Why I wish my mother a happy Father's Day every year

Growing up, I always knew I didn't have a dad. My mother told me the story early on: She had met the love of her life. He was married and had children but was interested in my mother. My mother decided to have a child to forever be reminded of this great love.

Like many womyn, I don't think my mom truly grasped that there was still a huge possibility I was going to grow up without a dad. Not even a baby will make a man stay. He even told her that he did not want another child because his life was already made and he wasn't going to provide for this new baby. But he caved, and here I am.

For years I was angry with my mother for bringing me into this world knowing she was going to be a single parent. At a very young age I understood that my mother had made the choice to bring me into this world without a father--and that was very hurtful for me. Many of my friends had fathers in their lives and had healthy and loving relationships with them. I felt like I was missing out on something important or like I was at a disadvantage for not having that other half of me in my life.

The older I got, the more upset I became because I felt like my mom had set me up for failure. What exacerbated my feelings was our financial situation. As a janitor, my mom didn't make more than $30,000 a year. Some years she only made around $15,000. I felt like I didn't have much because I didn't have a dad, and I didn't have a dad because my mom made that decision for me.

The closer I got to graduating from high school, the more I realized that my mom set me up for success. I thought to myself, "My mom is an actual badass!" Not only could she make $15,000 last for two people for an entire year, she also kept me pretty happy. She would play Gasolina by Daddy Yankee at red lights so I could show off my choreography. She also let me do her hair and take naps with her. She was my first dance partner who taught me all my cumbia moves. She miraculously even found the time to chaperone some of my field trips and never missed a parent-teacher conference.

Of course, like any relationship, we had our problems. She's not perfect, because no one is. And like the rest of us, my mother carries serious trauma from being a Mexican immigrant in the United States who was physically and emotionally abused as a child and an adult. Not only was she a single mother to me, she was also a single mother to my three siblings. She carried that weight the only way she knew how and made sure she did better than her parents did.

The older I got, the more grateful I was to not have a dad. The person my mom fell in love with was an immigrant from El Salvador who was cheating on his wife with more womyn than just my mom. I realized that having him in my life would probably have made living my life harder. I was never "girly," and my significant other is a butch lesbian. Latinx cultural norms make it hard to exist outside of heteronormative binary roles, and there is a high chance that he would have perpetuated these norms in our household.

Since I realized how much work my mom put in to taking care of me, I decided to wish my mom a happy Father's Day. I wanted to let her know that I appreciated her decision to keep and raise me knowing she was going to do so by herself. And since she had hoped I would have a father, I thought it fitting to let her know that although I didn't grow up with a second parent, she definitely filled both roles and then some.

It is because of her that I can speak up in situations many people from similar backgrounds are not comfortable to do so. As a single mother, my mom had to fight to survive and make sure her kids survived. Nothing was ever handed to her, and she didn't have anyone to lean on. If something needed to get done, she was the one who went out and made it happen.

This was my beginning as a feminist. Having a womxn in my life who played every role (homemaker, mechanic, doctor, cook, seamstress, breadwinner, chauffeur) taught me that I could do whatever I wanted. This was further engrained in me from watching my sisters apply what they learned from my mom (both are 20 years older than me) while raising families of their own (both were cheated on and left to raise their children on their own).

Wishing a single mother a happy Father's Day is not for everyone though. Many people feel it is dismissive of the importance of a father's role. This point of view reminds me of difference feminism (how the two sexes have inherently different qualities and therefore are inherently unequal). It seems like people who feel strongly about not wishing a mother a happy Father's Day believe that a womxn cannot fill the role of a "father" do to the biological, and therefore inherent, differences among the two heteronormative sexes.

However, this idea further perpetuates heteronormativity. Difference feminism leaves queer folks (including those who are polygamous) and individuals who decide to raise a child on their own. And I would like to point out that just because my children will have two moms and no father, they will not miss out on anything because femininity and masculinity are not rooted in any one particular gender.

Although there is controversy surrounding whether or not it is okay to wish a single mother a happy Father's Day, I wish my mom one every year because she persevered through her childhood trauma and her adult trauma to pick up the slack of someone who should have assumed the responsibility of being my father. And every year I say it, she is grateful for the acknowledgment and humbled by the recognition of her 24+ years worth of double duty.

Footloose: Toxic Masculinity Addition

Queer people, especially growing up, have to be especially careful about everything they do. Every action, every word choice, every joke needs to be carefully examined before its executed. For some people, this caution stems from fear of outing themselves before ready. For others, the fear stems from just being seen as an “other,” some misfit who does not belong.

For me, the latter was my main concern. A lot of people say that deep down they had always known they were gay. I, however, was not one of those people. Growing up, I believed I was straight. There was no nagging voice in the back of my head telling me that maybe I liked boys.

My mom was diagnosed with cancer right before I turned 15, and she died less than four months later. I attribute not hearing that voice to just trying to readjust to life and dealing with the trauma after her death. But, at 17, I realized I was gay, and within three weeks, I had come out to everyone in my life. It was a very short period between my own realization through me becoming open with everyone in my life.

So, what does this all have to do with the title I gave this blog post? Well, I have always loved to sing. It has always brought me joy. There are only a handful of days where I don’t start of the day humming “Good Morning Baltimore” from Hairspray (Musical) or “Provincial Life” from Beauty and the Beast (Movie). When I feel overwhelmed, I scream-sing “I’m Not Okay” by My Chemical Romance (Band) until I feel better. When I need a good cry I'm feeling sad, I listen to “People” from Funny Girl (Musical) or “On My Own” or “I Dreamed a Dream,” the latter two from Les Miserablés (Musical). Some of the quotes I live my life by come from songs. Two of my favorites, both which come from the song “Down, Down, Down to Mephisto’s Café” by Streetlight Manifesto (Band), which say “You can play the role of rebel, just be sure to know your wrong from right,” and

Way back when the prophecies began, do you think they really had a master plan, or were they merely writing fables, stories? I don’t know but it has occurred to me, the punishment that they threaten constantly, it’s only real if they can just convince me.”

 I have never been in love, but I have felt how much love can hurt someone by listening to any Adele album. This is all just a long way of saying, I love music and it has and always will be a big part of my life.

However, singing when you are in middle school and high school, especially growing up in the conservative part of California (I lived next to a place named Santee, but people referred to it as Klan-tee because of all the white supremacists living there) is not something a boy does. It’s something a “faggot” does. And this, guys, gals, and non-binary-pals, is where my tale of toxic masculinity begins.

First, what is toxic masculinity? Some on this blog have talked about toxic masculinity (see: Toxic Locker Rooms) and other have defined it (see: #MasculinitySoFragile and the Gendering of Consumer Products). I wanted to define it in my own terms as well. Toxic masculinity, to me, is any type of behavior done to ensure that one is seen as masculine, but to the determent of actor or others. This often means that the actor will avoid doing things that they or society perceive as feminine- like singing, dancing, cooking, talking about your emotions, having long hair, wearing traditionally feminine colors, etc.- even if it is something the person truly loves doing.

For me, the thing I avoided doing because it was considered feminine was singing. I never joined choir at my middle school. And I only joined high school choir my senior year, over half a year after I had come out. I was so afraid of being perceived as an “other” that I purposefully avoided something I truly loved. And I would only have been perceived as an “other” because of the patriarchy dictating what is masculine and what is feminine.

Instead of choir, I joined the next closest thing: band (I played clarinet for 9 years, and was first chair my last year of high school). I made so many good friends in band, and I cherish most of my memories from those times. But I never loved the activity. It was not something I wanted to be doing, but rather was something I was doing to get a fix. I still wanted music in my life, and band was the best, unfeminine way to incorporate it.

But it was not the same. And I look back now and am sad that I was too scared to participate in something I truly loved.

