From Slacktory:

There’s this running joke on the internet about an acne-scarred C.H.U.D. (or Butthurt Dweller) finding fault with any and all images of women in order to alleviate the self-hatred and loneliness that goes along with being a neckbearded netizen — “I can’t find a decent woman, not because I’m just awful in every way, but because all the women in my town have such big foreheads and stubby toes. Disgusting!”

This mindset has borne a new meme, “2/10 Would Not Bang,” in which 4chan users post images of flawless women and compete against each other to find fault in increasingly creative ways, and then dismiss them with the Comic Book Guy-channeling verdict: 2/10, Would Not Bang.

According to Slacktory and the 4chan-ers themselves, this is not men judging women harshly — it’s satire of men judging women harshly. GET IT? Good.

I can see hints of that satire in some of these images. For example, criticism’s like “half of face too bright,” “forehead cut off,” and “being outside on a cloudy day,” are kindof funny because they mock  the judging by judging things that are actually more about the photo composition or staging of the image than the woman herself. Unfortunately, the majority of the criticisms miss the satire mark by a longshot.

These are all real things that women (and others) actually fret about. These are things that women are judged by in the harshest and most misogynistic of circles. “Would Not Bang” is the meme version of real-life sorority hazing where female pledges strip to their underwear and let frat boys highlight their flaws in red Sharpie.

I just don’t see any humor in that at all.

***Oh, and did I mention this meme is an excuse for racial bigotry?

(h/t to Tali for the link)

The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) sponsored two new billboards in Albany, NY, warning residents that cheese makes you fat in what is possibly most irresponsible way ever. The first features an obese man’s disembodied torso and the words, “Your abs on cheese.” The second features an obese woman’s butt and thighs and the words, “Your thighs on cheese.” The images make a very clear statement: fat people are disgusting. Read more.

Shame and Blame: Facing the Unintended Consequences of Health Messaging

A solemn black and white poster shows a picture of an obese girl with copy that reads: “Warning: It’s hard to be a little girl if you’re not.” Another poster displays a woman’s naked legs with her panties around her ankles and the word: “She didn’t want to do it, but she couldn’t say no.” The first is part of the Georgia “Strong 4 Life” campaign to prevent childhood obesity; the other is part of the Pennsylvania “Control Tonight” campaign to reduce excessive alcohol consumption. Though the campaigns are unrelated, they have one thing in common: disregard for the effects of shame and blame — the frequent unintended consequences of health campaigns.

The promotion of health and social welfare is one of those noble causes that attracts people who want to “do good.” Physicians are taught to “First, do no harm,” but health communication professionals take for granted that their work is “doing good” without considering that it might cause unintentional harm. For example, stigmatizing sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevention messages may make people with STIs too embarrassed to seek treatment or too ashamed to tell their sexual partners. Not only can health promotion messages lead to such negative health outcomes, they can also promote destructive social values, like fat stigma and rape culture.

Read the rest at the Huffington Post.

Now, I know as much as the next person how important it is not to feed the trolls. And these Nazi commenters are trolls of the worst order — the angry, threatening kind. I tried to ignore the whole thing. But everyday, new anti-semitic threats and slurs kept showing up in my inbox.

Two of my grandparents are Holocaust survivors. They lived in the Lodz ghetto in Poland and were both sent to Auschwitz, although they didn’t meet each other until after the war. I always felt that they, and my dad (their son), were paranoid about anti-semitism. I mean, the paranoia was pretty damn rational for them, but it never felt like a real threat to me. Then again, I had never received emails from people saying they’d like to put me in an oven before.

I’ve taken a few days to think about it — whether I should respond, and if so, what I should say. I figured out what I wanted to say long before I decided whether I should say anything at all. I made a video. And then I agonized about whether or not to share it.

“You’re just going to bait them and get worse hatemail,” said a friend. “Why are you taunting them?” It’s true. I probably will get more hatemail. But is this just feeding the trolls, or is this a chance to say something important? To call attention to the reality that old-school anti-semitism still lives (even if it is in a small and pathetic sort of way).

In the end I thought about my grandparents. How would they feel if they knew their granddaughter was getting this sort of hatemail? They loved to say things like “I didn’t survive the Holocaust so you could drop out of high school and become a janitor.” Or maybe it was my dad who loved to say that… (“Your grandparents didn’t survive the Holocaust so you could get a tattoo!)

Well here’s what I have to say: My grandparents didn’t survive the Holocaust so that I should stand silently and be bullied by racist idiots.

