Sex
Twilight: A Feminist Nightmare
Published November 22, 2009 @ 05:52PM PT
Ok, I will admit it. I haven't seen any of the Twilight movies. Nor have I read any of the books. But what I do know about it is that it has attracted millions of young, female fans. Based on this fact alone, I feel the need to take a closer look.
I got my start in feminist organizing when I helped coordinate a voter registration drive during the Sex and the City Movie premieres in 2008, where with the help of Mobilize.org, we registered 10,000 women to vote. While Sex and the City certainly has its narrative flaws, I found that it helped many more women than it hurt by displaying the challenges of being a single mother, a career woman, being infertile, and many other difficult moments that millions of women experience. I also believe that it was the best sex education young women have had in the past decade; it made it okay for women to talk about sex, have sex and break out of the puritanical expectations of society. Sex and the City was the last big movie I can think of which drew in women from all over the world -- until Twilight came to the big screen.
Even without seeing the movies or reading the book, the Twilight narrative really disturbs me. From what I know about it, it is a story of a predatory vampire who essentially stalks a young woman named Bella. Their relationship turns into a reckless romantic escapade and Bella ends up losing every sense of herself, becoming solely concerned with giving herself to this 100-year-old vampire dressed up in a 17-year-old boy's body.
Friday Femme Fatale: Gore Vidal, Gen Y Women & Transphobia
Published October 31, 2009 @ 09:32AM PT
Ok, so this is more like a Saturday Femme Fatale - but I didn't want to let anyone down who is looking for the most interesting links in the feminist sphere from the past week.
Without further delay, here's this week's list:
- What women's lib? 70 percent of Americans think women should take spouse's name after marriage (NY Daily News)
- Work/Life Balance Is Not a Woman's Issue (American Prospect)
- No Dignity For NBC (Ms. Magazine)
- A [Disgusting] Conversation With Gore Vidal (The Atlantic)
- Pro-Palin Book Takes on Tina Fey, Feminists (Washington Independent)
- 'Why Y Women' (Media Post)
- Is Seventeen teaching transphobia? (Salon.com)
- Dating, love and feminism: do men prefer submissive women? (The Examiner)
Friday Femme Fatale: HIV Vaccine, Maternity Care & Anti-Choice Hit List
Published September 25, 2009 @ 03:41PM PT
Phew! How is it already Friday? This week just flew by. That must be because of all the amazing things going on lately. For example, NARAL had an event bringing together young professionals and helping them get involved pro-choice movement. Check out photos of those who attended (including yours truly) and if you haven't become a member of NARAL yet, you can do so here.
Also, my full-time employer, Air America Media, had a fun party this week as we get ready for our new website to launch in just a few days. You can see photos of that event here.
Next up, the latest and greatest articles in women's rights from the past seven days. Enjoy.
- Kyl: 'I Don't Need Maternity Care.' Stabenow: 'Your Mom Probably Did' (Talking Points Memo)
- Dylan Ratigan's Women's Moment (Gloria Feldt)
- Anti-choice 'Electoral Hit List' Targets Twelve Democrats (RH Reality Check)
- Bloody Hell-Healthcare Reform Will Not Increase The Tax On Condoms and Tampons (Feminist Peace Network)
- The Mother of Reinvention (New York Times)
- The Crusade Against Sex Trafficking (The Nation)
Get Ready for Freedom Week
Published September 17, 2009 @ 08:20PM PT
Just found out about this exciting event series coming up in New York City called Freedom Week, which is seven days of awareness-raising events, delving deep into the issue of modern-day slavery in all of its many forms. I hope to be able to make it to some of the events, but wanted to share with those in New York.
