms. "Prevention," "risk," "epidemic," etc. Kids are not clueless--even the little ones know when they've been judged deficient. To be fat is to be bad and immoral.
How sad that they're getting that message earlier and earlier.