It may not be the most mature way to handle internet trolls, but at least I live in a world where I’m free to express myself, free to be Jewish, and free to delete emails without reading them.

So, without further ado, this is what I have to say:

1. So, when the Shit Girls Say video first came out, I liked it but I wasn’t exactly sure why. Then I read Elissa Straus’s piece on it and now it all makes sense.

2. I was blown away by the Shit White Girls Say to Black Girls video. It’s truly brilliant. So is this article by Tami Winfrey Harris about why it’s not “reverse racist.”

3. Then I saw Shit Christian Say to Jews.

This one was particularly striking because it was all. too. familiar.

My family was one of the only Jewish families in my small, rural town. Here’s some shit that’s actually been said to me and/or my brother:

• What do you mean you don’t celebrate Christmas?
• You don’t believe in Jesus? You’re going to hell.
• Do you have … birthdays?
• Do you guys celebrate Thanksgiving?
• Your nose isn’t that big.
• Do you go to church?
• Did you, like, get circumcised at your bar mitzvah?
• If I lived during the Holocaust, I would have saved you and your family.
• Do Jews eat rotten fish heads?
• What’s Jewish church called again?
• I think Jews are really holy. They’re God’s chosen people.
• The other day some Jews came to church to teach us about Passover. You know, Jews for Jesus?
• [In Spain] I’ve never met a Jewess before. So exotic!
• I was going  to give you a Christmas card, but I thought it might be rude.

I think I find this video particularly striking because people assume that everybody knows about Jews, or even that American culture (pop culture?) is overtly Jewish. Not enough, apparently.

You know the type I’m talking about. The Drunk Creeper™ is a dude who is very drunk and very handsy. His patented move is to come up behind a girl and slide his arm around her waist, so that he can — before she even knows what’s happening — touch her hips and whisper in her ear in that oh-so-intimate of sexual positions. I find it hard to ignore Drunk Creepers™; they set off my internal alarm bells, even from across a dark bar. After watching a Drunk Creeper™ approach-and-grope seven or more women in quick succession, you know it’s only a matter of time before he stumbles onto you.

There’s a standard way to deal with a Drunk Creeper™ that fits with the learned, ladylike rule to always be pleasing, even in refusal. When a Drunk Creeper™ slimes his way onto your body, you start by giving the forced smile/eye roll combo that lets your friends know you are fully aware that this dude is a skeeze, but still appears pleasing to his drunkenly impaired senses. Then you sortof pretend to listen to his inebriated acknowledgment of your hotness and politely decline his advances, slowly disengaging yourself from his grip and moving to a new spot. Then, afterwards, you discuss what a creeper he was with your friends. It’s girl tested, girl approved.

Youtube celeb Jenna Mourey, aka Jenna Marbles, has a different approach: the face.

If that doesn’t work, she has more goofy techniques like acting like a velociraptor, singing, or planking until the guy leaves you alone. These are hilarious in theory, and they may even work in practice, but they still bother me. Basically, the Jenna Marbles’ techniques give you a humorous way to end an interaction without having to be the angry bitch girl who raised her voice and caused a scene on the dance floor. Because, according to the rules of being a lady, you must never, ever, be the angry bitch girl.

Saturday night, I was an angry bitch girl.

The Drunk Creeper™ was dancing in front of me and dropped his jacket on my feet. I kicked it back towards him, which unfortunately caught his attention. He spun around and before he even had time to look at me, grabbed my face with both hands and started to come in for a drunken, slobbery kiss. I reacted with a kung fu parry (all girls should take martial arts) and yelled “Don’t fucking touch me!” He backed off, but everyone around me gave me startled looks.

A little while later, I noticed him dancing behind a friend of mine. I leaned in to tell her to watch out for him because he was a Drunk Creeper™. Just as I finished warning her, he came up behind her and slid his arm across her waist and stuck his face in the crook of her neck. Before she had a chance to react, I grabbed him by the shoulder and pulled him off her. I screamed at him to get the fuck out of here and pointed forcefully with my finger. He looked terrified. But then again, so did everyone in a five-foot radius.

It’s never cool to be the angry girl, which is why Jenna Marbles came up with a creative way to take control without having to get angry. But sometimes I think it’s important to be the angry girl. Like, for example, when you’re really angry at a Drunk Creeper™ who is treating women’s bodies like his own property, touching without asking, and who will undoubtedly wake up the next morning with a hangover, but absolutely no qualms about his sexist, predatory behavior. Even though I admire the humor of the approach, I think it’s demeaning to use the “face” to deal with Drunk Creepers™. Why must we be so cautious about expressing genuine anger or disgust in situations like this when it’s so clearly warranted?