SEPTEMBER 20
- The Economics of Sex Slavery by Siddharth Kara, author of Sex Trafficking: Inside the Business of Modern Slavery. TBA; FREE
- Fatal Promises documentary featuring actress Emma Thompson, activist Gloria Steinem and Free the Slaves founder Kevin Bales. 3, 5, 7 and 9:30pm; $11, $8 student, $6 senior
SEPTEMBER 21
- "Faces of Freedom" photography exhibit co-sponsored by UNICEF & RugMark. TBA; FREE
- The World of Sex Trafficking with New York Times journalist Nicholas Kristof & Kaign Christy of International Justice Mission. 8pm; FREE
SEPTEMBER 22
- Q&A forum with Restore and other organizations. 7-9:30pm; FREE
- "Redemption Songs of Freedom" benefit concert with hip-hop artist Emmanuel Jal. 8pm (doors open at 7:30pm); $5 with Columbia Univ. student ID, $15 without
Engaging Rebecca Hagelin: Let's Rethink, Not Regress
Published August 12, 2009 @ 01:12PM PT
It was 1 a.m. this morning and I was going about my sometimes benign, sometimes epic scan of Twitter before bed. As I often remark in trainings and with interested audiences, Twitter has created a pretty damn efficient marketplace for ideas, and this evening was no exception. "Epic" might be an understatement. On offer this night, courtesy a delayed RSS feed of the Heritage Foundation's five most recent op-eds, was an opinion piece by Rebecca Hagelin: "Assaulted by sex-ed," which ran Monday in the Washington Times, with 3 comments as of this writing.
Not only does title the title appear to play on words - sex education implying sexual assault - but the actual content unfortunately reinforces a style of rhetoric about sex that is unproductive and makes a mistake common to traditionalist conservatives: The argument contradicts key conservative principles about personal responsibility, evaluating economic impact and driving our society forward in innovative, world- and industry-leading ways.
Let me be clear: on many market issues and some general policy issues, I see eye-to-eye with Heritage. I have even met in person and worked with Rebecca Hagelin (via JESS3) on a project that included redesigning their e-mail newsletters and web design for Heritage's blog, The Foundry. She is sharp, pleasant and a working mom. Respect, respect. I also count key Heritage folks like Rob Bluey, Tim McGovern and Todd Thurman friends. This is in no way a personal attack on Rebecca or any of her colleagues. And I hope anyone who chooses to engage in the comments, over Twitter and on their own blogs also maintains a high level of respect and professionalism.
As many friends and readers of my blog know, I have an interest in this subject beyond the pedestrian. I bring to the table over 15 years of activism in the sexuality and education space, starting as early as 7th grade and marked by academic work at the University of Chicago (especially my senior thesis, "Rethinking, Reframing and Revolutionizing the Sex Education Debate").
As they say in academia, let's unpack this. And to do so, I have two points and one caveat:
FIRST - THINK RETHINKING (this is where it gets interesting and productive). In 1984, Gayle Rubin put forth an important, well-considered challenge to rethink the way we think about sex. I want to challenge: the reader here, Rebecca Hagelin, the Heritage Foundation, young, old, conservative, progressive, straight, gay, heterosexual, queer and everything in between to rethink about what is really being taught, what is missing, what can in fact be presented in a better way. To quote Rubin from 25 years ago: to truly have a meaningful and more realistic understanding of sex, we must shift our thinking from the traditional framings of sex in terms of "sin, disease, neurosis, pathology, decadence, pollution, or the declines and fall of empires" to instead understand sex in terms of "social analysis and historical understanding."
SECOND -DON'T REGRESS (in 2009, we cannot afford not to take into account scientific, sociological and psychological learnings when it comes to human sexuality). While the Heritage Foundation espouses the concepts of free enterprise and individual freedom, they still have an arguably non sequitur belief in fear-based (not health- / science-based) treatment of sex education. Sorry, but this is where the conservative movement and adherent Republican politicians lose me and, I would imagine, many others. Until we can have a reasoned and measured discussion about sex, without framing it in terms of pathology and propaganda, we will not be able to truly address key issues such as sexual health (think both STDs, AIDS, abuse, as well as personal sexual agency and pleasure) and planned pregnancy (think not only reduced levels of rape, abortions and unprotected sex, but also joyful families welcoming little blessings into this world).
See what I did there? By using the neutral word "health" we can talk about the range from disease to expression. By using a word like "planned", we can talk about what happens when things do and do not go as planned. The language we use and the way we frame our thoughts all have an impact on the politics, policies outcomes and potential solutions. Not only do I see this enabling a happier, healthier and more self-aware culture, but I truly believe that this reframing has real impacts and benefits to our economy - just ask any economist from my alma mater (see especially: Becker and Levitt). Further, thanks to well-reasoned thinking from greats like George Orwell, we know that language is inherently political. But that doesn't mean we should charge it up with negativity just because we can. I would sure hope an institution that considers itself a "think tank" would think through its argument and frame it in a more productive way.
