Did You Just Call Me A "Dog"?

Have you ever really looked into the words you use to insult someone?

Have you thought about how our use of language is gendered and/or discriminatory?

How many of you have referred to someone as a “pussy” when they displayed actions that were weak? Who are we really insulting here...?

A pussy. Women have pussies. Right? So... I'm calling you a woman to make a point that you're “weak”.

A retard. I'm referring to you as one with a mental or physical disorder. Individuals with special needs suffer everyday, but apparently to me, it doesn't matter. I want to insult you really really bad.

A bitch. Well this goes with pussy I guess, I mean, a bitch is a female dog. Yes, I am a female, but did you just call me a dog?

A fag. You don't necessarily have to identify as LGBTQ. I'm calling you a fag anyway because I think you can't really top that insult and I'm the best.

A sissy. Derived from “sister”. You get the point?

So who do you think we're really insulting?

At his election campaign, Arnold Schwarzenegger proudly said, “Don't be economic girly-men!” (as borrowed from SNL)

His wife stood up cheering him on. Many people cheered on too, not realizing that he was using gendered language to basically say, “Don't be a economic weakling like a woman”.

“Retard” is often used as an insult, or “That's so retarded” to describe a messed up situation. Politician and Chicago's Mayor Rahm Emanuel's use of the word “retarded” was publicized and as criticisms about him were talked about on daytime TV shows, Twitter and other media sources on and offline.

Interesting how I never saw as much publicity on Arnold's “girly-man” comment though...

If I call a man a pussy, am I not really insulting myself? Am I not saying that ownership of a vagina mean you are weak, inferior, bottom of the food chain, second class... Isn't that what I'm saying?

If I call someone a retard because they had done something I don't agree with, am I not insulting every one of the special needs kids and adolescents I work with and adore?

This aspect of language has been so normalized into how we organize the social world. This didn't occur overnight or recently and it doesn't only occur in some cultures, it occurs in all. This has gradually evolved over time, over various spaces.

Really though... what am I saying?

Those Who Can't Do ... Need to Shut Up.

By "Those Who Can't Do" I mean, those people who are so used to just TALKING, that they really can't DO anything but talk talk talk...

Yes that's right, I said it. The title of this post is directed specifically at those people who like to turn an awareness campaign or any type of charity/fundraising event into, "That's a waste of time and money! People are dying of AIDs in Africa". ... Yes, people are dying of AIDs in Africa.
Let me make it clear that one awareness campaign, one charity or fundraiser DOES NOT trump over another.

For example, I looked at some of the mentions that @SlutWalkTO was receiving on Twitter. One person wrote how those involved with Slut Walk are basically "complaining" about nothing, and that their efforts could be more beneficial to "real" issues such as homelessness in Toronto.

Well, yes, there are homeless people in Toronto. But since when are we having a competition on which issue to tackle? Are women's issues not an issue?
What has happened to people that they look at rape, sexual assault or sexual harassment and say, "Put that on the back burner, we got bigger fish to fry".

Yes, some issues are more severe. Some issues are more attended to, supported, funded etc. But whether one chooses to advocate for children with special needs or donate their time for the CIBC Breast Cancer Walk is entirely up to that person.

Who it is DEFINITELY NOT up to is the person who is just talking.
Talking about how so-and-so awareness campaign is getting too much attention while AIDs in Africa or homelessness is not getting enough.
Talking talking talking... but really... are they DOING anything?

Yes, there are so many issues in this world whether it is social, physical, psychological ... you name it.
But what you choose to support is up to you and just because it isn't an global issue, or an issue that people aren't familiar with, it doesn't make it any less important than the next one.

And to those of you that think donating $5 per year to a charity is "advocacy", it's not. It's support, but please... don't call yourself advocates. It takes more than your money.
To those that sit and TALK about how people aren't doing enough, or so-and-so is not being done right... Well, what are you doing about it?

If you have the time to generate senseless and uneducated guesses about what is going on in the world, you DEFINITELY have the time to pick up some cases of water and haul it to your nearest awareness campaign.

And to those you can't...won't... don't want to DO:
Need to shut up.

That is all.

It Gets Better For Who?

I thought for a long time that people were aware of the politics behind the It Gets Better Project that has been voiced by many concerned individuals. The LGBTQ community has expressed both support and criticism of Dan Savage's campaign. 

During a discussion with some classmates, they asked a series of questions regarding my blog. Some "acquaintances" (barely) who are apparently aspiring comedians, questioned my sexuality because of the amount of LGBTQ issues I address on my blog. Nope, I'm straight. 

However, I am aware of the issues and the invisibility of these issues. So I speak about it. 

If you know me, you know I'm all for equality. However, you also know that I am aware of the disproportionate and unfair distribution of equality, freedom and opportunities. Equality applies to only SOME individuals. 

