Friday, October 31, 2014

Halloween roundup

Read this,
However well-intentioned the presentation was with regards to women taking precaution for their demeanor, it does not address the core issue, which is that it really has nothing to do with what the victim is doing, but everything to do with perceived male entitlement by some to females’ bodies...

“My thought the whole time was maybe women shouldn’t practice how long they’re blinking, men should just not rape people,” added Molina.
The use of victim-blaming in teaching sexual assault prevention places the burden of prevention on the targets of sexual assault and creates a culture in which survivors are shamed, perpetrators are excused and society is given no responsibility to end the pandemic...
The National Research Council reports that as many as 80 percent of sexual assaults are not reported to police. Victim-blaming not only deprives survivors of justice, but also allows perpetrators to potentially never see punishment for their actions.
in the context of (trigger warning) this and this.

Then read this for hope that times are changing. 

Consider the street harassment video, as important as it is, in the context of the racially-selective editing.

On reactionary rage and maintaining legitimate criticism without falling into the gutter:
I personally plead guilty to jumping on that bandwagon without thinking fully about what I was doing. And for not thinking about how the legitimate criticisms of problematic treatment of race and class in Girls, criticisms of the storytelling and comedic tone of the show, etc. were being actively used as a shield by the much larger wave of Internet scum demanding the freedom to call Lena Dunham a fat, ugly, spoiled bitch for daring to show up on their TV screen without their approval. I didn’t think how “legitimate criticisms”—like the legitimate criticisms of the materialism in the “disco lifestyle,” like legitimate criticisms of the cliquishness of the tiny indie video game scene—get used as fuel by reactionary hate mobs.
And note that sometimes--exactly sometimes--the personal is not political.
 
Tim Cook comes out and it's beautiful.
 
New Yorker profilee is confused about vegetarians:
Fernald also characterizes vegetarianism as a phase for new foodies in their early 20s. This isn’t just patronizing — if someone’s concerned about industrial meat and can’t afford silk wrap dresses, vegetarianism is a much better solution than saving up for a $12 burger.
The Wall Street Journal is confused about Americans (and their relationship to food).

Kids don't need special "kid" food.

These pumpkins are amazing; these are not. But baby Ruth Bader Ginsburg is most amazing of all.

This fashion writer is no Robin Givhan, but she has a point: style doesn't conflict with substance; style can even enhance substance.

I love this discussion with Anna Holmes and Zoe Heller about relationships and books.
I suspect I am not the only woman to become involved with men who profess to value her for her ability to be emotionally present, curious and passionate only to reveal, down the road, an expectation that this sort of generosity of time and energy be restricted solely to interests and activities that include them. I hate the idea that there is a type of person whose impulse when witnessing a partner’s clearly rewarding, other-directed engagement is to react with contempt, not celebration; to expect the prioritizing of one’s own needs far above hers. In my experience, daring to honor my interior life — not to mention my professional commitments — has proved, in the context of coupling, to be a controversial, radical act.
and
Insisting that your loved one’s literary judgments be in harmony with your own suggests to me a rather dull and narcissistic notion of what constitutes intimacy. Do you really want to be one of those dreary couples who are always delivering their identical cultural opinions in the first person plural?

No comments: