Another scary article from a feminist website, this time The F Word, addressing the state of abortion 'services' (if you can even call it that!) in Ireland. Once again, apologies for being so lax about this previously.
Sunday, 31 January 2010
Thursday, 28 January 2010
Buffy part 2
For the second part of my Buffy-thon postage I'd like to address an issue that might be triggering, so beware.
In season 6 of Buffy, our eponymous heroine survives a rape attempt in the episode 'Seeing Red'.
I think it was very important for BTVS to address the issue of rape purely because of the premise of the show: Buffy is strong. She is independent, powerful and beautiful. It demonstrates that it doesn't matter how strong or self-aware you are, you can still be a target. Additionally, the episode deals with rape by someone with whom Buffy has already had a sexual relationship: the vampire, Spike. With stories like this in the news I find a story-line such as this quite pertinent.
The scene is very difficult to watch, Buffy is injured and tells Spike to go away. He tries to 'prove' to her that she wants him by making advances, pushing her to the floor and trying to initiate sex, culminating in her kicking him off and questioning:
Buffy is never shown to be 'inviting it'; she is injured, trying to run a bath and he has entered her house. She constantly tells him to 'go away', and 'get off'. She says 'no', demonstrating that 'just say no' isn't always a viable option.
The episode doesn't even overtly make out that Spike is 'evil' as he tries to rape Buffy - he is not in his vampire face, he looks like a man. Thus the power of this scene emphasises that it's not a supernatural evil that causes Spike to rape Buffy, but a human evil, echoing the theme mentioned in my previous post that 'life is the big bad'
The incident inspires Spike to go on a quest to regain his soul as he cannot stand the purgatory of being 'not quite a man and not quite a monster' (my paraphrase). It is used as a development point for Spike's character, but manages to make a commentary on ideas of rape at the same time.
I have to admit, sex as a theme in Buffy isn't quite as empowering as it should be, Buffy uses it almost as a punishment during season 6, her first experience in season 2 causes Angel to become evil and she is portrayed negatively by the fraternity attitudes and reactions of Riley's friends in season 4. Nevertheless, the episode 'Seeing Red' is an important point in the series and demonstrates a strong counter-discourse to commonly held attitudes about rape.
Next up: 'Nice-guy' Warren
In season 6 of Buffy, our eponymous heroine survives a rape attempt in the episode 'Seeing Red'.
I think it was very important for BTVS to address the issue of rape purely because of the premise of the show: Buffy is strong. She is independent, powerful and beautiful. It demonstrates that it doesn't matter how strong or self-aware you are, you can still be a target. Additionally, the episode deals with rape by someone with whom Buffy has already had a sexual relationship: the vampire, Spike. With stories like this in the news I find a story-line such as this quite pertinent.
The scene is very difficult to watch, Buffy is injured and tells Spike to go away. He tries to 'prove' to her that she wants him by making advances, pushing her to the floor and trying to initiate sex, culminating in her kicking him off and questioning:
"Ask me again why I could never love you"
Buffy is never shown to be 'inviting it'; she is injured, trying to run a bath and he has entered her house. She constantly tells him to 'go away', and 'get off'. She says 'no', demonstrating that 'just say no' isn't always a viable option.
The episode doesn't even overtly make out that Spike is 'evil' as he tries to rape Buffy - he is not in his vampire face, he looks like a man. Thus the power of this scene emphasises that it's not a supernatural evil that causes Spike to rape Buffy, but a human evil, echoing the theme mentioned in my previous post that 'life is the big bad'
The incident inspires Spike to go on a quest to regain his soul as he cannot stand the purgatory of being 'not quite a man and not quite a monster' (my paraphrase). It is used as a development point for Spike's character, but manages to make a commentary on ideas of rape at the same time.
I have to admit, sex as a theme in Buffy isn't quite as empowering as it should be, Buffy uses it almost as a punishment during season 6, her first experience in season 2 causes Angel to become evil and she is portrayed negatively by the fraternity attitudes and reactions of Riley's friends in season 4. Nevertheless, the episode 'Seeing Red' is an important point in the series and demonstrates a strong counter-discourse to commonly held attitudes about rape.
Next up: 'Nice-guy' Warren
Friday, 22 January 2010
Buffy
My complete, utter love of Buffy the Vampire Slayer was validated this month upon a re-watching of series 6. This is the first in a series of posts about 'stuff I liked in Buffy'. I'll be doing a bit of an introduction to the series and discussing the representation of a same-sex relationship.
For those not in-the-know, this is the series where Buffy has been brought back from the dead by her best friend, Willow. Buffy, contrary to her friends' beliefs, was pulled out of a 'heaven' dimension and suffers from depression throughout the series. She becomes self-destructive, starting a disastrous relationship with Spike, a violent vampire.