Maybe I’m just the angry feminist who can’t laugh it off as “boys will be boys.” But maybe, just maybe, I’m acting the way a person should act when their personal space and potential safety is violated by a drunk asshole.

The predatory behavior of Drunk Creepers™ doesn’t deserve a free pass, and I refuse to be ashamed of being the angry bitch who won’t give it to them.

Strong 4 Life campaign

According to the Georgia Strong 4 Life childhood obesity campaign website, “Ignoring this problem is what got us here.”

It’s true that childhood obesity is a big problem, but you know what DIDN’T cause the childhood obesity epidemic?

Ignoring the problem.

You know what did?

• Income disparity
• Food deserts
• Fast food advertising
• The whole fast food industry
• Corn subsidies
• Policies like the one declaring that pizza counts as a vegetable in school lunches
• Lack of safe outdoor play space for inner city kids
• Video games
• Lack of funding for physical education
• Poverty

You know what this ad does?

• Help families alleviate/prevent childhood obesity
• Blame this kid for being a fatty fat.

Know what blaming kids for being fat does?

• Makes them lose weight
• Encourages a culture of fat stigma and fat shaming that fuels bullying
• Increases negative psychological, emotional, and health outcomes among overweight and obese children, such as low self-esteem, body image disturbance, eating disorders, and even suicide.

Way to go, Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta.

According to LifeNews.com (which I don’t suggest you read unless you want to feel stabby), Franks has said the bill is needed because abortions on black babies are done at much higher rates than abortions on babies of other races. (So he says.) Franks also believes that Asian Americans have brought the traditional practice of sex-selection (and the preference for boys) over to the US. So essentially, he wants to restrict abortion access to women of color in the name of protecting them from their own bad decisions.

Do you see something wrong there?

Oh! It’s paternalism!

It’s mansplaining at the highest level. It’s this:

The reality is that in the US, sex-selective abortion is incredibly rare because 95% of abortions happen too early in pregnancy to detect the fetus’s sex. And, since the ratio of girls to boys has actually increased since abortion became legal, we are definitely not seeing any effects of this practice. I call bullshit.

The reality is that in the US, women of color face enormous structural barriers to accessing reproductive healthcare, including contraception. As a result, they have higher rates of unintended pregnancy. According to the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, reproductive healthcare providers who seek to help these underserved populations get the care they need are actually “eugenicists in disguise,” targeting minorities not to help them–but to convince them to abort themselves out of existence.

The reality is that women of color aren’t buying this bullshit. Anti-abortion activists already tried to pass this legislation at the local level in Georgia; they were defeated by coalition of women-of-color organizations. The anti-abortion group backing the legislation is the same group that put up those billboards in low-income neighborhoods saying “Black children are an endangered species” and “The most dangerous place for an African American is in the womb.” Groups like the SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Health Collective have already called bullshit on the billboards, and the whole damned assumption they make about black women being manipulated into killing their own children:

Black women are not the pawns of these white people who erect such billboards. We find them offensive, racist, sexist and–most of all–disrespectful of our decision making, our 400-year history of raising and caring for black children and our human right to make health care choices for ourselves.

The reality is that the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act is not about protecting women of color, but about taking another swing at overturning Roe v. Wade. It’s hard to deny this when LifeNews.com is publishing editorials called “Sex-selection abortions a possible opening to overturn Roe.”

A sex-selection ban would indeed present the Supreme Court with a dilemma. To strike down such a law–in essence, to embrace a constitutional right to sex-selection abortion–would expose just how extreme and immoral the Court’s present abortion doctrine really is. To read such a result in the name of “gender equality” would be monstrous and absurd. Such a ruling would undermine support both for Roe and for the Court as an institution, as never before.

So there you have it.

There is no need for a Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act because “prenatals” are not being discriminated against. The only purpose it serves is to scare people into giving up their own human rights, including the right to comprehensive reproductive healthcare.

So please, contact your Congressperson and call bullshit on the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act.

Now.

