18 January 12
Paula Deen, Classism, Sizeism, and Diabetes
Paula Deen is diabetic. The occasionally rumored story has since come out as fact and she’s teemed up with a major pharmaceutical company who creates medication to help patients with diabetes manage their condition. There are many points I’ve seen expressed online in regard to this news.
One thing I’ve heard many times and by several people I didn’t expect to hear it from is, “Paula Deen got diabetes because she cooks horribly and is fat.”
We don’t know her medical history. As far as I know, we’ve not seen her medical report, and unless you’re a doctor with a specialization in diabetes, I probably wouldn’t listen to what you have to say about it anyway. But here is what I know about size and diabetes. Being overweight can make it harder to manage your condition, but becoming overweight will not make you get Type 2 diabetes. Diabetes is a medical condition that has some times to genetic markers. It is incredibly possible that there are environmental factors that increase your chances of getting diabetes, but I don’t know what they all are and I can be sure the folks saying Paula got diabetes because she cooks with butter aren’t either. I can also be sure that while many of Paula’s recipes are not those a dietician would tell a patient with diabetes to eat on a regular basis. I suspect that most doctors would tell their patient they could eat Piggy Pudding in moderation as part of an otherwise balanced diet.
However, while cruising through Twitter tonight I came across two tweets side-by-side each other which solidified and explained the discomfort I felt. One was from an acquaintance I’ll keep anonymous who said “Paula deserves diabetes for giving every one of her fans diabetes.” [WHOA! Really? Someone deserves diabetes?]
The next tweet was from a local foodie acquaintance who said “The Joe Beef Double Down can’t be a real thing. Bacon, mayo, cheese btwn 2 battered & deep fried foie gras slices, drizzled with maple syrup.”
Now it is possible that because Joe Beef is not battling a public outing as a diabetes patient, he wasn’t criticized for even suggesting such a thing, let alone serving it as his restaurant and possibly publicizing it in his new cookbook that lotsa foodies are all agog over online. Or is something else at stake?
I mean, many of the famous foodie folks and they’re a touch on the overweight side. Emeril Lagasse? fat. Mario Batali? fat. Ina Garten? fat. Alton Brown isn’t fat, but he’s lost weight and he’s had heart trouble. Emeril Lagasse damned near creating Food Network single-handedly with his Bam! and his “more can’t hurt” philosophy. Each one of Mario Batali’s sausages are 30% fat, same as Paula’s. Ina Garten doesn’t shy away from butter use.
But none of them sound Southern. None of them were on welfare as single parents with children. The other guys are a bit snobby for most of the folks living in the diabetes belt. Paula’s not. She’s comforting. She sounds like yer mom, or somebody’s mom. She laughs, she has fun, she uses a lot of butter. But she also creates recipes like this one for White Bean Chili which sound pretty danged tasty and healthy. (And it has been online for more than 2 years, if you’re going to go all “of course she put up healthy recipes now!”)
Every cook on Food Network Television has made a ton of unhealthy dishes and made them look great and appetizing. But Paula’s son joked about how she ate “deep-fried butter” so a fan created a recipe for it and came on the show to help her make it for a special episode. And foodies freaked out. Since then, Paula has become the queen of food that is really, really bad for you, the Queen of Deep-Fried Butter.
But is it her food we dislike so much? Is it her tendency to take tons of “bad for you food” and make it on our TV? If so, then why aren’t we up in arms about Mario Batali’s Mozzarela Carozza? Is it because we know what “deep fried butter” is, but Mario’s recipe sounds fancy. Know what it is? 1/2 pound of fresh cheese put between 2 slices of Wonder bread and pan-fried in butter. Or is it because Mario didn’t have to get famous by becoming a joke of himself? Is it because we couldn’t dare to take Paula seriously as a cook, so she took the road to success that let her raise her kids and pay her bills, and turned herself into a joke at her own expense?
I find it hard to believe that if Mario Batali told the world he was diabetic that the reaction would be the same. No one would say he was a fat cow who deserved diabetes because he gave others diabetes. But Paula, being female, Southern, and of a different “class” (even though she’s rich now, she’s still no Ina Garten, right?) she’s treated differently. I think all of these factors weigh into the public approach to her diagnosis.