In college, I tried out for a couple acapella groups, but because of my lack of experience and training, I often was under prepared for my auditions, and clearly not the best choice. I only auditioned my freshman year, and it went terribly. I heard other auditions, those that had musical training and had been singing their whole lives, and knew I could not compare. I knew that I would never be on that level without practice, which I did not have time for. Even after shedding my toxic masculinity, I still felt its effects.

It was not until I came to law school that I started singing again. I bombed my audition with Law Capella my 1L year because I was scared. I was a 1L auditioning in front of 2Ls and 3Ls (that in and of itself should be enough explanation), but I also was sandwiched between two people I already knew could sing well. My nerves got the better of me.

Full of resolve, I tried out again my 2L year. Thanks to some help from my friends, and some practice, I was able secure a spot in the group. I have taken a solo three times now, and I will be singing at graduation. I am extremely proud of the journey that has brought me here. I just wish I had not let fear, the patriarchy, and toxic masculinity stop me from pursuing something I truly loved. What comes to mind are The Streetlight Manifesto lyrics I quoted earlier: "the punishment that they threaten constantly, it’s only real if they can just convince me." My fear, the patriarchy, and my toxic masculinity were only real because they just convinced me that I would be nothing if I did not fit the mold.

Just some ending thoughts. One, I am extremely happy with how my life turned out, so even though not joining a choir sooner is probably one of my bigger regrets, I am still extremely happy. Two, life is always better with a soundtrack, so add some music to your life. Three, do not let others define you, and do not let them limit how you live your life because, if you do, you will miss out on a lot of songs along the way.

To the single fathers with daughters

A new study from the London School of Economics revealed that men with school-aged daughters tended to be less sexist than men without children or men who had only sons. The study tracked about 5,000 men and 6,300 women who had a child (age 21 and under) living with them from 1991 to 2012. Each year, the individuals were surveyed to see if they agreed, disagreed, or were neutral to sexist statements like “a husband’s job is to earn money; a wife’s job is to look after the home and family.”

While the study did not look into why having a daughter made men less sexist, it did discover that the effect evolved over time. One of the researchers, Dr. Joan Costa-i-Font, said,

[Men with school-aged daughters] experience first-hand all the issues that [exist] in a female world and then that basically moderates their attitudes towards gender norms and they become closer to seeing the full picture from the female perspective. 

So essentially, being a bystander makes the fathers more aware of the female struggles.

After reading this, I thought, does this hold true for my single father? To be 100% honest, my dad was a major sexist throughout my childhood. It’s sickening now to think he taught me that in a heterosexual relationship, "the man" is the king of the castle and what he says goes. My big brother did the yard work with Dad, and he was taught to ignore his emotions and to respond physically, rather than verbally. I learned that “the man” makes the money, fixes the cars, and does not listen to Mary J. Blige’s latest music even if his daughter wants him to. It’s beyond problematic, I know, but the music, movies, and our community also reinforced these sexist views.

But there was a shift once my parents divorced. Then, I also learned that “the man” cleans and cooks (pretty damn well) too.

Even after the divorce though, the traditional patriarchal structure caused my mom to make up for my dad’s failures. Initially, he didn’t shop for me or talk to me about puberty or dating (this changed in my late teens). There were many times when Mom came to the rescue, taking me to soccer practice (because my dad wouldn’t since he had to sleep) or picking me up to get supplies for a school project (because my dad wouldn’t since he had to sleep). You get the picture. He was still stuck in the whole "what he says goes and everyone else has to figure out how to live with it" mentality.

Looking back, I wish I had a feminist father so it 1) wasn’t entirely on my mom (pre or post divorce), and 2) to dismantle the sexist teaching that a “good woman” is one who takes a care-based approach to all things living. As if “good men” can't be taught this too.

Don’t get me wrong. There were times when my dad tried to be a “good man,” and if anything, being a single dad sort of forced him into it. He decorated the house for the holidays, always fixed a homemade meal for dinner, and curled my hair one time for picture day (I hated it, but that’s neither here nor there). Point being, he tried to be nurturing the way he knew how. As time progressed, he got better at it and his sexist views continued to dissipate.

Mind you, this was before the dads don’t babysit movement as well as the BABIES Act. Being a single father in the '90s was somewhat of a novelty. Not only did he have this insecurity to overcome, but much of how he parented was based on his cultural Mexican roots. He learned from his father that domination is power; the man sets the rules and the wife and kids follow; and the man provides while the woman takes care of the husband, children, and household. 

Gross, I know, but that was his reality that became my reality until he was forced to have a reality check himself. It was a rough start, but he slowly made the transition to being less sexist, and I’m not sure if it was because of the circumstance (being a single dad) or if it was because of me (raising a daughter), like the study suggested.

Either way, if there’s one thing I learned from being raised by a single dad and could share with other fathers of daughters, it’s to know that you won’t be able to completely understand the female experience and its hardships, but you’re a front row observer with a VIP pass. Take advantage of it.

I’m not asking for you to ignore the differences in our world experiences based on our perceived genders because, Hello! We still live in a gendered society. I’m not even asking for you to teach your daughters how to do the “manly” things because forcing her to imitate men may keep her from uniquely contributing to society. What I am asking is for you to debunk the myth that girls and boys are so incredibly different from one another and to give your daughter the option and empowerment to do what she wants as an individual. Listen and support her needs and desires. No “dad knows best” language because that completely drowns out your child. Listen to her experiences, learn, discuss, and educate other adults because perpetuating the patriarchal system limits and devalues everyone. 

This is what I wish my single dad had known back then. 

What even is a nipple?

My partner and I were getting ready for bed one night. As she was getting out of that day's clothes, she pulls up her shirt and starts yelling, "I want my Jerry beads!" We both thought it was hilarious. Between the laughing, I told her that, as a child, I thought it was so cool that womyn would show their breasts on T.V. for some beads. I even wanted to go on the Jerry Springer Show and get myself some beads! And my partner expressed she had the same desire as a child.

And then it hit us--what a horrible thing for a child to want to do when they got older! As the daughter of a single mother who was also a Catholic Mexican immigrant, pulling my shirt up to show the world my "chi chis" was not something I should have wanted to do, especially not for some beads my mom could have gotten at me from the 99 Cent Store. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with pulling up your shirt and showing the world your boobs. It was problematic for a seven-year-old girl to believe that was what she should do for attention.

I can think of so many more ideas I had as a child that involved me trying to be "sexy" so that boys would like me. Some people will point to my mother and say she should have monitored what I watched more closely. As many low-income people of color know, our immigrant parents were preoccupied working and worrying about feeding us and not missing our rent payments.

Additionally, this problem goes beyond monitoring what I watched as a child. Why did I think it was cool to pull up your shirt and show off your boobs? My brain had already been wired to sexually objectify my own body. But how?

I am especially surprised that my partner wanted Jerry beads as a child because, from a very early age, she knew she was masculine-of-center and had identified with her brother's clothes and toys more so than what her mother would buy her.

There are obviously many reasons as to why young girls objectify their bodies (i.e., media, society, cultural norms). Whatever the reasons are, this cultural norm is a lose-lose situation for womyn. Womyn are encouraged to behave like this (Jerry beads, spring break wet T-shirt contests, mud fights), but once they do, they are seen as hoes, easy, whores or immoral. Additionally, although men don't want an "easy" woman, they do want a woman who attracts attention. But how do you attract attention without doing  the things that consider a woman easy?

These questions lead me back to wanting Jerry beads. Although this behavior is encouraged, female nipples generally have to be censored on television and social media, with a few exceptions. This would not be upsetting if male nipples also had to be censored. This has fueled the #FreeTheNipple movement. When looking at photos that have been altered to show male nipples in place of female nipples, we can appreciate how similar male and female nipples are and conclude that body censorship really is about sexually objectifying female bodies.