Alongside this, a trio of nerds from Buffy's high school band together to try to take over Sunnydale. The nerds' quest starts off quite naive and quirky but gradually gets more and more disturbing, to the point where Warren, the leader of the trio, shoots both Buffy, (who survives) and Willow's girlfriend Tara (who doesn't).
Willow's rage from the death of her partner sends her into vengeance mode, she goes on to abuse dark magic and ultimately tries to destroy the world, only being saved by her childhood friend, Xander.
In the DVD special features, creator Joss Whedon explains that the 'big bad' of the series is 'life'. In this series, instead of an evil super-strong baddie; it is growing up, life itself and all the associated baggage that has to be overcome.
So, with this in mind, lets talk about lesbians.
Willow and Tara
I love the representation of these two in Buffy. At my first viewing I was surprised that the show would do such a thing, I though it would be simply for shock value and didn't see how it would be relevant to the show. How wrong was I?
Creating a relationship between two women that doesn't sexualise the situation is a fantastic choice for a TV series: Buffy creates a positive image of lesbians and represents same-sex relationships in a natural way. Perhaps other women would disagree with me, but, personally, I find Willow and Tara very engaging as a lesbian couple.
Their relationship is represented in such a way that I feel comfortable using Buffy to introduce the concept of same-sex love to my young daughter.* I concede that the song 'Under your Spell' in the musical episode 'Once More With Feeling' is filthy in imagery and subtle meanings, but I also think that those meanings need an adult brain to decipher them.
Willow and Tara are rarely used for sexual effect, the only instance I can think of is a dream sequence in series 4 that focuses on Xander's view point. Thinking about series 6, the two women show affection, but nothing overly sexual. They are shown in bed a number of times and are shown kissing, but I cannot think of an instance where their relationship is represented for a specifically 'male gaze' purpose.
In conclusion, I love Willow and Tara, I love being able to explain to my daughter that Willow and Tara love each other like Mommy and Daddy do. Admittedly, she just gets excited that they make stars with magic, but hey, it's a start.
*I know some episode of Buffy are completely NOT child friendly, however, I believe three things:
- 'Once More With Feeling' isn't too gruesome
- euphemism isn't in her lexicon, and
- she loves the songs
Thursday, 7 January 2010
Abortion
I think people in the UK really need to see what it can be like to try to get an abortion in areas of the USA.
Scary article from Feministing
Plus, remember - you have to pay for this privilege in the US. Many people can't afford to pay, so charitable organisations raise money for women to get abortions.
And then, of course, there is the doctor who performed MEDICALLY NEEDED late-term abortions. He was shot whilst in church by an anti-abortion activist.
Once again, praise the NHS for all you're worth, in the name of whatever deity/secular icon you prefer.
Scary article from Feministing
Plus, remember - you have to pay for this privilege in the US. Many people can't afford to pay, so charitable organisations raise money for women to get abortions.
And then, of course, there is the doctor who performed MEDICALLY NEEDED late-term abortions. He was shot whilst in church by an anti-abortion activist.
Once again, praise the NHS for all you're worth, in the name of whatever deity/secular icon you prefer.
Friday, 25 September 2009
Suri Cruise
What a kerfuffle
The reason these photos were taken may not be cool but, man, that skirt is gorgeous.
I don't agree with young children wearing high heels, they need to learn to walk in proper shoes that support their feet. I can't escape noticing, however, that Katie isn't wearing heels. Which suggests to me that Suri might just really like dressing up. What mother would put her child in a pair of heels when she herself isn't even wearing them? One who is encouraging their child to have creativity and choice in her clothes.
What parent HASN'T had a kid that wants to walk around in mommy's/daddy's shoes? It was only a few weeks ago I watched my friend's little boy trot around the Wacky Warehouse in his mama's totally awesome stiletto boots!
Or I could just be being idealistic and Suri has already been brainwashed into received ideas about femininity. Whatever.
The reason these photos were taken may not be cool but, man, that skirt is gorgeous.
I don't agree with young children wearing high heels, they need to learn to walk in proper shoes that support their feet. I can't escape noticing, however, that Katie isn't wearing heels. Which suggests to me that Suri might just really like dressing up. What mother would put her child in a pair of heels when she herself isn't even wearing them? One who is encouraging their child to have creativity and choice in her clothes.
What parent HASN'T had a kid that wants to walk around in mommy's/daddy's shoes? It was only a few weeks ago I watched my friend's little boy trot around the Wacky Warehouse in his mama's totally awesome stiletto boots!