I’m glad she’s talking about it publicly 3 years after she found out. I am glad she had time to deal privately with this. I’m glad that she is finally talking about. Because I’m hopeful that others will hear her symptoms, they’ll see themselves in her, and they’ll get treatment of their own illness. They may even end up taking the same medicine she does to regulate their illness, just like she does. And in the end, more people are likely to get treatment, to begin getting well (or at least better, because no one gets over diabetes), to begin understanding their bodies better. If this public announcement had happened right after she found out, I’m not sure she’d have the ability to be the voice of her people now. I think we should be proud of her now. Reading her brief letter to her fans about facing diabetes head-on is nice. But I disobeyed my general rule of not reading comments and read some of hers on this post. The commiseration of people who see themselves reflected in her is uplifting and fulfilling. And that is what Paula’s message has always been for those who watched her show and saw their mother in her smile.
Comment [1]
12 January 12
2012 Nonprofit Selection: Women in Media & News
One of the 7 nonprofit organizations that I’ll be donating a portion of the sales of each bag to is Women In Media & News: WIMN.
This organization was founded by Jenn Pozner, who I’m fortunate to call a friend (for full disclosure-sake). And it has 2 main focuses that I support whole-heartedly.
First, it serves as a resource to connect journalists and other media outlets with women who are experts in their given field. If you are writing an article about Engineering Curricula you could contact WIMN and ask for women sources to contact for your piece.
Second, it critiques coverage of women by the media, while providing training opportunities and educational (and hilarious) seminars to encourage people to engage in their own critique of media coverage.
Jenn also wrote Reality Bites Back a book that focuses on how reality television portrays gender, race, class and more. I joke that Jenn watches The Bachelor so I don’t have to, but it’s true. I have a few reality shows that I like (Project Runway and Project Accessory), which I like because it focuses on the quality of what is created instead of the weight of the people creating it. However, even I had to admit that there have been many instances of some pretty intolerant comments, the challenges are focused on selling things, and my gawd y’all the product placements are getting cray-zay!
In general, I feel like Jenn, and the other people she has writing for the website and who help with the overall message of the organization, holds media accountable. It also provides a place where people who are interested in understanding the dynamics and the behind-the-scenes decisions of journalists and media outlets can turn.
And did I mention she’s funny? Cause feminism isn’t about sapping the enjoyment out of life, but making it a better place for more enjoyment to happen. And WIMN is helping to do that.
03 August 11
#140reasonsdvisnotajoke
There is a great hashtag on Twitter right now. Actually it isn’t great. It is awful. And horrific. And disheartening. And all to real.
Have you ever seen your father hit your mother and know that you’re powerless to stop it? Have you ever heard, every day, for months on end, that you were going to get hit, and knew you would, but just didn’t know when? Have you ever worried that if you leave, if you do what everyone tells you to do, you’ll die? Have you ever looked at the options to leave and wondered why there weren’t more situations more groups more policies more help more protection?
If you haven’t then take out your wallet or your credit card. Agree to drink the office coffee for a week or make it at home instead of going to #sbux. For one week. Take the money you would save and send it off to the nearest domestic violence agency. I’m not asking you to send it to mine. Just go to Google and type in your town name and then type in “domestic violence agency”. Find their mailing address and send them a check.
Do it now. Right now. Before you forget. Even if it is only $10. Do it.
If it wasn’t for the Lighthouse in Lancaster, Ohio, I wouldn’t be here. My mother may not be alive. My brothers would not be what they are. This organization made it possible for my life to irrevocably change forever, for the better.
And I’m not alone. There are a lot of people like me out there. Out here. You just wouldn’t know it.
Comment [2]
04 May 11
Self sufficiency and feminism
I tend to blog more when I have insomnia. Forgive the ramblings and the grammar.
A friend posted a comment tonight about a classmate who is writing a dissertation, or perhaps just a paper, about how reclaiming the “feminine arts” is either radical or reinforcing a feminine stereotype.
And I’ve got lots of disparate thoughts swilling through my head, and I’ve not read the paper, nor do I really know what her approach or opinion is. I just know that the topic of craft and feminism comes up frequently. And I know I’m interested in it. And I know that I see myself rolling up my sleeves and getting deeper into what is out there someday. But right now, I’m spending that time sewing instead. Oh, the irony? Or maybe it isn’t ironic at all, actually.
