Last year was my senior year of college. I attended Oberlin College and took a class called Principles of New Media (Or Introduction to New Media, I can never remember which) that lasted both semesters. The first semester was more about photoshop and illustrator and some beginner internet; the second semester was purely dreamweaver and flash.
One day in class we had a discussion about the nature of the internet in terms of a social tool. We weren't even necessarily talking about social networking; many of the main points of the discussion dealt with whether or not it was a bad thing for one's entire social life to be on the computer. At the time I felt neutral about the whole discussion because I most definitely had a real life social life and didn't really spend that much time cultivating an online one.
Fast forward a year later, and I wish I knew then what I know now. I have been using the past six months to build my presence in the Jezebel commenter community and I have found it to be an invaluable tool in dealing with my spiral of depression post-graduation. I also have found keeping this blog itself has given me a sense of purpose and a place to organize my thoughts. Maybe I'm unclear as to what my professional aspirations should be; but at least I have this forum to write and develop ideas and stay intellectually on point.
My bottom line? Everybody should be part of an internet community of some sort. Finding the right community is a lot like choosing a college or making a real-life friend. You definitely have to sort through a lot of crap blogs and crap forums until you can find a place that is a good fit for you. But then, it opens up a whole new world! New people to hang out with, new ideas presented to you, a new support system! It's great.
I also think that the way society views the internet is totally wrong. It must be acknowledged that it is a realm unto itself and not an extension of real life. I'm not saying it doesn't cross over into real life or vice versa; it's just that it is entirely possible to live out an entire other life online, and I don't think that this choice should be a punishable offense. You may think many things about people who have their social lives online, but censure and pity should not be among them.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Rape culture
Recently my brother emailed me a link to this article, which contained news I had already seen on Jezebel. I've been thinking a lot about it in the context of everything else I've ever read or thought about rape. The idea that people blame victims (and that women blame victims more often the men) hardly surprises me. In fact, it didn't even phase me.
A lot of the comments on these blogs that are thoughtful really hit the point about women blaming women: most women want to feel like they can do something to prevent being raped. We are told what steps to take to prevent rape, and then we think that as long as we follow those rules, we won't be raped. I'm not claiming I'm different, I'm just saying that's how it is--so there is probably some part of a woman who thinks "but that would never happen to ME because I would never get drunk/get in a car with a man/go outside/____" and thus, victim-blaming.
How I want to describe the problem with rape culture is this:
Imagine that participating in the gender binary is like driving a car. Therefore, everybody is driving at all times. Most people follow the rules of driving MOST of the time (that is, they drive on the right side of the road, they follow traffic lights, they don't drive drunk, they don't cut people off). On occasion, however, somebody breaks a driving rule, and a crash ensues. These crashes can range from fender-benders (unwanted touching) to death by car accident (rape at gunpoint).
The reason I make this analogy is to ask this question: if you knew a girl who was killed in a car accident because a drunk driver swerved across the middle lane, would you say that it was her fault because she didn't have good enough grades, because she once road in a car with another boy, because sometimes she likes to drive barefoot, or blame her for any number of actions she has taken in the past? Obviously, the answer is no (I hope). You would blame the drunk driver and punish that person and educate them on safe driving.
You can't claim that the accident was the girl's fault because she was driving to begin with--people who decide to operate outside of the driving normative by riding a bike or walking could also be struck down by a reckless driver (i.e. transgendered people, homosexual people, young people, old people). Someday everybody has got to get somewhere, and they could be struck by a careless "driver" at any time.
Additionally, in rape culture, young women are raised with lessons about How Not to be Raped, while men (and people) are not taught How Not to Rape. That's the equivalent of giving half of the populate driver's ed, refusing to educate the other half, letting the uneducated half be indoctrinated through societal messages that they should be aggressive drivers, and then blaming the educated half for getting killed in a car accident when the ignorant driver breaks a law.
In short, stop blaming the victim and start blaming the perpetrator. And then take it one step farther and start blaming rape culture.
Here are some links about Rape Culture and the consequences of rape for further enlightenment:
The Not Rape Epidemic
Labels:
sad stuff
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
pipettes/valley of the dolls
I found myself thinking about this Pipettes video (embedding disabled unfortunately) this morning during my commute.
I wanted to share with you the inspiration for the video, a clip from Beyond the Valley of the Dolls which makes me so happy. It is a great time capsule.
I wanted to share with you the inspiration for the video, a clip from Beyond the Valley of the Dolls which makes me so happy. It is a great time capsule.
Labels:
the musics
Monday, February 15, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Lady Gaga: preventing people the world over from suiciding themselves
So as you may recall from a previous post I will continue posting crazy emails in the customer service entry (and other crazy emails in general). A lot of these emails come to me from a friend who works for a ticketing company and she likes to spread the love.