Or I could just be being idealistic and Suri has already been brainwashed into received ideas about femininity. Whatever.
Thursday, 24 September 2009
The Pill
Sometimes, something comes up that makes you eternally thankful for the NHS and free contraception: click to read
Yet, I know personally that I hadn't even considered that you might have to pay for the pill when I first started taking it. I cringe at the thought of how much money I would have spent by now if I'd lived in the US as a teenager.
And we don't even have to pay for condoms, if we don't want to.
Thank the deities for the NHS.
Yet, I know personally that I hadn't even considered that you might have to pay for the pill when I first started taking it. I cringe at the thought of how much money I would have spent by now if I'd lived in the US as a teenager.
And we don't even have to pay for condoms, if we don't want to.
Thank the deities for the NHS.
Thursday, 17 September 2009
Prejudice, idiots and retribution
I'm thinking about getting a tattoo. Across my forehead.
I am utterly and unreservedly pissed off with the attitudes of people in positions of power when they meet me. I say positions of power, rather than professionals, because this isn't just an issue I have with traditionally 'powerful' people. I even experienced it last week from a library assistant.
What am I talking about? Judgemental attitudes.
I'm wondering what I should put on my tattoo, something simple like "I've got a degree, actually," might cover most of it.
I feel so disgusted when people think they can talk to others with such condescension, based on prejudices about the way someone is dressed, the colour of their hair, or their age. I don't know which of these aspects I get judged on most often, whether it is a combination of all of them or something more, but it damn well pisses me off!
Two recent events have triggered this:
The first was when I discovered NP had an eye infection and I rushed her to an emergency appointment at the surgery. She'd already had two such infections in previous months and I wanted to catch it early this time. We took Spongebob with us, a little toy that she finds very comforting and sleeps with every night, but doesn't tend to use as a comfort item all the time. It also gets washed regularly.
I was seen by an older female doctor who proceeded to speak to me in a tone that rendered me speechless:
I am utterly and unreservedly pissed off with the attitudes of people in positions of power when they meet me. I say positions of power, rather than professionals, because this isn't just an issue I have with traditionally 'powerful' people. I even experienced it last week from a library assistant.
What am I talking about? Judgemental attitudes.
I'm wondering what I should put on my tattoo, something simple like "I've got a degree, actually," might cover most of it.
I feel so disgusted when people think they can talk to others with such condescension, based on prejudices about the way someone is dressed, the colour of their hair, or their age. I don't know which of these aspects I get judged on most often, whether it is a combination of all of them or something more, but it damn well pisses me off!
Two recent events have triggered this:
The first was when I discovered NP had an eye infection and I rushed her to an emergency appointment at the surgery. She'd already had two such infections in previous months and I wanted to catch it early this time. We took Spongebob with us, a little toy that she finds very comforting and sleeps with every night, but doesn't tend to use as a comfort item all the time. It also gets washed regularly.
I was seen by an older female doctor who proceeded to speak to me in a tone that rendered me speechless:
Her: "Well, it doesn't help using Spongebob to wipe her eye with then rubbing it all over the other eye"
Me: "hahaha [nervous laughter] yeah I know"
Her: "No, I'm serious because....blah blah put it in the microwave blah blah [ basically continuing in the vein of 'you're a stupid girl]' "
Firstly, I've just acknowledge what you said, you really don't need to qualify that for me.
Secondly, I know how infections work. I was even commended by the last lovely doctor I saw for not letting it spread to the other eye after weeks of trying to treat it at home. The other eye wasn't even showing signs of gunk this time.
Thirdly, that tone of voice is one I wouldn't use with anyone who was asking me a perfectly reasonable question, even if I thought they needed a little education. It was reminiscent of the teacher at primary school telling off the serial misbehave-er! Yes, my kid was getting a recurring infection, but it's not like I can prevent her getting a cold and rubbing her snot in her eye!
The whole situation got me so flustered that I couldn't even string sentences together, I was so angry, but instead of delivering a well structured smack down about prejudice, I ended up silently fuming whilst babbling about biological washing powder!
The other incident involved the utter stereotype of a grumpy library assistant. I don't say this lightly - I have years of experience of working in libraries and happen to know that lots of library staff are fun-loving, fantastic people. It boiled down to the fact that I was listed as 'staff' on the library system, when I no longer worked for the authority. This individual reeked of condescension throughout our whole exchange, for no reason other than the fact my status hadn't been changed on the computer. I tried to make light of it:
Secondly, I know how infections work. I was even commended by the last lovely doctor I saw for not letting it spread to the other eye after weeks of trying to treat it at home. The other eye wasn't even showing signs of gunk this time.