The politics behind the It Gets Better Project is that the main message is misleading to young adolescents who live an alternative lifestyle. On the other side of society's norms, the LGBTQ community faces ridicule, stigma, harassment, and other severe forms of physical and mental harm. The project spreads the message to basically, "SUCK IT UP" throughout high school amidst the bullying. After the news of several LGBTQ teens that committed suicide, Dan Savage began the campaign, backed by several celebrities. 

Although high school can be a cruel environment (and I'm not denying this), Savage's project tells teens that it gets better after high school. But better for who?

Savage is speaking from a white male with a middle-class background. Being, white, being male and being from a white middle class background comes with certain privileges and powers that cannot be forfeited. The project denies intersectionality of gender, ethnicity, religious and cultural backgrounds of LGBTQ teens who are not white, male, or from middle class. 

This campaign does not highlight the issues that these teens will face in adult life. This includes issues at the workplace: denial of promotion, denial of a specific job position, denial of opportunities due to sexual orientation. This also includes issues with child adoption/parenting, "coming out" to other family members (extended for example), issues with marriage and the invisibility of domestic violence in same-sex relationships. The extensive amounts of discrimination, harassment and inequality does not end at your high school graduation.

It doesn't get better. Not for all. 

This project misleads the teens by saying that high school and bullying is just the climax of being LGBTQ, and that once you graduate from high school, all other problems are a piece of cake to deal with.

Although the It Gets Better Project is a move toward support for LGBTQ individuals, it needs to modify the message and clarify what is to be expected in adult life. To tell those in need of support that it gets better creates falsifying hope, even for teens who are white male from a middle class background. A message like this, especially from a person who comes to privilege and certain powers is misleading to teens who require a different message and different support. 

It gets better? For who?

Indigenous Women - 0, Toronto Police +11.5

"Police have a choice NOT to be police. 

Indigenous women do not have a 

choice NOT to be Indigenous." 

If you are unaware of the missing Indigenous women cases that go unsolved, here is a new flash for you. Native Women Association of Canada (NWAC)'s Sisters in Spirit have estimated that 580 Indigenous women have gone missing or have been murdered in the last 30 years. To those who can picture it immediately, that is basically 1 1/2 of the large lecture hall in the Administrative building at my University Campus. For those who cannot picture it and choose to see it differently, it may be viewed that 580 is surprising a low number to report. 
For the latter group, it should be noted that 580 and a very big number and it is an underreported number. 580 THAT WE KNOW OF. 


Unfortunately, we have very little help from the Toronto Police Department. Many of the missing Indigenous women cases receive very little attention. 


In 2010, the government discontinued funds to Sisters in Spirit in search of missing Indigenous women. We're not too pleased with this of course. 
You know who is REALLY pleased? Chief Blair and the Toronto Police Department. I don't doubt that police officers have a difficult job and I don't deny that they have a risky job. The difference between the police and Indigenous women that go missing or are murdered is that for the police, it's a risk that comes with their job. For Indigenous women, going missing or being murdered is a risk that comes with being Indigenous. Clarification: Police have a choice NOT to be police. Indigenous women do not have a choice NOT to be Indigenous. 


This month, it was announced that the Toronto Police officers will get an 11.5% pay increase over four years. Does this mean that the money will motivate them to give these cases more attention? I mean... if they won't do it because they really believe in the bullsh*t slogan TO SERVE AND PROTECT...


Of course there are dedicated police officers that truly help and think others first before themselves. But people see authority, people see police, people see the uniform and give too much credit to the ENTIRE police department. I see that too. I also see the power-tripping and the over-usage of their shield, gun and the cuffs. I would really like to see the over-usage of the officers to pay attention to cases that they have been ignoring for years. Why do they get to choose WHO they serve and protect? The 11.5% pay increase says they shouldn't have the option to pick and choose who the SERVE AND PROTECT slogan applies to. 


This 11.5% was pulled out of thin air then? Let's not forget the deficits of G20.
Does this make sense to you? Where did this 11.5% come from? From the fund that would have been going to Sisters in Spirit?
Does the government have a money tree hidden somewhere that we don't know about (perhaps they have it stashed on sacred Indigenous land)


Colonialism. Who said it no longer exists?

Science Says!

Have you ever read a scientific study and believed it? Did you think about reviewing the framework of the study and rating whether the methods were sound or not.

Have you ever heard, "Studies show..." and do you tend to believe the information if the sentence started with those words?

In my Psychological Research Lab class, the Prof posted this Powerpoint.
If we believed the information in one study and convergence was completely non-existant, this is what we would believe about bread. (Yes, bread... as in Wonderbread.... as in carbs)

Entertaining? Yes.
Interesting? Yes.
Give up bread? No.

This is Postfeminism? Pink: Stupid Girl

With the analysis on Modleski's work “Postmortem on Postfeminism”, Post feminism has a heterosexual presumption that brings the main focus back on to men which in turn, sets women as the “other”. In addition, Postfeminism can be defined as an eraser of power dynamics by promoting the liberal characteristic of gender equality, which has been attained. Events that proclaim or assume “the advent of postfeminism, are actually engaged in negating the critiques and undermining the goals of feminism... Delivering us back to the prefeminist world” (3).