For instance, take Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" at the 2004 Super Bowl. People were so upset about what happened that Janet Jackson issued a public apology even though it was Justin Timberlake who exposed her breast. The aftermath of the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show brings to light the sexism surrounding body censorship. Not only was Janet Jackson's career affected by this choice, Justin Timberlake's was not affected negatively, and if anything, was affected positively. Since Justin Timberlake did not share the responsibility in 2004, people were upset he was invited to perform for the 2018 Super Bowl halftime show.

At the end of the day, male and female nipples are the same. So what's the problem? The only thing I can think of is that the more censored a womxn is, the sexier society finds her. But, that's society's problem to deal with, not ours.

Law and sexual repression in China

Li Yinhe, the famous sociologist, sexologist, and activist for LGBT rights in the People's Republic of China claimed in an interview with Phoenix Net Culture (IFENG. COM) on December 24, 2014, that Chinese sexual repression is the highest in the world and only North Korea’s sexual repression is higher than China. It is worth mentioning that on December 12, 2014, cankaoxiaoxi.com published an article: the Chinese are the most sexually “repressed”? The article indicated that people in China watch pornography as the highest in the world and have surpassed the United States in pornography usage.

For thousands of year, Chinese culture promoted the belief that sex before marriage is unacceptable. Women should abide by “the women's morality” and maintain their loyalty to their husbands before marriage. The purpose of sex is not enjoyment, but to produce offspring and to let the husband release his sexual desires. Fortunately, with the advent of family planning policies in the 20th century, the purpose of sexual behavior has changed. The family can only have one child. So sexual behavior between a husband and wife is no longer just for childbirth but to enjoy sexual pleasure. However, in an interview, Li Yinhe, I mentioned at the first paragraph, said, “There was a national sex survey in 2004; twenty-eight percent of Chinese women between 60 and 64 years old had never experienced sexual pleasure in their lives.” she also stated that “ There are also surveys about other countries’ people. Sometimes women can’t enjoy sexual pleasure because of physical limitations or personal dislikes, but that does not exceed more than 10% of the female population.”

The key reason for feeling no pleasure from sex is probably due to long-term sexual repression based on cultural norms. Women are shamed and prevented from expressing their sexual desires. However, the law also plays an important role in shaping a woman’s perspective and behavior. The law relating to sex absorbs plenty of traditional moral theory. The law in any country reflects the cultural values of that country; the law can also shape the values of individuals within the country.

There are two typical laws in China that exemplify this. According to Article 301 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, group licentiousness is a crime based on the view that assembling a crowd to engage in sexual promiscuity reflects public contempt for state law and social morality. Specifically, it refers to a gathering of three or more people (men and/or women) engaging in sexual activity and other promiscuous activities. The activity of the participants must be voluntary. The state views such behavior as violating the public order. Those who gather for promiscuous activities shall experience criminal detention or public surveillance or imprisonment for not more than fives years.

There has been much talk of the law being repealed. Legal experts argue that there are no victims from voluntary group sex which generally takes place in private and hidden places and does not endanger public order. Why, then, should the law punish such harmless acts? There are opposing voices say that these group sex acts can’t match the traditional Chinese morality. In my opinion, law is the lowest standard of morality. We can require the public to respect the law and use the standard of law. But we can not ask the public to act following all the traditional morality whatever it is correct or decadent. Because it is difficult to distinguish whether the standard of traditional morality is appropriate in this new era. If we use morality as the bottom line of law, then morality will kidnap all the people to comply with the strictest “law” which may cause the mess. Also, freedom will become nonsense.

The goal in punishing group licentiousness is to curb sexual openness and freedom. The present Chinese law doesn’t accept sexual openness in its citizens and uses stringent criminal laws to imprison people for what the state considers immoral and unlawful behavior. Criminal laws serve to warn people that sex can only take place between two people, a husband and wife, in private. Sex intercourse should occur in a “proper way”. Citizens can't follow their own inclinations. Sex is a private act, but the law wants to control this kind of behavior in a way that completely violates the individual's privacy and sexual freedom. It is unreasonable to treat sexual acts in private as sins when they are done freely and do not harm others.

Then people began to accept that sex was not completely free. Once again the ancient tradition came to mind that sex was not something to be played with, but rather a tool for procreation within rules and regulations. Even if you want to enjoy it, be careful and sneaky.

Another law that promotes the sexual repression of citizens is the People's Republic of China criminal law, Article 363 (amended in 2015)：

Whoever for the purpose of making profits, produces, duplicates, publishes, sells or disseminates pornographic articles for profit shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of no more than three years, criminal detention or public surveillance and shall also be fined. If the circumstances are serious, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of no less than three years but no more than 10 years and shall also be fined; If the circumstances are especially serious, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 years or fixed-term imprisonment, and shall also be fined or have his property confiscated.

Criminal law, Article 364, claims that whoever disseminates pornographic books, periodicals, films, audio-visual materials, pictures or other pornographic materials, if the circumstances are serious, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than two years, criminal detention or public surveillance.

Whether making a profit or not, it is a crime to disseminate obscene material. According to the law, the spread of obscene materials in the society will harm the physical and mental health of the Chinese people, especially teenagers, and also easily induce illegal and criminal activities. From the criminal law perspective, cracking down on the spread of obscene articles in society according to law is critical to maintaining public security, protecting people's physical and mental health and promoting spiritual civilization.

When I asked my close male friends, all of them have seen pornographic movies. When I asked my female friends, almost half of them have seen pornographic movies. Since the law wants to combat the spread of obscene materials, why does the law can tolerate everyone watching porn at home? There is an old saying in China that sex and food are life. In other words, the two most important things in life are eating and having sex. The demand for porn is a normal human physiological desire. It is oppressive and against human nature to prohibit people from satisfying their sexual and physical needs.

If the law wants to prohibit the impact of such films on minors, it can learn from the United States to create a film classification system and child protection mode for television. Blindly banning the spread and production of pornographic films will only result in the boom of the pornographic materials market. In the present Chinese system, protecting teenagers from porn can’t be achieved. Worse yet, people can make more money from the dissemination of pornography because it is illegal.

The booming porn market in China is inseparable from sexual repression. Chinese students do not receive sex education as children and teenagers. Teachers keep silent on the topic of sexual behavior and sexual health. Normal minors are full of curiosity and desire as their bodies develop and change. So boys and many girls under the age of 18 have been exposed to porn and they acquire their sexual knowledge and sexual behavior from pornography. Porn is the sex education for Chinese boys. However, girls are more confused about sex because they have no resource to understand sex and sexual behavior. Teachers do not carry out positive sex education in school and parents are too shy to speak to their children about sexual knowledge. Pornography has become the key way for minors to acquire sexual knowledge before they experience sex.

However, pornographic materials are prohibited by law. Minors and adults must close the curtains and watch pornography secretly and quietly. As a result, the public believes that pornography is bad and harmful. More importantly, people are influenced by the anti-pornography laws. Since pornography isn’t supposed to be seen and masturbation is regarded as depraved thing, sexual behavior seems even more shameful. People suppress their desires because the law tells us that it is against the law to spread pornography to help people enjoy sex. Sex, then, should not be treated as a natural pleasure to be enjoyed.

Chinese minors and adults, generation after generation, grow up in this sexually confused and repressive environment. When they first come into contact with sexual behavior, they will doubt themselves: should I feel happy? Should I be ashamed? Morality and law tell me that I should not enjoy sex. Sexual repression is sprouting and developing in China.

The extraordinary influence of laws on the public is so great that legislators should be extremely careful to find ways to deal with the problem since the current laws force people to accept conflicted and negative values towards sex. Laws are meant to protect people's relative freedom, not to limit their innate needs.
x

The fight for LGBT-inclusive K-8 curriculum in Elk Grove Unified School District

I am the Vice President of a the local LGBTQ Democratic club called the Stonewall Democrats of Greater Sacramento. Several months ago in December 2018 I got an email suggesting that Stonewall get involved in a local school board matter. 