Thirdly, that tone of voice is one I wouldn't use with anyone who was asking me a perfectly reasonable question, even if I thought they needed a little education. It was reminiscent of the teacher at primary school telling off the serial misbehave-er! Yes, my kid was getting a recurring infection, but it's not like I can prevent her getting a cold and rubbing her snot in her eye!
The whole situation got me so flustered that I couldn't even string sentences together, I was so angry, but instead of delivering a well structured smack down about prejudice, I ended up silently fuming whilst babbling about biological washing powder!
The other incident involved the utter stereotype of a grumpy library assistant. I don't say this lightly - I have years of experience of working in libraries and happen to know that lots of library staff are fun-loving, fantastic people. It boiled down to the fact that I was listed as 'staff' on the library system, when I no longer worked for the authority. This individual reeked of condescension throughout our whole exchange, for no reason other than the fact my status hadn't been changed on the computer. I tried to make light of it:
Her: "Do you still work there?"
Me: "No, not for a while, haha"
Her: "Well you shouldn't really be staff then should you?" (note the same 'stupid girl' tone?)
Me: "Ahh, isn't there some kind of solidarity with ex-staff?" (Joking, smiling, being friendly)
Her: "No"
Utterly miserable cow, no doubt, but why?
Why did this jobsworth assistant feel the need to be so bleeding miserable with someone who's attitude was nothing but friendly? Perhaps it's also useful to bear in mind that I'd already had this conversation 1 year earlier with a (supervisory) member of staff at a local branch library; a lady with whom I'd had a lovely chat about the changes since I'd worked there. She also (obviously) hadn't changed my status at that time.
Maybe I'm paranoid, maybe I'm overly sensitive, maybe maybe maybe.
But maybe I'm getting judged for being a young, blonde, lazily dressed parent. I may just try one day getting an appointment with the same doctor, dressed in a suit with a power hair-do and make up. Because I'm perfectly capable of doing that. I'm perfectly qualified to hold a job that would require that. But why should I conform to society's class standards and gender restrictions?
I was a mum worried about her daughter, I wasn't going to dress up to go to the sodding doctors in an emergency, and I shouldn't be judged for that. My little girl wanted some comfort and I let her take her toy, I shouldn't be judged for that. Perhaps I should stop being friendly and approachable, because it stops people from forming respectful opinions?
It's hard to broach this issue when you're dealing with a power difference, obviously, but at least with the library situation I've got the means and inclination to do something about it. I sent a very derisive email to the library and received the following (abridged) reply today:
Why did this jobsworth assistant feel the need to be so bleeding miserable with someone who's attitude was nothing but friendly? Perhaps it's also useful to bear in mind that I'd already had this conversation 1 year earlier with a (supervisory) member of staff at a local branch library; a lady with whom I'd had a lovely chat about the changes since I'd worked there. She also (obviously) hadn't changed my status at that time.
Maybe I'm paranoid, maybe I'm overly sensitive, maybe maybe maybe.
But maybe I'm getting judged for being a young, blonde, lazily dressed parent. I may just try one day getting an appointment with the same doctor, dressed in a suit with a power hair-do and make up. Because I'm perfectly capable of doing that. I'm perfectly qualified to hold a job that would require that. But why should I conform to society's class standards and gender restrictions?
I was a mum worried about her daughter, I wasn't going to dress up to go to the sodding doctors in an emergency, and I shouldn't be judged for that. My little girl wanted some comfort and I let her take her toy, I shouldn't be judged for that. Perhaps I should stop being friendly and approachable, because it stops people from forming respectful opinions?
It's hard to broach this issue when you're dealing with a power difference, obviously, but at least with the library situation I've got the means and inclination to do something about it. I sent a very derisive email to the library and received the following (abridged) reply today:
I am very sorry that you had such poor service on Saturday. It was obviously far below our standards and I apologise for it and I will do what I can to improve the situation.
In our regular customer surveys we generally get a very high rating for customer satisfaction so things were certainly not good that day.
[...]
In the situation this would have left the least experienced staff on the desk. Your comments do highlight the need to give casual staff training in customer care. This is a difficult matter to resolve but we will have to give it some thought. You mention a particular person was “snotty and offensive.” From the timetables I can discover who this was and I will act on this. In this person’s case the problem was not simply lack of experience and knowledge.
Blatantly this person is a problem! I now feel a great degree of satisfaction for calling out her prejudices, and I feel lucky to be able to do this; others might be unable or unaware that they can complain about that sort of treatment. I think privilege definitely can be used for good, as well as evil.
But anyway, at least there was some satisfactory resolution to one incident, but it doesn't remove the gnawing inclination that I get judged for how I look. Which is unfair, to anyone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
