But now I’m moving over to tumblr until I regain a focus to my writing. Please follow me there! I’d love to keep writing for you and hearing from you.

Cheers,

Tasia

http://wordshappen.tumblr.com/

2. I was later in the diner, paying for my food. Andy and Ryan had already paid their share and walked outside. The owner looks at me and says, “How did this happen?”
I responded, “How did what happen?”
“When I was young, women were forbidden to pay for their own food.”
A server chimed in with, “It depends on the man. Some of us are still like that.”
I smiled and said, “Well, I like paying for my own food. It makes me feel like a real person.”

3. While walking home from DVA at the end of my evening, wearing shorts, a men’s button down, and a vest, a passing car slowed down near me. One boy inside yelled somethingunintelligible , and the other yelled “SLUT!” They sped away. I felt uncomfortable in my clothes, in my skin, and in my neighborhood. I just wanted to be inside and away from these assholes. It’s interactions like this one that make the first one happen. And the thing is that I don’t understand it at all. Why would you do that? I wish I could ask. Why would you yell something so offensive at someone just walking around in her own neighborhood? She’s a person and you’ve ruined her evening, not to mention given her another reason not to talk to anyone she doesn’t know. I shouldn’t have to feel unsafe in my own neighborhood, nor should I have to feel like I can’t dress for the weather without being attacked.

2. Lose Weight
Since Christakis and Fowler published their study showing that obesity was socially transmissible among members of the famous Framingham Heart Study (it wasn’t just that birds of a feather flock together: People were actually making one another gain—and, sometimes, lose—weight), the finding has been confirmed in multiple other populations. So how do people infect each other with fat? One way is imitation. Brain scans show that when you watch someone else eat or run, your brain activity is the same as if you were eating or running yourself, priming you to do the same things. And people in experiments seated next to robust eaters will eat more than those seated next to light eaters. Social norms also play a role: If your friend gains weight, you might become less motivated to go to the gym because your friend’s example showed you that weight gain isn’t the end of the world. She’s heavier but still the same person you know and love. And now that 66 percent of the American population is overweight or obese, that’s a pretty well-established social norm.

Happily, this effect could be turned on its head if people worked to establish an opposite social norm—weight loss can spread just as easily as weight gain if you seed your network with fat-fighting habits. In Christakis and Fowler’s book, they suggest starting a running club containing friends of friends so that you’re surrounding yourself and your closest contacts with exercisers (and remember, when people see you run, it makes their brains think about running too). You can also make healthier food choices and eat with greater restraint. If you take a pass on the fries and eat more vegetables, your pals are more likely to make the same choices. And then, once you reach a healthier weight, you might shift the norms in your group.

This is a category of what-the-fuckery that I have not dealt with in a while. Apparently, if you befriend fat people, you brain will tell your body that you should be fat, too, and you will gain weight, whereas if you befriend thin people, your body will start losing weight, because your brain doesn’t want to go against the norm.

Does this strike anyone else as one of the most ingorant and illogical things ever?

This article does several things.
-It sets fat up as something you can catch. Apparently body types are contagious.
-It then hails the social norms of our culture as 100% the exact thing you want to achieve and follow.
-It states that if you get thin, you will be setting a good example for your friends, so they will also get thin. To not be thin is to cause harm to others.
-It promotes fat hate by supporting the isolation of the fat individual.
-It promotes segregation of the fat population by saying they should just be friends with themselves.

The fat are ruining innocent thin people with their disgusting habit and existance! Don’t befriend the fatties! They’ll eat you and your attractiveness!

For fucking shame, Elle. For fucking shame.

Let’s start with what a slut(t) is. It’s a woman who has too much sex with any number of men indiscriminately and is morally and ethically evil/bad. Slut(t) is a highly gendered term, and women attending this event are a part of the fucking problem. Slut(t) is a moral judgment, this fear of sex and objection to female sex(ulaity) comes from a highly religious culture and background. This is an ethical judgment, because even people who think they have escaped such a background still want to deem women as bad or wrong in the way they choose to be sexual.

It is not okay to pass moral or ethical judgement on an individual’s sexuality. Again, it is NOT okay. Leave your judgments out of my sex life. Do not attempt to paint yourself is somehow superior to me because you have been with one partner or have somehow escaped the label of “slut(t).” Do not wedge me into your narrow framework and then call me the one who is wrong.

I’m using the first person singular pronoun of “me.” I am not a slut(t). I refuse to label my sexual self as something so degrading. But I have been called a slut(t). I have had my behaviors judged in such a way. Most of us women have at some point, as even hinting at yourself being a sexual being is to become a slut(t) in this Madonna/whore world.