The Elk Grove Unified School District (EGUSD), the fifth largest school district in California, was in the process of adopting new K-8 Social Science and History textbooks. The proposed textbooks would comply with CA state law called the FAIR Act which requires K-8 History and Social Science to be LGBTQ-inclusive. The School Board had only received public comments opposed to the adoption of the textbooks because of its LGBT-inclusiveness. 

I worked with a former board member to draft an email to EGUSD Board Members to show the club's support for the proposed curriculum and the importance of seeing members of the LGBT community reflected in textbooks.

The day after I send the emails, Board Member Nancy Chaires Espinoza responded thanking Stonewall for our advocacy and indicating that the comments she had heard thus far at largely been in opposition to the proposed curriculum.

In January 2019 following a Stonewall Board meeting discussion of the issue, I emailed Nancy to ask if she was available to talk with our members about the issues EGUSD is facing. Nancy was unavailable but suggested we invite Board Member Bobbie Singh-Allen, an ally of the LGBTQ community to come talk.

On January 14, 2019 EGUSD Bobbie spoke at the January Stonewall meeting. She said that our advocacy was needed, asked members to send letters and to attend EGUSD board meetings to speak during the public comment period in support of the proposed curriculum. At the time of the January meeting it was unclear when the board would be voting on whether or not to adopt the curriculum because agendas are posted just 72 hours in advance.

Later that night I took the tips and information shared by Bobbie and created resources such as template emails to board members, email addresses for board members, and information about the issue.

Stonewall members responded by sending emails expressing their support to EGUSD board members. The Sacramento Area Rainbow Families and other LGBT groups shared the resources provided by Stonewall.

On Tuesday February 5th the Stonewall board got notice that EGUSD would be voting that night. We sent out emails and spread the work on social media about the upcoming vote and encouraged as many people as possible to show up in person.

The EGUSD board meeting began at 6:00pm in a large room with a dais on one side of the room and lines of tables filing the room. Many people were standing around the edges of the room because there weren’t enough seats for everyone. Stonewall members and other LGBTQ community members that I recognized where there. There were several news cameras and reporters.

Over the course of the regular board meeting, people spoke on the proposed curriculum change during the general public comment period near the beginning of the meeting as well as during the comment period when the curriculum agenda item was called. When it came up on the agenda after what already seemed like a long meeting, EGUSD staff did a presentation about proposed curriculum and recommended adoption.

Public comment on the textbooks took hours. Each speaker had 2 minutes to talk, but many went over the time limit. It was an incredibly emotional and tense environment. There were likely approximately 100 people there to talk, and at least half of the people spoke in opposition. The people speaking in opposition talked about how they didn’t want their kids learning about gay sex and advocated for an opt-out option like with sex education. The amount of hostility and misinformation was staggering. Whenever a speaker would say something in opposition the crowd would erupt in applause and cheering.

When it was my turn to speak I was admittedly nervous. I had not expected the room to be filled with such hostility and hatred masked by people saying “I’m not homophobic but…” I read my notes, shared my personal story of struggling with my sexuality at 13 years old, and tried not to cry so much that I couldn’t get the words out.

When I had finished speaking I stepped out of the room to get a break from the hostility. Friends and strangers came up to me to support me and make sure that I was ok. Two strangers talked with me and hugged me.

Once all of the public comments were heard Board Members spoke, and each gave statements about their decision and the issues. Both Nancy and Bobbie were ardently in support of the proposed curriculum. When the final vote was called at around 9:50pm, the EGUSD Board voted unanimously to adopt the proposed curriculum which is LGBT-inclusive.

With the number of students and young people openly claiming LGBTQ and non-binary identities, I had hoped that parents and community members would be more understanding of the need to talk about role models and historical figures in the LGBTQ community. It was distressing to see how wrong I was, and how little has changed since I was in school. 

This experience showed me how very important having LGBTQ people and allies in public office is, and how important it is to make sure your voice is heard. 

What about Brett? The media’s treatment of Malia Obama

While most people were discussing the legality of Donald Trump’s recent declaration of a national emergency due to the lack of funding for a southern border wall, the Daily Mail was working hard to ensure Americans did not miss out on the other, more shocking national emergency happening right under our noses: Malia Obama’s underage drinking.

In what the Daily Mail described as a “wild weekend,” Malia Obama is seen in a slew of (decently creepy) paparazzi shots holding, pouring, and (most egregiously) drinking rosé with a group of her female friends. While, for most, this could hardly be described as wild, the Daily Mail eagerly reminded readers Obama doesn’t turn 21 until July – making her rosé consumption illegal and very risqué.

Some jumped at the opportunity presented by the Daily Mail to pounce on the behavior of Obama, using the hashtags #privileged and #illegal. Conservative talk show host Andrew Wilkow tweeted, “Living like the 1%? Drinking underage? Let's see the #democrats and media scream about "privilege" here...” with the link to the Daily Mail article.

Some other examples of tweets criticizing Malia Obama’s underage drinking included (by @Krossbone2):

#MaliaObama is still drinking illegally. She's underage. It's that simple. Not calling to castrate her obviously, but some form of punishment should be leveled.  

And (by @littlejessbent):

Oh that’s right, the left can THREATEN Barron Trump (a child) but when u simply point out that Malia Obama (an adult) is underage drinking(illegal) & being a total disgrace, acting like trash, just like her parents, y’all freak out. Please 🙄Stay classy Obamas— U are NOT missed. 🤮#MAGA 

This isn’t the media’s first time criticizing Malia Obama for acting like her peers either. In November 2017 she was accused of being intoxicated at a Harvard football game in an article titled, “‘Drunk,’ Smoking & Kissing! Wild Coed Malia Obama Caught Partying at Harvard.” She was also dragged through the media in 2016 when she was caught on film smoking what appeared to be pot at Lollapalooza, a music festival. In that instance, headlines ranged from the scandalized, “EXPLOSIVE VIDEO: Malia Obama CAUGHT On Camera Smoking ‘Pot’” to some sites even going so far as to say Malia was going to be sent to rehab.

This also isn’t the first instance of sexist media coverage involving a daughter of a president (the media also ruthlessly criticized the Bush daughters while they were partying in college). To me, this seems to reek of exceptional overreaction given the allowances made to the actions of other male, adult political figures.

For example, a comparison that has emerged online is the double standard of the right critiquing Obama for her behavior, while many of these same critics were quick to give Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh a pass for his teenage drinking in the 1980s. Kavanaugh's underage drinking only came out as a side story to the much larger accusation of sexual assault by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford that was brought before the Senate during his confirmation hearings. While Kavanaugh denied Blasey Ford's allegations, he readily admitted to underage drinking, saying, "Yes, we drank beer. I liked beer. I still like beer." Following Kavanaugh’s confirmation, some of his supporters even celebrated with beer on social media. 

This recent media controversy (if you can even call it that) reminded me of difference feminism. In particular, Kingsley R. Browne’s article Sex and Temperament in Modern Society: A Darwinian View of the Glass Ceiling and the Gender Gap, in which Browne attribute certain characteristics to men and women based on the idea those characteristics are intrinsically attached to one’s sex, as well as our discussion of Carol Gilligan’s gender-linked analysis of ethical orientations.

Malia Obama, as a woman, has less freedom to behave like a young adult because of the limitations and expectations ascribed to women. She is expected to act maturely, as a caregiver, and without any sexual desires. So, when she is caught kissing boys and drinking alcohol while under the age of 21 it is “scandalous”, and when she smokes pot she is “bound for rehab.” But, when Brett Kavanaugh readily and, some may argue enthusiastically, admits to drinking underage and engaging in sexual conduct it’s just boys being boys.