THIRD - MY CAVEAT: I am also not ready to completely disregard concerns about age-appropriate content in classrooms funded by the state. On this point, I am not ready to dismiss Dr. Miriam Grossman, the expert quoted by Hagelin in her piece, who has written You're Teaching My Child What? A Physician Exposes the Lies of Sex Education, because I would like to first read her book and second, continue my own research in this area before I make any final judgments. In fact, my suspicion here is that both Hagelin and Grossman may describe extreme, but rare, instances that are true in some cases. I also recognize that Hagelin is deliberate and strategic about her polarizing approach. She has a world view that in her experience has not been honored by the public school system and it's OK if she wants to opt out of the system. She also has a book to sell; hats off to the hustle.
That said, this remains a conviction and the note on which I want to end: Using extremist language such as "perverted and immoral sex propagandists" to describe respectable organizations like SEICUS gets us nowhere fast. This is exactly the kind of language I saw advanced in the 90s in Oregon by the far-right group Oregon Citizen Alliance, where they conflated a way of life (homosexuality), with a set of practices (S&M) and a completely illegal act (pedophilia). Polarizing tactics aside, the end goal here should be happy, healthy children who grow into happy, healthy and productive members of society. As many of us know, relationships, sex, having children and sexuality all play into our ultimate and collective happiness and healthiness. And so does meaningful, well-framed and productive dialogue, as I believe I have begun to lay out here.
What are your concerns? Where do you think the limits reside? Please share your thoughts here, over Twitter and via our Act.ly petition:
Petition @Heritage to Help facilitate a meaningful dialogue about Sex Ed. #sexed http://act.ly/e6 RT to sign #actly
Even more fired up? Blog about it, tell a friend.
Photo credit: Lew57
Just Say No? Well, Not Exactly.
Published June 26, 2009 @ 02:54PM PT
If you're wondering who thought it was a good idea for Bristol Palin, pregnant at 17, to warn America's teens not to have sex until they're married, you're not alone.
This week Jessica Wakeman of The Frisky reported that advocates of abstinence-only education are re-branding its message with the selection of Bristol Palin as their spokesperson about the hazards of pre-marital sex:
But it's hard to figure out what, exactly, the well-meaning adults who preach "no sex until marriage" to teenagers are thinking, considering a 2007 study confirmed abstinence-only education does not work.
Jessica Valenti, editor of Feminsting.com and author of The Purity Myth: How America's Obsession With Virginity Is Hurting Young Women, has written a piece for The Nation about how the groups that comprise what Valenti calls "the virginity movement" have finally realized they need new PR.
I've written before about the need for parents and schools to focus their energies on comprehensive sex education so that teenagers can make better informed decisions about engaging in sexual activity (or not). But I'd like to submit that perhaps the abstinence-only movement doesn't need re-branding. What they need is to refram abstinence and the reasons for _why_ youth should abstain.
In many churches - particularly in the Black church community in which I came of age - teens are told to just "not have it" because sex is bad. But the abstinence-only crowd instead told teens to wait because, well, sex is a _good_ thing? What if they took it a step further and said, "Because sex is good, we want teens to be inform on how to protect themselves"?
Perhaps organizations supporting abstinence-only sex education could get real and admit that some kids just aren't going to wait until they're married and start educating you on how to prevent STD's and pregnancy. That's the model my parents used when they began a Rites of Passage Program for youth at my church back home in Los Angeles. And lo and behold: many of us waited longer to have sex and - gasp! - there were fewer unwanted pregnancies.
This story brings to mind the "sex-as-taboo" meme that Americans seem to be so obsessed with. Female sexuality is still seen as a bad thing, particularly when complicated by race and ethnicity. Girls in general and Black girls I particular are told to just "not have it" by their parents and places of worship. On the flip side, women are also seen as mere sexual objects by pop culture and the media.
I cannot walk on a DC street wearing a maxi dress in peace. Instead, I still have to hear calls like "Hey, Chocolate!" by men on the block. And believe me, I don't take it as a compliment.
Perhaps by providing comprehensive sex education, society could finally address the discomfort we have with female sexuality and with sexual behavior as a whole. Maybe then, we will see sex beyond a biological destiny and more of a realistic act of intimacy.
Ladies, Do You Carry Your Own Condoms?
Published May 28, 2009 @ 08:29PM PT
I do. And I hope you do to. Carrying a condom doesn't make you promiscuous, it makes you smart.
Here's a great new campaign from "Just In Case" that not only gives you a stylish way to carry your condoms, but a lot of good reasons to do so as well.