This is what my friend had to say

Second, this event is encouraging violence.
*1 in 3 females worldwide will be raped in their lifetime.
*1 in 4 females will be raped before they turn 18.

According to the National Dating Violence Hotline,

*1 in 3 teens report knowing a friend or peer who has been hit, punched, slapped, choked or physically hurt by his/her partner

*1 out of 3 women around the world has been beaten, coerced into sex or otherwise abused during her lifetime

*1 in 5 female high school students reports being physically and/or sexually abused by a dating partner. Abused girls are significantly more likely to get involved in other risky behaviors. They are 4 to 6 times more likely to get pregnant and 8 to 9 times more likely to have tried to commit suicide.

*74% of all murder-suicides involved an intimate partner (spouse, common-law spouse, ex-spouse, or boyfriend/girlfriend). Of these, 96% were females killed by their intimate partners.

*In 2004, 1,159 females were killed by an intimate partner.

You may say I am taking this event too seriously. You may say it is meant to be a joke. It is not funny. One person wrote on the wall that 33,000 people cannot be wrong. What about the Nazis? What about Rwanda? What about the systematic murder of Native Americans in our country? What about racism? Lynching?

I work with survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence every day. I have been called to the hospital to be with a 67 year old woman who had been brought in with deep gashed in her arms and bruises covering her body from the beatings she had sustained from her partner. I have also been called to the hospital to sit with a 14 year old who was gang raped while she was trying to have a fun night with people she thought were her friends. Are those two women sluts?

What if you have a friend who has been called a slut so many times she has started to believe. What if she believes that the abuse and rape from her partner is deserved because she’s a “slut?” What message does attending this event send her?

Violence has to stop. It has to stop with us.

What is the purpose of a title? I suppose it has several. One being to prepare the viewer/reader/listener for what they are about to experience. Okay, so titles can be informational. A good title can entice people into looking up your work or attending your event, so titles can be attention-grabbing. But for a photograph or a single piece of art, I think titles are different. They could arguably be less important. A poem or a story requires reader commitment, and titles help make the reader want to take that commitment. They help your work be remembered (as companionablesnuffles pointed out recently) and serve as a defining characteristic. In art, this is less the case. The eye does not usually see a title first, but the work itself. When talking about a piece of art, people usually go to the what of the thing before the who of the thing.

So why is it bad to not title art?

There were a few times during the art editing Preface meeting that we were debating artistic pieces and choices, saying “If only we could ask the artist why this is this way!” or “If only we could ask the artist what they were trying to accomplish!” Because without knowing those things, sometimes a piece of art just looks like an accident or a mistake in technique. And if I don’t have something to give me more information about what I am seeing, I can feel satisfied continuing to assume that this is an accident and mistake. That’s why artist statements are important. And that’s why titles are important.

A title for a piece of art should help the viewer understand something about the art. What are you trying to convey? Emotion? Are you trying to simply show someone something you’ve observed? Patterns, maybe? What? What resonates with you, the artist, about this picture or sculpture? Are you just showing off your skills? What do you want me to see or know or understand or explore? If you don’t know, then why the fuck should I care about this? If you don’t, then I shouldn’t.

A title is a bit of a conversation with the viewer. It doesn’t have to be obvious. It can be interprutive. But art is a purposeful thing. So if you leave a piece Untitled, make sure that you want to convey everything that word means to the viewer. To me it means accidental or confused or uncertain or devalued or nonchalant. I judge your work with that word in mind. If you have a photo of a puddle reflecting a building, and you took it because you thought it looked nice or interesting, but you don’t think it has a specific message, don’t be afraid to title it “Urban Lake” or “Puddle” and let me know that’s what you had in mind. If I see something more, I’ll ascribe it something more. If it affects me majorly, I’ll still be affected. But I want to know what you thought or saw. I want to know a little about your why.

So maybe it is the case that groups of people who are openly discriminated against have a much better place to push from. When a woman is told she’s not as good as a man, she can push back. When she is told that her performance is lacking, and nothing more specific, she has little footing.

If this is the case, then the fat population is in a great position for social change. This is a population of people that is openly hated by the vast majority of both men and women across Western cultures. Examples can be found everywhere: in the health care bill, in the movies, in television, in magazines, in malls, in education, etc. Not only are examples of fat-hate everywhere, but the mentality is quite encouraged. If you even date a fat person, you’re often met with some form of ridicule or disbelief. We talk about fat and lack of control in the same breath without anyone bothering to do a double take. The hate is everywhere and it’s blatant.

So we are in the perfect position for a body revolution, yeah? We have the proof that we’re being treated poorly and we have a strong and very present mind-set to oppose. The fat are in a position to change American society in a way that has not been possible in decades. While the details about the how need hammering out, the overall ability and potential is remarkable.