An example I decided to use from the mainstream media that exhibits potential for subversion and has problematic elements at the same time is the music video and lyrics of “Stupid Girls” by Pink. The music video mocks video models and women with eating disorders in order to teach a little girl to take the more “masculine” route (football) and focus on less materialistic (feminine) things.

Women's Representation in the Music Video and Problematic Elements

1. The video starts with a little girl in a football jersey who is watching Pink's video on TV. She is witnessing all the things the celebrities and women go through to become an “ideal” woman. The little girl has Pink as an angel on one side and Pink as the devil on the other.

Problematic Elements: While this may be seen as feminist by teaching young girls that superficial and materialistic views are not actually the main focus of life, the problematic element is that at the end of the music video, the little girl chooses a football over “girly” toys. This highlights that to avoid being a ”stupid girl”, women should choose the more masculine route. To play with barbie dolls or other “girly” toys is a predictor of a “stupid girl”. This brings one of Modleski's respects to defining postfeminism. Featuring the traditionally masculine traits as the focus in order to be a smart girl brings “men back to the center stage and diverting feminists from tasks more pressing...” (6). In other words, this music video brings traditionally masculine roles or traits as the focus while setting feminine aspects as “the other”.

2. A video model is seen dancing beside a well-known rapper, 50 Cent, as Pink asks in her lyrics, “What happened to the dreams of a girl president? She's dancing in the video next to 50 Cent”.

Problematic Elements: It is true that video models and strippers are glorified and the presence of video models in hip hop videos is almost mandatory in order to “sell” the song/album/brand. In other words, it seems that in order to sell the song, the music video needs to sell hyper-sexuality. However, asking where the dreams of becoming a president for a girl as she dances next to a rapper in a music video may seem feminist, as it may seem to ask why a woman's goals is resorted so easily to video modelling and objectification. Yet, it is problematic to assume that the models never had and will never have such dreams. The lyrics denies the possibility that socio-economic statuses of women in low-income areas may have see such occupations as a way to earn money in order to obtain such dreams or to support her family. Although glorifying and objectifying women is problematic, assuming that these models' dreams are fulfilled at being featured in a music for a few minutes ignores socioeconomic issues that exist. Furthermore, asking “Where, oh where, have the smart people gone? Oh where, oh where could they be?” in the chorus generates the message that the video models lack intelligence or ability to utilize intelligence. How is the viewer to know that the goal of a certain video model isn't to use that money to pay for law school? Using Modleski's article, this part of the music video is in respect to the notion that power dynamics do not exist and that women can easily obtain dreams and goals without being subject to objectification by men. It is also evident that a power dynamic exists between different groups of women, for example, a woman from a middle-class upbringing may have more easy access to education, programs and resources than a woman from low-income area.

3. A girl is seen walking into the bathroom complaining of eating 300 calories that day and is quoted saying, “That was so not sexy”, while her friend is vomiting in the sink.

Problematic Element: To mock purging as an attempt to look like an ideal woman may seem feminist, generating the message that women should be happy with their weight or consider healthy eating and exercising instead. However, in the eyes of one who suffers from bulimia or anorexia will see this part of the video and take offence. “300 calories... That was so not sexy” is not an accurate portrayal of what eating disorders are about. Eating disorders are a mental disorder and women with eating disorders may not seek to just be “sexy” but may be seeking to just be thin. What the video, coupled with the song, is actually doing is generating the message that only stupid girls have eating disorders. In addition, it tells the one with an eating disorder that they will be ridiculed. This can result in may negative situations such as deterring from seeking help.

We currently live in a postfeminist world where events may seen feminist. With this music video, it may be assumed that the general message for young girls and women that glorifying sexualized characteristics as their primary identity and conforming to the idealized and fantasized woman is socially construction. However, the mockery and humour used to generate this message does more damage than liberation and as Modleski says, this very act delivers us right back to the prefeminist world.

Alicia Keys At Hope Rising!

Tomorrow, a benefit concert for the Stephen Lewis Foundation will be held at the Sony Centre for Performing Arts.

The foundation is for AIDS in Africa founded by a dedicated Canadian politician, Stephen Lewis. The foundation funds several parts of Africa and supports community based organizations that strive to "Turn tides of HIV/AIDs in Africa". 

Alicia Keys

The benefit concert will be headlined by Alicia Keys along with Toronto's own K'naan. The concert also features Holly Cole, Gloria Reuben and more. 

Information is below!

Sony Centre for Performing Arts

1 Front Street

Toronto, Ontario

May 3rd, 2011 (Tuesday)- May 4th, 2011 (Wednesday)

8pm-1am

Tickets: $100+

Enjoy!