So, my thoughts:
Craft is fun. Honestly, the vast majority of people who do something crafty, do it solely because it is fun. But guess what, I bet the vast majority of women who become professional basketball players, or who manage bee-hives, or who learn car mechanics, or who become doctors, or become pastry chefs do it because it is fun. This doesn’t make it unfeminist. However, this doesn’t inherently make it feminist either. Or does it? duh duh duuuuh
People who scoff at women for knitting but then cheer on a woman for playing a guitar irk me right out. Seriously. Unless that guitar player was signed to a major label in 1992 or before, chances are she isn’t rich. Unless that knitter is, well, anyone, then chances are she isn’t rich. But the knitter gets scoffed at? At talk of financial security and traditional women’s roles gets brought up. Guess who is going to be warmer in the winter? The broke knitter struggling to get by and support her craft? Or the broke guitar player struggling to get by and support her craft? The knitter. However, the guitar player can pawn the tools of her craft, so there is that advantage.
But seriously, it all comes down to developing a skill. A skill that has the potential to make you not rely on our consumer culture. A skill that makes you self sufficient to some degree. The guitar player, once her guitar and nominal strings and picks are purchased, can completely back out of a financially supportive model to entertain herself and others. The knitter has less invested up front, more invested for each project that gets undertaken. But she also can leave a financially supportive model to entertain herself and provide for others. A handmade sweater can cost as little as $20 if made with inexpensive yarn. A handmade sweater can also cost as little as $20 when purchased at a major retailer who employs inexpensive and non-American labor to create goods. So the knitter is spending $20 to create a sweater or buy a sweater. However, she gets to make it any size, pattern, color she wants to. She is more likely to get exactly what she wants, in a manner that fits her better, than if she were walk into Generic-Mart and buy a sweater.
But in the meantime, she also gets hours and hours of time where she is assumed to be enjoying herself. Hours that she is not spending buying other goods, shopping for other goods, obsessing about her weight, hair, or skin tone. (Unless she watches TV while she knits and then these are possibly true.) But she is taken out of a consumerist market during the time she is creating. She is not spending money while she knits. So while she has to buy yarn and tools to knit, while she is knitting she needs to buy nothing. This is scary to Generic-Mart who would really prefer we visit them daily and spend every cent we get in the stores.
I warned you about the ramble.
So how I think that knitting is ultimately a feminist act, no matter the opinion of the person doing the knitting is:
Knitting, along with any other skill, makes you self-sufficient. It makes you not HAVE to rely on others to make what you need. It makes it possible for you to determine what your fashion needs are. It maks it possible for you to create a heavy wool sweater in the middle of summer, or a lightweight rayon tank in the middle of winter. Just try to buy either one of those things during an off-season and you’ll see that being able to make what you want/need when you have time and when you want/need it, means that you control the fashion season and direction. Which is not to say that knitting patterns aren’t fashionable. They are. But many of them are free (a topic for a whole ‘nother time) and the people who design these patterns are not getting paid designer-level fees, like the fashion designers of Mossimo, or Free People, or even American Apparel. Why? because their skills aren’t valued as highly by the people who purchase their product.
So if a woman can change her own oil we’re all “Wow! Awesome!”. But if a woman can knit her own sweater we’re all “Poor woman. She’s being brainwashed by Patriarchy into following traditonal female roles.” So what we’re saying is that women who do traditionally masculine tasks should be congratulated because those tasks are obviously harder. Well, guess what. I bet I could figure out how to change my oil in a few hours with internet searching and a car manual. I wonder if a mechanic can figure out how to create a cabled scarf in the same amount of time with a few books and Ravelry access. Maybe. But I bet I’d be better, faster at his skill than he would at my mine. And what we’re saying be reinforcing this, is that male roles are valuable and traditionally female roles are not.
And where did these ideas of traditional male and traditional female roles come about? They’re so tied to class structure it hurts me. You think men didn’t knit in the 1880s? You’d be wrong. Men knitted at night with the women. Maybe not all of them. Maybe not as often. But many of them did. And you think women didn’t know how to shoe a horse or straighten a wheel on a carriage? Boo! Maybe not al of them. Maybe they didn’t do it as often. But they did it when they had to, same as the menfolk knitting. They did it cause they had to. And it was only when people could afford to pay someone else to do something that it became a traditional male or traditional female role. When few people could afford handmade scarves, socks, doilies, etc. they were man by male craftspeople. Once more people became able to afford them, the production was taken on by women. Once people could afford to have their carriages serviced, they took them to men to do so. And the men who fixed carriages were paid better than the women who knitted.
So if feminism is the quest for women and men to be considered equal. Then it stands to reason that the quest should also include the quest for men and women’s historic roles, traits, crafts to be considered equal. By saying that practicing traditional female arts is hurting women, then you’re saying that women can only succeed if they become more masculine. And the Second Wave taught us that doesn’t work.