Neato.

In addition, the people in my classes primarily come from a much different, less challenging place than I do. Which I mostly wouldn’t care about. Except that they tend to say things that I can’t help but get angry at, like that the domestic sphere is almost equally divided between men and women. Or that there’s more pressure on men to be sexually thrilling than there is on women. Or that Goucher students are just like students you’d find anywhere else, so our immediate personal experiences clearly reflect the rest of American culture. And they’re wrong. And I know they’re wrong. But I can’t seem to get anyone to agree with me. So I thought that maybe I was wrong. But I can’t honestly buy that.

So what do I do?

Well, after going to my psychoanalysis class yesterday, I think the answer is pretty clear.

We read Luce Irigaray’s ‘The Poverty of Psychoanalysis’ and discussed it, and this line, which I marked my first time reading the text, was expounded upon by Rochelle.

Most of you will therefore be unable to interpret it. And you will be prevented from listening by at least two systems of screens, of censorship or of repression.

Irigaray was addressing a group from the Lacanian school of psychoanalysis, which she had at one point been a part of. She was addressing them after her friend had committed suicide after being so disheartened and annihilated by the theory that she just couldn’t really go on. And Irigaray is mad. And she is emotional. And her theory is a part of her. And it’s beautiful.

Rochelle talked about how much Irigaray attacked the Lacanian school and its students and, well, Lacan himself. And how nobody would listen to her. She knew nobody would listen to her or even understand her. But she kept talking and attacking and refused to be quiet.

And when Rochelle was saying this, I felt so connected. And I felt so much better. And I feel more determined to not give up on speaking in my communications classes, even if everyone rolls their eyes when I do it. Even if I’m the “token feminist.” Even if no one understands me. Because I know I have something to say and because that something feels so important. Not that I’m going to be too Antiochian about it (okay, I’ll be a bit Antiochian) and just make noise about everything for the sake of making noise. But I fully intend to raise concerns and issues with the standard nonsense that is frequently espoused in these classes.

I’m no Irigaray, by any means, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to shut up just because my opinion is unpopular.

It was a very inspirational class.

I am angry.

I am an angry feminist. When sexist things happen to me and those around me, I get mad. When I see horrible advertisement on TV, I get mad. When I feel afraid to speak, I get mad. And you know what? I think I have every right to be angry and to get mad. The world is a mess. And it’s messier if you’re a woman. And why shouldn’t my blood boil? Why do I have to be nice and sweet to people who are belittling and incorrect or tell me I can’t lift a box because I’m a girl?

Really, I think we should all be a bit angry.

Maybe because we make 83 cents to the male dollar.
Or because we wear clothing designed almost exclusively by men.
Or because we have to live up to a feminine ideal that has been created by men.
Or because we are afraid to walk alone at night.
Or because we can’t be in the “in” crowd in HvZ.
Or because our bodies are commodified.

I’m angry because I’m passionate, and I know that my passion won’t produce much change. It’s hard to look around and know that you can’t change their minds. It’s hard to know the depth of your ownhypocrisy that comes from the inevitable concessions you have to make. And it’s a reason to be angry.

I don’t yell a lot. I keep a lot of opinions to myself. I try and listen to people when I disagree with them. I don’t argue when the merch boy who is much smaller than me is told to carry a box, when I’m closer and less busy. And yet, still, when I come out as a feminist, people assume I must be awful somehow. And I have the responsibility of proving that I’m not loud and angry, but that I’m “rational” and agreeable. But I do get angry, and I’m sick of feeling guilty about that. I’ve been angry for a while and I expect I’ll remain angry for quite some time. And that doesn’t make my opinions invalid. And that doesn’t make me a bad employee. And that doesn’t make me difficult to get along with.

I’m a feminist. I’m angry.
What’s wrong with that?

This is all taken from three conversations I’ve heard while reading the times and harvesting my farmville crops this morning here in Pearlstone. Why is that okay?

Let’s preform a bit of a test. Here’s two sets of phrases.
Batch 1:
You’re too stressed out, you should relax tonight.
Take a nap today, please, you’ve been awake for two days.
Why won’t you go to the health center if you’ve felt like shit all week?

Batch 2:
Why would you be religious when you know all religion is idiotic?
That shirt is very ugly.
If you aren’t going to wear make-up, then don’t complain about not getting laid.

Now, which batch seems more like the example quotes?
Okay, it’s not a perfect test, but it seems to me like there is a distinct difference in inquiring about a friend’s health and belittling their choices. The sad thing about eating, food, weight, and nutrition is that it falls under the guise of health concern. But it’s not, is it? Not usually anyway. Not here. It’s about beauty and standards of appearance.