Personally, the only opinion I have on Obama’s drinking is jealousy over the fact she gets to drink $80 rosé at a Miami beach club at 20, while I was forced to drink bagged wine in a frat basement at the same age. 

Roy Moore, females, and small-town access to justice

Media accounts sometimes implicate rural access-to-justice issues, though the connection is not always obvious at first blush.  Perhaps no story better illustrates this point than the recent allegations against the candidate for U.S. Senate from Alabama, Roy Moore.  Moore, a small-town lawyer turned-twice-removed Alabama Supreme Court justice, is now facing multiple allegations of inappropriate conduct with underage women in the 1970s.  Many have asked why the women (girls, some of them, at the time) did not come forward sooner.  I assert that the answer to this question lies in the complex barriers that have long deterred those in rural communities from pursuing legal redress.

By now, we are all familiar with the allegations against Alabama Senate Republican nominee Roy Moore. The salacious accounts, initially published by the Washington Post, paint Moore as an opportunistic predator who used his power and influence in the small city of Gadsden, Alabama as a means to attract and "romance" teenage girls. A report from a former co-worker notes that Moore's affairs with teenage girls were "common knowledge." Moore himself issued a sloppily worded defense on Sean Hannity's program, where he stated that he could not deny that he had dated teenage girls in the past.

Many, including Moore himself, have asked why these women would wait four decades to come forward with their stories. Steve Bannon has even accused Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos of engaging in a  conspiracy to destroy Moore's candidacy. The people who ask these questions seem  ignorant of the social dynamics of tight-knit rural communities and the secrecy that can often times be fostered by these communities.

As the WaPo story notes, Moore was seen as a local hero. Like many rural communities, Gadsden (population 37,000), has been in a state of decline brought upon it by a loss of manufacturing jobs.  With opportunities few and far between, the fact that Moore had managed to gain admission to West Point and then to law school was seen as an inspiration to the people of the town. As is common in many rural communities, being a lawyer also conferred a certain amount of social capital upon Moore. The level of admiration for Moore was such that when Debbie Wesson Gibson asked for her mother's permission to date Moore, her mother told that she would be the "luckiest girl in the world" if Moore, then 34, were interested in her.

To make allegations against Roy Moore in 1970s Alabama would have been a tremendous uphill climb for anyone, much less a teenager. Even his co-workers viewed Moore's tendency to date teenagers as essentially a personality quirk, not anything that warranted investigation and possible prosecution. As Moore himself noted in his interview with Sean Hannity, he never dated a girl without her mother's permission. The WaPo story even notes an instance where Moore stopped dating a girl when her mother did not give permission for the relationship to continue. From the evidence presented, it seems that Moore was careful to target girls whose parents were okay with the age difference and at least, in one case, encouraged the relationship to continue.

In small towns, relationships and social standing are both very important forms of currency. In sociologist Cynthia Duncan's book Worlds Apart, Duncan tells a story about a young man in a small town in Appalachia that is able to secure a bank loan with no questions asked because of a familial relationship with a person with whom the banker had done business.  The young man's relationships and social standing made him inherently trustworthy and conferred upon him a certain amount of credibility. Roy Moore was certainly a beneficiary of being seen as trustworthy because of his social standing as well.

The standing of women in Alabama in this time period also presented a barrier. The most famous illustration of this from Alabama came from 1961 when Alabama First Lady Lurleen Wallace was diagnosed with uterine cancer. As was standard practice at the time, the doctor told only her husband, Governor George Wallace, who then insisted that the diagnosis be kept from his wife. First Lady Wallace did not find out that she had cancer until 1965. Wallace would later die from this cancer during her own term as governor, which she was serving as a surrogate for her term-limited husband.

If the First Lady of Alabama was seen as so lowly that a cancer diagnosis was hidden from her, what hope would a young girl in a small town have of successfully seeking justice against a respected local attorney?  indeed, against the local district attorney/prosecuting attorney?

Another barrier is the lack of general knowledge of how to avail oneself to the protections of the legal system. In 1969, the Duke University Law Review conducted a study on the legal issues of the rural poor. Their focus was an unnamed county in eastern North Carolina. What they found was that a very small percentage of people sought legal action when wronged by either the government or another private party. The study also found that many of them were unaware that they could even do so.

The idea that Roy Moore would have been prosecuted for his actions in 1970s Alabama is laughable at best.  Moore was insulated by a culture that knew of his actions but did not take action to stop them.  He was also enabled by parents who felt that dating Moore was advantageous for their daughters, regardless of the implications of the age difference. In a small city going through economic turmoil, Moore was seen as a shining light, proof that you could escape your circumstances and make something of yourself. The notion that the credibility of the accusers is impeached by their "failure" to come forward 40 years ago is intellectually dishonest.

While Moore's actions are egregious and--we would hope--atypical of any community, they do point to the vulnerability of people who are facing injustices and have nowhere to turn. As the Duke study notes, the issue of justice in rural communities has long been hampered by a lack of resources and knowledge of the legal system. While many communities have access to civil legal aid programs that can help people, particularly victims of domestic violence, seek protective orders and other remedies against abusers, many of those programs are increasingly facing cuts on the state and federal level. In fact, President Donald Trump's proposed budget from earlier this year called for the elimination of the LSC, which provides grants to legal aid programs.

Before asking why these women did not come forward 40 years ago, perhaps we should examine the barriers that made doing so effectively impossible.

Another post about Roy Moore and rurality is here.

Cross-posted to Legal Ruralism.  By Christopher Chavis 

Women in sport: how far have we come?

Last week in class we watched a clip from the Makers documentary. This told the story of Kathrine Switzer, who, in 1967, became the first woman to run the Boston Marathon as a numbered entrant. At the time, women were not sanctioned to enter the iconic race but Katherine had completed her application in the way she normally signed her name, ie as “K V Switzer”. Consistent with the attitudes of the time, race organizers “naturally” assumed that she was male.

Katherine didn’t enter the 1967 Boston Marathon looking for a fight. She simply loved to run. However, the race official, Jock Semple, was so outraged when he saw her racing with the other competitors (all male) that he ran onto the course and attempted to physically pull her away and rip off her numbered bib. Although Katherine’s story made headlines at the time, it was another five years before women were officially allowed to compete in the Boston Marathon.

Fifty years on, we rightly celebrate the undoubted progress that women have made in the sport and fitness world since Katherine’s frightening 1967 encounter with sporting officialdom in Boston. No one today bats an eyelid at female marathon runners. In fact, it’s a recognised Olympic sport. Women’s participation in various other sporting and fitness disciplines has rocketed. Indeed, we’re now increasingly being accepted even into “traditionally male” sports like boxing (Ireland’s very own Katie Taylor being one such example) as well as soccer and rugby. All of us – male and female – are increasingly familiar with and accepting of ever more female sporting role models such as Serena Williams and Nicole Adams. Clearly, we have come a long, long way since 1967. Or have we?

A seemingly trivial remark apparently made about me a few days ago prompted me to question how far women have actually come since 1967. What triggered the thought was something a friend told me the other day about what a male student had apparently said of me. What was stated was apparently along the lines of:- “I saw that Irish girl [me] in the gym yesterday and she looked like she really knew what she was doing… Is she doing that for the float trip next weekend?”

I never heard the comment myself and I’m sure there was a compliment intended in there somewhere. Yet for some initially inexplicable reason, I can’t help but feel slightly offended. Why?

Perhaps, I’m simply neurotic. Or, perhaps, I’m unduly sensitive about being Irish outside in the United States and that someone would assume that, as an “Irish girl,” I would not be expected to “know what I was doing” in the gym (particularly in the male-dominated weights area, where I spend most of my sessions). But no, I know that the comment was in no way derogatory of my Irishness. That is simply part of who I am and how I’m known here, and is perfectly fine.