This one is particularly sad, as it deals with a fan whose love of Lady Gaga knows no bounds. As you may or may not be able to guess because of how extreme this fan is, the person is from Japan. S/he purchased a meet and greet package for a Lady Gaga concert that had to be canceled because of Gaga's overscheduling and health issues. Here is the person's response to an email with the news that the meet and greet is canceled:
Dear [redacted],
I'm one of the biggest Lady Gaga fan in [redacted city].
I'm so disappointed your update. I had been sooooo looking forward to meeting and greeting Lady Gaga. I don't need Hot seat package. Because I have already got a Kobe concert ticket.
If I can't meet Gaga, I don't want to attend (I have Hearbeats headphones as well). I wanted to say "Thank you for saving my life and you are a part of my life..." to Gaga. She saved my life!!! If I hadn't knew about Gaga(her music, fashion, belief etc...), I would have suicided myself. I want to tell her these things from my mouth...
Considering her health condition, not to meet Gaga is the better for her. I will be very sad if she fall into sick again because of hard work for us. I think I will have a chance to meet her in near future. I'd like to get a full refund.
Best regard
[redacted name]
I'm one of the biggest Lady Gaga fan in [redacted city].
I'm so disappointed your update. I had been sooooo looking forward to meeting and greeting Lady Gaga. I don't need Hot seat package. Because I have already got a Kobe concert ticket.
If I can't meet Gaga, I don't want to attend (I have Hearbeats headphones as well). I wanted to say "Thank you for saving my life and you are a part of my life..." to Gaga. She saved my life!!! If I hadn't knew about Gaga(her music, fashion, belief etc...), I would have suicided myself. I want to tell her these things from my mouth...
Considering her health condition, not to meet Gaga is the better for her. I will be very sad if she fall into sick again because of hard work for us. I think I will have a chance to meet her in near future. I'd like to get a full refund.
Best regard
[redacted name]
This email breaks my heart. Good luck, Japanese fan who loves Lady Gaga. I hope she continues inspiring you into creating a life that treats you more kindly.
Labels:
crap customer service email,
gaga ooh lala
Monday, February 8, 2010
I didn't mean to come back to Brave New World twice
I'm still in the process of reading Brave New World (It's been going very slowly because I can sense something portentous on the horizon of the book, and that always slows down my reading, especially if I think whatever is about to happen is bad. It's my mind's way of dealing with the possibility of negative things happening to the characters I guess). I just read a passage that absolutely destroyed me.
For this entry to make any sense, we have to first agree on the fact that when a person reads Brave New World, they are essentially entering into a contract with the book. This contract is, namely, that one should think that the "Civilization" portrayed in Brave New World is entirely negative and that the "Savages" (aka people who are not raised in test tubes) are somehow better because they retain their Christianity, religion, literature, individuality, etc. Huxley sets up a then vs now construct, and I suppose the idea is that the reader is supposed to come down on his side (then). (Btw I haven't finished the book so maybe I should save the book reports until then, but I like writing about things as I experience them, so here we go!)
From here on out: SPOILER ALERT
But here's the thesis of my post: I just don't agree with Huxley. I'm not saying everything about Brave New World's "Civilization" is what I want from my ideal society, but there are some aspects of it that are okay, or at least not unacceptable to me. And the dealbreaker for me is the scene where Lenina and the Savage (aka John) confess their love to one another. Lenina, who was socially conditioned to give her body to any man who asked for it, immediately undresses and goes to hug John. Her sudden undressing produces this result:
The Savage caught her by the wrists, tore her hands from his shoulders, thrust her roughly away at arm's length.
"Ow, you're hurting me, you're...oh!" She was suddenly silent. Terror had made her forget the pain. Opening her eyes, she had seen his face--no, not his face, a ferocious stranger's, pale, distorted, twitching with some insane, inexplicable fury. Aghast, "But what is it, John?" she whispered. He did not answer, but only stared into her face with those mad eyes. The hands that held her wrists were trembling. He breathed deeply and irregularly. Faint almost to imperceptibility, but appalling, she suddenly heard the grinding of his teeth. "What is it?" she almost screamed.
And as though awaked by her cry he caught her by the shoulders and shook her. "Whore!" he shouted. "Whore! Impudent strumpet!"
"Oh no, don't, do-on't," she protested in a voice made grotesquely tremulous by his shaking.
"Whore!"
"Ple-ease."
"Damned whore!"
So, to use the words immortalized by Kenan Thompson in his nefarious SNL skit, WHATUP WITH THAT?