It would not be okay for me to approach a friend and mock parts of their identity with total sincerity. Of course friends disagree with each other, but there is a difference in disagreeing and judging. Also, weight has serious stigma in our culture. To be fat is to be ugly, lazy, stupid, undesirable, pathetic, etc. so maybe it’s extremely hurtful to criticize our friend’s eating.

Food and eating are such strange creatures in our culture.

Who’s us? The women at Goucher College who study philosophy. I’m a communications major, but I have been taking courses in philosophy since I entered college, because, well, all of my friends were using words like “simulacrum” and “transient self” and “objective Truth” and I wanted to know what all the fun was about. And I’ve found that I quite enjoy philosophy, and that we have a stellar philosophy department here.

But I find that I am always the token feminist. There maybe be a lot of us in the class, but but, really, only a few of us speak. And it really bothers me. I do not want to be the token feminist in a philosophy class at a college that has been historically a women’s college.

The current Goucher women to men ratio is 7:3. That’s right. This is a school where 70% of the students are female. But there are departments that are fairly male dominated, and philosophy is one of them. Not only are the majority of philosophy students male, but most of the professors are male. John, Bob, Steve, and Rochelle are the current line up of professors. So, it’s a bit of a boys club, but this really follows the pattern visible in history.

There is a strange divide in philosophy classes here, I have noticed. You have your history of philosophy and general “philosophy of” classes, that are attended heavily by the men in the department, usually having a more even gender (sex?) split, and then there are classes on women’s issues and race issues and sexuality issues that, really, only the ladies in philosophy take. Some boys, of course, venture into these areas, but, mostly, it’s ladies.

In the classes where there’s a decent sampling of men, feminist issues are not usually discussed all that much. I do not think that everything should be about feminism, but I do think that we are at the point in our social and philosophical lives that we should be good at being aware of the silences in both history and philosophy. A friend of mine took a class of philosophy and art. You know what they didn’t discuss even a little? Women. The female in art. Hello? i feel like this is such a no brainer in terms of “things a liberal arts college should talk about when discussing art and thought” that I was quite literally stunned when my friend told me this. (In addition, there wasn’t anything about race, but that shouldn’t surprise you. If women didn’t make the cut for topics to be discussed, race most certainly wouldn’t. After all, we’re all white kids here. No reason to talk about anything crazy like race issues. Save it for an African Studies class)

Women in philosophy have been silent players forever. Can you identify Socrates? How about Hypatia? If you can identify both, do you know one theory from each? probably not. We’ve remained silent players and, even today when amazing theories are being published and put forth by women, we skip over them when talking about “non-women’s” issues. How difficult would it be to throw in a week or two near the end of term acknowledging these silences? I don’t expect every course to suddenly become rooted in feminism, but I think that, especially at a historically women’s institution, it should be something that is at least mentioned in each class. And it should not be up to the students alone to mention it.

That being said, why the fuck aren’t students mentioning it? Why do I, the woman, have to be the one to bring it up? Not just in philosophy, now, but in any class. And why are the reactions when I bring these issues up more of a collective groan than a thoughtful “hmm?” I mean, it seems to go back to issues of privilege to me. The boys don’t have to seem the women’s silences in the course, because they are boys. They dont’ have to be aware of it in their everyday lives, so they don’t have to be aware of it in class. Like I said, some guys are exceptions to this. Not that they have managed to relinquish their privilege, but that they try and stay aware. But the majority don’t. There is still a distinct separation between what real philosophy is and women’s philosophy. The silences in this field have to be relegated to their own field, which enables them to continue being ignored.

There’s a strange pressure being a woman and a feminist in a philosophy class. There is the thought that I must always really know what I am talking about before I speak (even before I ask a question about what I’m seeking to understand) and that I am expected to bring up being a woman, which is typically irrelevant.

In my feminst philosophy class last year, there were 4 or 5 boys and about 12 girls. For my communications class, I counted for two weeks how many times men spoke versus how many times women spoke. On every day, the number of male comments were at least double (usually more) than the female comments. In a feminist philosophy class. What? We women aren’t even speaking in a class that is about ”our issues?” If you ask the silent women why, usually they say that they don’t feel qualified to speak, regardless if they have done every page of their reading or not. Why don’t we feel worthy of speaking in class, when there is always that one guy who never really reads anything but spouts of useless bits of information anyway? (Note: I’d rather be the token feminist than that guy.) 

I think it’s time we take our classes. I think it’s time we female philosophers speak up (out) in class. We have the questions and we have the analysis. We have the background and we have the drive. There is no reason for us, especially here at Goucher, to feel so silenced. There is no reason for us to be the only ones noticing the silences. There is no reason for us to feel like all we can speak about is “women’s philosophy.” Come on, Goucher. Let’s figure this out.