So what was it about the reported remark that caused me to react so badly? The more I thought about it, the more I realised that my real issue was the seeming association between my interest in the gym and personal vanity. To me it implied that my sole motive for being in the gym was to make myself appear more physically attractive on a weekend outing – presumably to male students. In short, I (rightly or wrongly) interpreted the statement as judgemental and demeaning, not of the Irish, but of females in general who choose to go to the gym, exercise or take part in sport. I am sceptical that a statement like this would have been made about me if I had been male.

As earth-shatteringly appalling as it may sound coming from a female, I actually love the gym, and I love exercise. I have been weight lifting for several years now, and health and fitness has become a very important part of my life. It has helped not only my physical health, but also my mental well-being. In the past, I have struggled with anxiety, and, for me, the gym and other activities like hiking, horse riding and swimming have become my “sanctuary.”  It’s where I go when I’m stressed or upset or just simply need a bit of “me-time.” It makes me feel strong and confident. Of course, all of us like to look well and to keep our weight in control. But that is a human desire and is certainly not the sole preserve of females!

The question I’ve been left with is whether a seemingly throw away remark about my reasons for exercising might be exemplary of wider barriers that women still need to overcome in the area of sport and fitness. I found myself wondering whether the 1967 spirit of Jock Semple still survives in sport – albeit, perhaps, in a more covert and less glaring form? Once I began to look further into the subject, it became hard for me to avoid the conclusion that a bit of the outraged spirit of Jock Semple might still lurk amongst us, perhaps somewhere in the depths. In preparing this blog I googled “women in sport” and was stunned to discover that the first search result was an article entitled, “Top 10 Most Beautiful Women in Sport”. The more I searched, the more I found female sports being praised (or criticised) for their bodies, rather than for the hard work they put in for competitions or the titles they win.

And what of girls in sport who may not correspond to the traditional stereotype of a physically slender female that many men find appealing? I noticed that, in recent years, Olympic gold-medalist, Caster Semenya, was barred from competing and was subjected to degrading gender testing simply because the media and athletic associations thought she looked “too masculine”. Such attitudes are reinforced by the limited nature of media coverage of women’s sports. Studies show that only about 4% of sportscoverage in local and national media is dedicated to women’s sport. Self-evidently, female athletic achievements are much less important to the popular press than male.

If this is how women are evaluated and treated in sport, how can I blame any male student for possibly suggesting that, as a girl, I only go to the gym because I want to impress men? If this is how women are evaluated and treated in sport, no wonder there remains a significant disparity between male and female participation nationally and internationally. If this is how women are evaluated and treated in sport, should we be surprised that, by the age of 14, for example, girls are dropping out of sports at twice the rate of boys? Surely all this merely serves to maintain life support for the 1967 Jock Semple notion that women and girls don’t belong in the sport and fitness arena on the same basis as men?

Women today owe a huge debt of gratitude to people like Katherine Switzer. Their personal courage, determination and audacity opened a huge new door of freedom and opportunity for women in sport over the past 50 years. However, we owe it to Katherine - and we owe it to the many other brave women of her generation - to remember her example and not to become complacent. It is Katherine’s spirit - not the 1967 spirit of Jock Semple - that most needs life support today and which we must, in our own and our children’s interest, endeavor to keep alive and perpetuate.

Yes, we have come a long, long way from the 1967 Boston Marathon. But the journey is not yet over.

The outright insult of being told you do something “like a girl”

The #LikeAGirl, a movement brought about by Always, aims to redefine the blatant insult associated with doing something “like a girl”. This video, orchestrated by the company that designs sanitary towels, displays the varying opinions that doing something “like a girl” entails, specifically comparing the answers of young, prepubescent girls with those of young women. A very strong message portrayed by the advertisement is that the girls whose self-esteems have not yet been affected by growing up have much greater confidence in their abilities than the girls that are that bit older. The New York Times reports that, in a study conducted by the American Association of University Women, 60% of girls in elementary school are confident in themselves. This figure drops to a mere 29% by the time they reach high school. Why the massive decrease in self-assurance?

Adolescence is a time when girls become women. They develop breasts, menstruate for the first time, and grow hair in places they were previously bald. This period of great change (excuse the pun) can be very distressing for young women and they end up looking to others for acceptance. The unfortunate aspect of this is that the characteristics that are approved of by society are often those traditionally attributed to men. If society is only going to value the male characteristics then of course to do something “like a girl” would be taken as an insult every time. 

The insult is usually directed at a boy who has, by some misogynistic standard, acted in a feminine manner or carried out some manly task poorly. For example, the boy in the playground who cries after falling over is told to “stop crying like a little girl” or the boy at practice that is shamed by his coach for “throwing like a girl”. One thing that bothers me about these non-chalant insults is that they are not directed at those to whom they are said. They are, instead, directed toward all females. Young girls are growing up in an atmosphere where they are taught that to behave “like a girl” is wrong and something of which they are to be ashamed.

While on the topic of throwing like a girl I would like to touch on this light-hearted Mythbusters episode where they tackle the same subject. They carry out a number of experiments studying the way in which boys and their female counterparts throw a number of balls at a target. The conclusion of these trials demonstrated that overall the girls performed no more poorly than the boys!

I believe the Always campaign to alter the meaning of what it is to do something “like a girl” is exactly the kind of education for which society is begging. There are almost 7 billion people in this world, 50% of whom are females, 50% of whom are talented human beings, fully capable of achieving equally with their male counterparts, 50% of whom are doing things “like a girl”.

Gurls Talk

Gurls Talk is a movement that strives to create a platform for girls to openly share their experiences and feelings in a safe and trusting environment. Gurls Talk was set up by Adwoa Aboah, the beautiful, British freckle-faced model who has experienced the hardest and darkest times of her life over the past two years.  She struggled with depression and addiction which amounted to an attempted suicide at the end of 2014.

Now sober, Adwoa is using her battle as a stepping-stone for other young girls. She has created a safe space for others to talk about the issues which every girl faces growing up from losing your virginity to getting your first period. Gurls Talk is a forum where female creativity is used as a tool for change. 

She first launched @gurlstalk on Instagram and now has a growing fan base of over 58K followers. As the current face of Calvin Klein and the former face of Topshop, she has turned the perceived 'glamourous' supermodel stereotype on its head. Her inspirational Instagram account addresses important feminist talking points with the aim of giving girls a voice.  

Adwoa snowballed on top of the success of her Instagram account by setting up the Gurls Talk website earlier this year. The site is a private page and invites girls of all ages to submit their questions/concerns/comments via email. From there she issues a response and welcomes them to a chat group of other individuals who are sharing similar experiences. Anonymous submissions may also be given. 

Gurls Talk is like the best friend every girl wishes she had growing up. The forum documents Adwoa’s road to recovery and speaks out on a range of issues such as body image, feminism, self-perception and empowerment. She cites the likes of Lena Dunham and Meryl Streep as inspirational role models,while giving out a healthy dose of inspiration herself:  

"You can be a mother of five [and] a business woman...You can be anyone you want".

This March, Adwoa’s best friend, model and actress Cara Delevingne also opened up about her battle with depression on twitter. The tweet explaining her rough patch of “self-hatred” was shared over 10,000 times. This highlights the absence of mental-health discussion in the public eye today.

Adwoa explains that the most important message she would like girls to take away from “Gurlstalk” is to “be vulnerable, open and true to yourself.” She wishes to shift society’s focus from the academic to the emotional. She passionately believes in this emotional/academic equilibrium which so many young women have lost in modern day society,

"... there has to be a middle ground between dealing with emotions and educating on mental health, addiction and eating disorders as well as teaching kids how to balance their time tables". 

In these turbulent times, it is very refreshing to see a passionate and emotionally aware role model like Adwoa Aboah. Let’s use this platform to speak up, we can all get involved in the conversation with the hashtag #letsgetgurlstalking. 