Filed under: Abortion, Rhetoric ]]> http://talkinreckless.com/2011/12/06/dont-be-fooled-the-prenatal-nondiscrimination-act-is-bullshit/feed/ 0 leality franks http://talkinreckless.com/2011/12/04/its-not-like-a-sweater-why-you-shouldnt-ask-a-pregnant-woman-for-her-baby/ http://talkinreckless.com/2011/12/04/its-not-like-a-sweater-why-you-shouldnt-ask-a-pregnant-woman-for-her-baby/#comments Mon, 05 Dec 2011 03:29:28 +0000 Leah http://talkinreckless.com/?p=1137 ]]>

This week, something on Postsecret really bothered me. One secret told the story of a generous shopper who purchased over $300 worth of Christmas presents for a fellow shopper whose credit card was denied. A second secret was from a mom who, for the second year in a row, couldn’t afford to buy her children Christmas presents. In response, three people wrote in offering to donate so that her children could have presents to open Christmas morning. A third secret was written by a woman who was lying to her employers about taking time off for a funeral so that she could get an abortion (left). In response, a woman who could not have children wrote in asking for her baby.

—–Email—–

Hi Frank – My husband and I are not able to have children. Or at least I’m not. I had my 2nd ectopic pregnancy the day before Thanksgiving and they took my last fallopian tube. I would love to get my contact info to the poster of the abortion secret in case she changes her mind and considers adoption. We would make amazing parents!

This really bothers me. It’s as if the emailer is talking about a plate of food, asking, “Hey, are you going to eat that?”

I realize that my interpretation of this exchange is colored by context of the first two secrets about giving to families in need, but the juxtaposition is striking. Good samaritans donate money, food, clothing, toys, and shelter. They give scholarships, grants, even buildings. But a baby is not charity or something you can donate. A baby is not something you should ever ask of someone — especially of someone who has already made the difficult decision to terminate her pregnancy.

First of all, it is not the responsibility of pregnant women who don’t want to have a baby to provide babies for couples who can’t have their own. Adoption is not some sort of magical solution where pregnant women who don’t want babies can just give them to women who want babies but can’t get pregnant and everybody wins. In one episode of Sex and the City, Carrie’s boyfriend asks, “If Miranda doesn’t want the kid, can’t she just give it to Charlotte?” Carrie responds, “No, it’s not like a sweater.”

Adoption is a choice, yes, and it is the right choice for some, but it is not any easier or any less emotionally devastating of a choice than abortion for a pregnant woman. Let’s not forget that giving birth involves drawing out the emotional turmoil for nine whole months, not to mention the physical challenges, medical risks, and ya know, having to hand over a squishy infant that’s been a living part of you for nine months.

Nor is adoption a magic-happy-fun-time solution for couples who can’t conceive or carry out a pregnancy naturally. The adoption process is just as emotionally trying as struggling with IVF or surrogacy — just ask Alicia who recently shared a heartbreaking story of her adoption that fell through six days after she and her husband had begun taking care of the infant they thought was to be their daughter. I have a lot of respect for birth parents and adoptive parents, partly because this is not something everyone can do. And it’s certainly not something anyone should ever expect anyone else to be able, or willing, to do.

Clearly, the woman who responded to the secret is hurting and I can empathize with her. For those who want children, not being able to conceive, carry, and give birth to a child can be absolutely devastating. But just as she is suffering, so is the writer of the secret. Pro-life factions would like us to believe that Pro-choice women get abortions like they get their teeth cleaned, but the reality is that abortion is difficult and emotionally painful even when the woman is sure of her choice, and even when she doesn’t regret it afterwards. So, asking a woman who has already chosen abortion to reconsider because other women would give anything to be able to have a baby, is an especially cruel variety of guilt trip.

For some reason, women’s bodies become public property the minute they get pregnant. Strangers feel like they have the right to reach out and touch their bellies, or police what they’re eating or what they’re doing. It seems this is true even for pregnant women who choose abortion — who may never get to the point where their pregnancy shows, but who are still being made to feel like they owe someone something. In this case, a freaking baby.

Sometimes I wish I could be a guardian angel for women who choose abortion. I wish I could envelop them in my big angel wings and protect them from the hate, the judgment, the protesters, the politicians. I wish I could wrap them in love and they would know that someone out there supports their choice, and trusted them to make that choice in the first place. I wish I could protect them from the kind of guilt that comes from unintentionally tactless emails like the one above.

Asking to adopt a pregnant woman’s baby might make good television (it’s a running plot arch on this season of Parenthood), but in real life it’s a bad idea. If you’re looking to adopt a baby, go through the channels that will link you with pregnant women who have already chosen adoption and are looking for great parents just like you. But if a pregnant woman chooses abortion, have some compassion and leave her the fuck alone.