Ok, so the Savage believes in choosing one woman and living with her forever. His character's motivations are complicated because he loves his mother, a woman who slept around because she believed that "everyone belongs to everyone," so he has some sort of deep oedipal resentment for the idea of sleeping with a woman and being promiscuous. But this reaction just smacks way too intensely of the madonna/whore dichotomy. Lenina was perfect to the Savage before this incident: divinely beautiful, he could barely look at her, he trembled in her presence, blah blah blah. And then she shows one sign of sexuality and she's a DAMNED JEZEBEL! Besides the fact that the poor girl has nearly no agency in deciding how to deal with her sexuality because she was being hypnotized in her sleep practically her entire life.
Madonna vs Whore is a binary used to oppress women that is practically as old as time itself, and I just don't buy the fact that having lots of sex is so bad, as Huxley makes it seem. But then again, I couldn't give a damn about most of the Bible's commandments of morality, so maybe I'm just largely missing the point.
I guess what I'm asking is--does this instance of extremely screwy sexism illuminate the fact that Brave New World is, frankly, no longer relevant?
For this entry to make any sense, we have to first agree on the fact that when a person reads Brave New World, they are essentially entering into a contract with the book. This contract is, namely, that one should think that the "Civilization" portrayed in Brave New World is entirely negative and that the "Savages" (aka people who are not raised in test tubes) are somehow better because they retain their Christianity, religion, literature, individuality, etc. Huxley sets up a then vs now construct, and I suppose the idea is that the reader is supposed to come down on his side (then). (Btw I haven't finished the book so maybe I should save the book reports until then, but I like writing about things as I experience them, so here we go!)
From here on out: SPOILER ALERT
But here's the thesis of my post: I just don't agree with Huxley. I'm not saying everything about Brave New World's "Civilization" is what I want from my ideal society, but there are some aspects of it that are okay, or at least not unacceptable to me. And the dealbreaker for me is the scene where Lenina and the Savage (aka John) confess their love to one another. Lenina, who was socially conditioned to give her body to any man who asked for it, immediately undresses and goes to hug John. Her sudden undressing produces this result:
The Savage caught her by the wrists, tore her hands from his shoulders, thrust her roughly away at arm's length.
"Ow, you're hurting me, you're...oh!" She was suddenly silent. Terror had made her forget the pain. Opening her eyes, she had seen his face--no, not his face, a ferocious stranger's, pale, distorted, twitching with some insane, inexplicable fury. Aghast, "But what is it, John?" she whispered. He did not answer, but only stared into her face with those mad eyes. The hands that held her wrists were trembling. He breathed deeply and irregularly. Faint almost to imperceptibility, but appalling, she suddenly heard the grinding of his teeth. "What is it?" she almost screamed.
And as though awaked by her cry he caught her by the shoulders and shook her. "Whore!" he shouted. "Whore! Impudent strumpet!"
"Oh no, don't, do-on't," she protested in a voice made grotesquely tremulous by his shaking.
"Whore!"
"Ple-ease."
"Damned whore!"
So, to use the words immortalized by Kenan Thompson in his nefarious SNL skit, WHATUP WITH THAT?
Ok, so the Savage believes in choosing one woman and living with her forever. His character's motivations are complicated because he loves his mother, a woman who slept around because she believed that "everyone belongs to everyone," so he has some sort of deep oedipal resentment for the idea of sleeping with a woman and being promiscuous. But this reaction just smacks way too intensely of the madonna/whore dichotomy. Lenina was perfect to the Savage before this incident: divinely beautiful, he could barely look at her, he trembled in her presence, blah blah blah. And then she shows one sign of sexuality and she's a DAMNED JEZEBEL! Besides the fact that the poor girl has nearly no agency in deciding how to deal with her sexuality because she was being hypnotized in her sleep practically her entire life.
Madonna vs Whore is a binary used to oppress women that is practically as old as time itself, and I just don't buy the fact that having lots of sex is so bad, as Huxley makes it seem. But then again, I couldn't give a damn about most of the Bible's commandments of morality, so maybe I'm just largely missing the point.
I guess what I'm asking is--does this instance of extremely screwy sexism illuminate the fact that Brave New World is, frankly, no longer relevant?
Labels:
literature
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
formspring!
I found a nifty website via the groupthink on Jezebel today that allows people to ask questions--any question--of the participants anonymously. I've decided to add it to the blog primarily so you, as the reader, can ask me questions about content you want to see on the blog. Is there something that you think EssandK should cover? Has Kanye been in Taylor Swift's jam lately? Ask me about it or tell me about it using Formspring! It's now a widget on the righthand side--I'm using it as a kind of de facto "tips" section.
Love to all!
Monday, February 1, 2010
postcards from yo momma REBLOGGED
I finally discovered a postcard from yo momma that truly reflects my future self as a mother. I present for your entertainment, the Gaga postcard:
I wish I could take credit for this image, however, I cannot. Via.
Also the text, as always, comes from postcards from yo momma.
I wish I could take credit for this image, however, I cannot. Via.
Also the text, as always, comes from postcards from yo momma.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)