#1000blackgirlbooks reading challenge

Earlier this year I came across this article about a young girl in New Jersey who was collecting books with black, female protagonists under the hashtag #1000blackgirlbooks.  Her name is Marley Dias, and she was tired of reading books about white boys and/or their dogs. We’ve talked in class about representation, both in watching MissRepresentation and with the election.  One area we haven’t delved into is literature. 

I was that bookworm child who grew up to be an English Lit major.  I read everything I could get my hands on as a kid, and luckily I had a mother who made sure that most of what I got my hands on were books with female protagonists.  But, like Marley, I hadn’t been exposed to that many books about people of color.  We read Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry in middle school, but that was about it. 

                It wasn’t until college that I learned how much the study of literature was shaped by the stories of white men.  In junior year I took a class entirely devoted to reading Toni Morrison’s novels.  It was in that class that I developed a conviction that I not only needed to be reading more books by women and authors of color, but I needed to be actively encouraging others to do so as well.  Law school dulled that conviction a bit.  So, when I read about Marley’s quest to give other girls that looked like her heroes to read about, I was ashamed to look at the books that I had brought to Davis with me. 

                I own over 500 books.  I had taken a full hour to decide which of my favorites to bring with me.  As I looked around my bedroom I saw that of the 15 or so books I had brought along, only 2 novels written by women, and just 1 other was written a non-white man.  I was surrounded by books written by middle-aged, white men: Tolstoy, Lewis, Tolkien, Martin.  I made a promise to myself to pick out books to diversify my Davis library the next time I visited my parents. 

                A few months after the article highlighting Marley's bookdrive came out, Beyoncé’s visual album Lemonade was released.   Of the many responses to the album, my favorite was the Lemonade Syllabus.  For it, Candice Benbow sorted through submissions from Twitter of books, poetry, movies, and more that further spoke to the themes of black womanhood that are found in Lemonade.  I looked at the list of novels, and didn’t recognize any names beyond Toni Morrison and Zora Neal Hurston.  I felt disappointment in myself.  Here I was, 3 years after that class in undergrad, without having progressed any further. 

                So, I renewed my promise, and I challenge you to do the same.  Every other (nonacademic) book I read will be written by either a woman or a person of color, preferably a woman of color.  So much of what we believe as a culture is formed by so called “classic” stories.  But we get to choose what is classic.  If enough of us read books by people who are not white men, we can shift the standard, and, hopefully, make it so that there never needs to be another #1000blackgirlbooks campaign.  

Breaking the glass ceiling; is this enough?

The term "glass ceiling" is used to describe the transparent barrier that prevents women and other minorities from climbing up the corporate ladder in the workplace. When Hillary Clinton was elected as the first female candidate for a major political party, her first words at the National Democratic Convention were:

I can't believe we just put the biggest crack in the glass ceiling yet.

Despite this historical achievement, the media have continued to base their commentary on superficial aspects of this campaign, sometimes writing solely about Hillary Clinton's hair. An article in the New York Daily News suggested that Clinton presents a good presidential look because of her "perfect highlights" on the cover of her new book.

Have any other news broadcasters published a similar article commenting on Donald Trump's hair? My research suggests not (despite the fact that his hair raises far more questions than Hillary Clinton's and in my opinion demands further explanation.) Nor was there an equivalent article written during the publication of Barack Obama's book before he was elected.

These observations beg the question: in the eyes of the media, when will women's achievements ever be enough? It scares me to think that in future generations, those for which this "glass ceiling" is deemed nothing more than a historical metaphor, successful women will still be required, on top of everything else, to meet superficial expectations for their looks.

If I have a daughter in later life, I imagine her coming to me at a young age, innocence and determination in her eyes as she confidently tells me she would like to become the head of government when she grows up. What would my reply be? "That is wonderful honey, but even after you have successfully come through your education, built a credible political reputation and gained the trust and respect of the nation, you must then prove your candidate worthiness by having well groomed hair and exuding an overall 'presidential look'."

This dual-standard for women to not only prove themselves professionally but to also satisfy certain expectations for their demeanor and looks is manifested in pop culture. It is hyper-sexualised in the showbiz and entertainment industries. This conceivably adds an additional tier to the glass ceiling, a further requirement in order to be deemed 'the ultimate woman'.

The roast of Justin Bieber was the third most watched ever for Comedy Central. Undoubtedly, the vast majority of these viewers were adolescents, mainly young girls. The roasting panel featured Martha Stewart who was praised afterwards for her dry and vulgar jokes. In her conclusion, the lifestyle personality advised the rebellious heart-throb to search for an influential, powerful woman to marry. She described this ideal future spouse as:

...a player in the boardroom and a freak in the bedroom. 

Pop-icon Usher released a hit song in which he expresses longing for a woman who is:

...a lady in the streets and a freak in the sheets.

This can be contrasted with self-proclaimed feminist Lilly Allen's lyrics:

If I told you about my sex life, you'd call me a slut but boys are talkin' bout their b****** and no one's making a fuss. 

In the eyes of the media, a woman who excels in the public sphere must also encompass the male's ideal in the private sphere. We are told that on top of other facets such as intelligence, relatability, humour, kindness and determination, women must also look good and have sex appeal. When I graduate from college and pursue a career practicing law, I hope that I will be evaluated on my hard work and quality of service to clients, not on my hairstyle.

"Chatty Cathy" and ADD: How Gender Expectations Influence the Diagnosis and Treatment of American Girls

We’ve spent a lot of time this semester teasing out the differences between how men and women are understood, and how that relates to the legal profession and society at large. A theme that keeps re-emerging is objectivity – whether it exists, how it is used by the patriarchy, and whether it is simply an idea that is used to silence “emotional women.” The subtle and persistent idea that women’s intelligence is suspect because it will be side-tracked by their unpredictable emotions plays out in the workplace and in interpersonal relationships. Recently, I was surprised to see it also crop up in another area – identification, diagnosis and treatment of Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD).

Could the fact that men are expected to be objective, focused and level-headed lead to a more quick diagnosis of a man who does not conform to that expectation? Can we expect that women who are disorganized and inattentive are more likely to be shrugged off as emotional, hormonal or sensitive? Is it possible that our societal expectations of women’s emotional instability leads to less empathy for women who struggle, and less narrative directed towards legitimate psychological conditions shared by both genders? There is evidence that suggests the answer to all of these questions, currently, is yes.

A few months ago, a friend sent me an article about under-diagnosis of ADD in women.While women are just as likely to suffer from ADD as men, they are much less likely to be diagnosed and receive treatment. Instead, women are more likely to be diagnosed with depression or anxiety, psychiatric illnesses that can result from untreated ADD. The article explained part of the reason for the under-diagnosis:

Girls with ADD tend to try harder than their male counterparts to compensate for and cover up symptoms. To keep up their grades, girls are often more willing to put in extra hours of studying and to ask their parents for help. In addition, girls are more likely to be “people pleasers” doing all they can to fit in – even when they know they are ‘different.’

When ADHD was first identified, researchers focused on young, white, hyperactive boys. Guidelines for identifying ADD and ADHD were geared towards these boys, leaving girls overlooked. Because teachers are often asked to identify children with ADD or ADHD, the common perception that it is a young boy’s problem leads to under-diagnosis in girls. In her book Understanding Girls with AD/HD, Dr. Ellen Littman explains that theillness can display much differently in girls and women: carelessness, disorganization and difficulty following instructions are more likely indicators than hyperactivity. 

Dr. Littman believes that girls with undiagnosed ADD/ADHD may “internalize their symptoms – disorganization or carelessness - as personal flaws rather than medical issues.” Self-esteem and even academic challenge brought on by struggling with undiagnosed ADD can often lead to anxiety and depression. Studies show that these are more frequently diagnosed in women, and it could be because they are more stereotypically “women’s issues.” However, the research that Dr. Littman and others have done suggest that anxiety and depression may be masking a deeper struggle in girls. (In fact, women are twice as likely asmen to be diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder).
 