Comment [2]
20 October 10
My journalistic history
In 1997 I graduated from The Ohio State University with two Bachelor of Arts degrees. I was the final student to graduate with a BA in Photography. And I was one of the final students to graduate with a BA in Journalism. (The school merged the School of Communication with the Journalism school into one Communications department.)
During every photography class, during every quarter I spent dozens of hours sequestered in a darkroom with dozens of other students from a variety of departments, I never experienced anything that made me uncomfortable, made me feel nervous for my safety, nor did I feel that I was being discounted as a person of value. Despite having portions of every class set aside for critique where my teachers and my peers were welcome to criticize my work at will, I never felt discounted. Even during classes where one or more classmates showed nudes or sexual imagery, I never felt threatened. I never felt triggered. I never felt uncomfortable. Their work was about them, not about me.
However, once I began taking classes offered in the journalism department this feeling of safety, of education, of camraderie changed pretty significantly. The stereotypical newsroom atmosphere pervailed, was encouraged. The atmosphere that the NY Times has attributed to the executives at the Chicago Tribune was all present and then some.
I won’t name names, or positions, because all of these people have grown up or moved on. But I will say that the leaders of the newsroom, the teachers, the professors, the people who worked in an advisory capacity knew about and participated in the racist, sexist, sexual, and demeaning behavior. Those who also participated in this behavior “fit in” and were rewarded with editorial positions. Which is not to say that every person during the time I spent working on the student paper at OSU participated, just that it was prevalent and obvious.
During what I expected to be my final year there, I became more involved with the paper. And I became disgusted with the behavior that I saw of the students and of the adults. I was tempted to do something, but I didn’t know what. Then one day while having a conversation with someone across a desk with his computer monitor between us, I hit my threshold of acceptance. He wore glasses. Every time I looked him in the eye, I had to decide whether I focused on his eyes, or whether I focused on the nude woman reflected in his glasses. To say it was distracting, is obvious. To say that I felt threatened is extreme. But I did feel uncomfortable and I felt disrespected.
I complained about this with another classmate that I had vented with before, we talked to another classmate who had received very vocal offers of unwanted advances in front of the newsroom. We decided to take up a formal complaint. Not a lawsuit. Not charges. Just a complaint. We didn’t want punishment, we didn’t want financial retribution, we just wanted to feel comfortable sitting in a room that we had to sit in order to get class credit or in order to get paid for being an editor.
We talked with a variety of officials at the university level. We talked with the dean of the college. And without us realizing it, the transcripts of our complaint were forwarded on to everyone we complained about. Every instance of offense that we mentioned was forwarded on for all involved to read. It became a much bigger deal than we expected it to. Our hope was that dean would institute behavior changes in the employees of the school who would encourage those changes in the students.
Instead, the students we had mentioned were involved in these incidents were enraged, at us. They were enraged at us for airing their dirty laundry publicly. They were enraged for putting potential black marks on the records that would prevent them from getting hired. The employees of the school, mostly refused to talk to us if they could avoid it. And the atmosphere changed, but only because the skilled students, the students who were supposed to receive training in how to participate in a newsroom, quit working for the student paper. The employees who had to remain walked on eggshells, but didn’t necessarily change their behavior. They just made sure to make their comments in a less-public manner.
And while talking with two different professors, professors who were not mentioned in the complaint I filed, I was told something that chilled me and changed me. I was told that the behavior I was complaining about was typical of all newsrooms across the country and if I expected to work for any news-gathering organization I would have to grow a thick skin and participate in the jovial atmosphere. In other words, I was told to suck it up and deal and quit whining about boys being boys.
So reading the article in the NY Times that clearly calls out the bad behavior of the executives at the Chicago Tribune, I’m reminded of this. I have no doubt that the vast majority, if not all, of the actual news producers for the Chicago Tribune are upstanding, decent, staff who work hard while being underpaid. I have no doubt that the newsroom atmosphere was not reflective of what was happening in the executive suites.
However, I also have no doubt that there are many staff members who had uncomfortable moments involving those executives, heard about uncomfortable moments of others, and simply left the newspaper. I’ve heard of several women who decided to leave instead of making a big deal of things.
Journalists are a tight bunch. They’re much more likely to talk among themselves about each other than to ever go public with bad news of each other. What happens in the newsroom, stays in the newsroom. If the executive shake-up of the last week or so were at happening at any other large and influential (and admittedly non-public) organization, journalists from all over would be scrambling to get the details, to get the quotes. But the respect fellow journalists have for each other keeps them for pursuing this with the vigor they might otherwise. For example, a Google News search of chicago tribune executive resigns returns with links to 2 stories. Two stories.