Situations like this gender difference in diagnosis of ADD illustrate the subtlety of the patriarchy, which impacts women in unexpected ways. Sure, it could be easier to diagnose a hyperactive boy than a “chatty” girl, but could that partially be attributed to our gender expectations? If we expect women to struggle with emotions more than men, we are less likely to legitimize symptoms that fit gender stereotypes. Perhaps increasing education about psychology, mental illness and the human brain can ultimately impact society’s expectations for women in all aspects of their lives. 

"Hotline Bling" and the "Soft" Patriarchy

Recently in seminar, we talked about the pervasive sexism that women still face in developed nations. While it seems that the patriarchy has stepped away from blatant and obvious inequality in many ways, the reality of the structure still exists. In thinking about the ways I have encountered this more subversive form of the patriarchy, I almost always think of Drake’s 2015 hit “Hotline Bling.” From the second I heard the lyrics of this song, I was almost the most offended I have ever been by pop culture. There are two things I want to further explore – first, the fact that this, of all rap songs, offended me, and secondly, what is so problematic in Drake’s whiny ballad.

Writing this post and thinking about “Hotline Bling” makes me aware of my privilege, and in many ways, fortunate chance in life that I have never encountered severe abuse. I don’t want to point out “Hotline Bling” as a new form of sexism and misogyny that is replacing more overtly gendered violence, because that’s completely false. There are many women who face those traumas, so I am in no way suggesting that my encounter with patriarchical ideas is prototypical of the American woman. I do, however, think it is pervasive and common. While violence, oppression and overt sexism demand our attention, I believe this “softer” form of the patriarchy does as well – because it reinforces the ideas that lead to blatant abuse and discrimination.

Offensive rap and R&B lyrics are nothing new. Many rap and R&B artists embrace sexist imagery, tone and messages in their music. The genre is known for being unapologetic, and I found many articles outlining “Most Offensive Rap Lyrics” that I don’t want to link here because I don’t want to give them a further forum. However, “Hotline Bling” departs from the expected misogyny to paint the picture of a lonely boyfriend that misses the good girl he used to know. Drake mourns the loss of the girl that used to call him up when she was lonely, even as he takes credit for her sexuality, decides she doesn’t belongin places she wants to go, and takes issue with her making friends he hasn’tmet and traveling without him. In short, he is acting like almost every high school boyfriend I had or observed who wanted his girl to act a particular way to make him feel comfortable – with no parallel response expected on his end. “Hotline Bling” perpetuates gender stereotypes, while at the same time telling girls they should be “good girls” and allowing boys to expect that. Good girls apparently only have friends their men approve, don’t travel alone, don’t make decisions for themselves, and keep their sacred bodies pure and covered for their man’s eyes only.

I guess I expected more outrage about this song, but all I heard was people making fun of Drake’s dorky dance moves in his music video. I am not sure whether this reflects apathy, whether no one finds it as offensive as I do, or whether people just think we have more important problems to focus on. We certainly have many battles to fight – but I think confronting the “soft” patriarchy is one worth considering. 

Minor's Prostitution in Switzerland Banned in 2013

In Europe, there is still a debate regarding whether prostitution should be legalized or not. I also have some difficulty to decide between the two principal arguments. On one side, legalization allows a better protection of sex workers, which is more than necessary regarding the danger of this occupation and the abuses that are committed. On the other side, I can’t see it otherwise than an exploitation of human beings that should be banned. Whereas the discussion is complex, it appears much easier to decide when we are talking about minors’ prostitution. The answer seems clear: children should be legally protected from prostitution. If someone would have asked me five years ago if the prostitution of minors was legal, I would have sworn that it was not possible in Switzerland … And I would have been wrong. Indeed, until 2013, the prostitution of minors aged between 16 and 18 was legal.

How that could be possible in 2010 in a western, supposedly developed nation? That seems crazy, but it was possible due to two factors combined together. First, prostitution is legal, contrary to the US, and only the forced prostitution is illegal. Second, the age of consent, which is the age at which a person is deemed legally competent to consent to have sexual intercourses, is fixed at 16 years old, as it is in most of US states.

Fortunately, in 2010, The Swiss Federal Council, approved the 2007 Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse (or “Lanzarote Convention”), which took effect on July 1st, 2010. The modification of the Swiss Penal Code necessary to respect the terms of the convention was adopted in September 2013 and took effect on July 4th, 2014, which means legislators took 4 years to produce a law stating that requiring the services of minor prostitutes is a crime.

This situation was qualified as “ gap in the law” when it came to the attention of the public through the media, but I can’t prevent myself from thinking we did not legislate on that earlier because it was mostly a feminine problem. As often, these questions take years to solve and don’t seem to be taken seriously as a real problem.

Same face: female cartoon characters have no distinct identity

Every female cartoon character has the same face. No really. Take a look for yourself at the faces of the recent female Disney-Pixar cartoon characters:

 

Okay, okay, so maybe cartoonists just draw faces the same way for both sexes? Wrong. Male faces have a lot of variation, from face size and shape, to facial feature size and shape.

 

Tumblr user Every Flavored Bean created these depictions to highlight the differences between male and female cartoon faces. We perpetuate beauty standards and rampant sexism even in children’s cartoon movies. When children see these images (particularly girls) they begin to build expectations regarding their own self-image.

What's worse, animators don't deny that they draw female faces the same way. The lead animator for the recent Disney movie, Frozen, tried to explain why faces on female cartoon characters lack any differences:

They have to go through these range of emotions, but you have to keep them pretty. So, having a film with two hero female characters was really tough, and having them both in the scene and look very different if they’re echoing the same expression; that Elsa looking angry looks different from Anna being angry.

Hmm. It may help the characters look different if they actually have different faces. But drawing different faces would mean deviating from "keep[ing] them pretty."

A few years ago, feminists were in uproar over a leaked revision of a Disney princess who was to be featured in an upcoming movie. A new version of Merida, the lead character in the movie Brave, lost 20 pounds (but her breast size increased), had a lower cut dress, added a ton of mascara, and suddenly had no flyaway pieces of hair. There was such an outcry, that eventually Disney decided to keep the original version of the heroine with a fuller figure, natural hair and less makeup.  As a side note, she also became the first female hero in any Pixar film.

Generally, Disney grosses billions of dollars every year from its franchise of Disney princesses, a false and generic ideal of beauty for young girls. While some may consider cartoons to be “fun and games,” are these the type of messages we want to be sending young girls? It seems that everywhere one looks, there are stereotypes about the way we should look, dress and act. And I know there are others who don't appreciate this constant bombardment with the fake ideal. Tumblr user Every Flavored Bean stated:

Boys in animated movies have faces that are square, round, skinny, fat, alien-looking, handsome, and ugly. The only face that girls get to have is some round snub-nosed baby face. That’s not right.

There have been some improvements in cartoons. Disney made its first movies with female characters who didn't have a primary motivation of romance in Frozen and Brave. If you think of all the classic Disney movies: Snow White, The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Cinderella, (I could go on), the primary motivation for female characters is love! Rare examples of movies with strong female characters are hard to come by, but animators are slowing starting to produce them.

There is no reason why female cartoon characters should all have the same face. Just as there is no reason all female cartoon characters should be primarily motivated to find love. It’s amazing to think that in the year 2015, we are still dealing with these implicit expectations of what women should look like, and we are marketing these expectations to our children! Soon female cartoon characters will be allowed to have the individual identities and characteristics that male characters are already afforded. For different perspectives on Disney princesses and their effects on young girls, read this post and this post. Also please see this post for a discussion on the similar harmful effects of the Barbie doll.