I want to be clear. I do not think that the sexual banter, the sexist remarks, the unprofessional behavior extended to the newsroom. I do think the journalists I know who are employees of the Chicago Tribune are great people who I would feel comfortable working with.
However, I decided that I couldn’t accept the bad behavior I saw as a student. I didn’t want a job that would require me to expect boorish, unprofessional, sexual commentary on a daily basis. And I imagine that there are a number of women, and possibly some men, who decided they couldn’t deal with the goings-on of the executives. Goings-on that weren’t much of a secret if you live in Chicago and know journalists. So they did the only thing they felt comfortable doing. They left. The changed fields, or employers, or their focus.
And I don’t blame them for leaving. I don’t even blame them for leaving without creating a fuss, or complaining, or going public or trying to change things. The behavior of the executives, the loss of qualified staff who decided they deserved better treatment, this is the fault of a few who are leaving or have left. However, it certainly sounds like more people than two people were involved in the descriptions of shenanigans that were unprofessional at best.
13 October 10
Open Letter in Support of the Parents and Students of Whittier Dual Language Elementary School
Dear Chicago Mayor Richard Daley,
Dear Chicago Public Schools Superintendent Ron Huberman,
Dear Chicago Alderman Danny Solis,
You don’t know me, but my name is Cinnamon Cooper and I’m a 13-year-resident of Chicago. I own a home in the West Ridge neighborhood on Chicago’s north side. I’m a small business owner. I’m a manager in a department at a textbook publisher. I’m a published author. I’m an organizer, and an activist, and a voter. And I love this city. I love the opportunities I’ve had here, the friends and family I have here, the things I’ve learned and experienced here. And I have to say that I can say without a doubt that I would have none of this if it weren’t for the public libraries I attended on occasion, the Bookmobile that came to my very rural elementary schools, and the small school libraries that were always staffed with wise and compassionate librarians whose only agenda was to encourage reading among students.
It seems like an overly simple thing, really, that libraries are what permits me to have the middle-class life that I enjoy. But it’s not simplified, it is the simple and honest truth. Without libraries, without access to free books, without librarians who encouraged, suggested, and recommended things to me I have no doubt that I would have become a different statistic. Instead of being the shining example of possibility, the one to be held up and admired, I would be a negative statistic. If it weren’t for the learning I sought on my own from libraries, I may have just become the person my high-school guidance counselor told me I would become: a pregnant high-school dropout before I turned 18.
But books, libraries, and the librarians who staffed them helped turn this public-assistance getting, free-lunch eating, leech on society into the tax-payer that I am today. And I gladly pay my city taxes every year. And I look at the bill I receive and see how much money goes to fund the public libraries, and I smile. Because I know how those libraries saved me and I’m so blessedly grateful they exist for other kids, kids who are like me, kids who can become like me because of their love of books.
But not every kid has easy access to a library. A few miles to reach a library can be just as hard for Chicago families to traverse as 30 miles was for me as a kid. Without a library in my schools I would not have been able to write the research papers, read the books of poetry, read biography after biography at the suggestion of Mrs. Rand who suggested I read about Amelia Earhart and Susan B. Anthony and try to model my behavior on them. And then when I was feeling low and put-upon, she suggested I read about Helen Keller, because perspective is a good thing to have at all times.
I was lucky enough to visit the parents and students who are staying at La Casita at Whittier until they get a promise that their 7 years of hard work will result in a library. And I say lucky because I left affirmed of their mission, and affirmed that my emotional connection to them was honest and not self-serving. I was lucky to talk to several kids and what I heard from all of them was “I like to read, but without a library I can’t”.
I know money is tight. And I know many people are criticizing these “illegal immigrants” (I don’t believe this claim is true, by the way) for occupying a “dangerous” building and “putting the life of their kids at risk”. And I know you have to answer those people just as you have to answer to the mothers of Whittier. But the parents of Whittier fought for 7 years to get TIF funds to fix up their school and get a library. The legal status of the mothers doesn’t matter because the children are citizens. And if the building is dangerous, I didn’t feel threatened as I walked around inside and viewed the shelves and shelves of books that were being donated from all over the country.
I ask you to answer to me, and to the potential kids who could become like me who are housed in that school. I ask you to look in the face of the future and say that you’ll rectify what has gone wrong in the past, that you’ll improve the lives of these kids, that you’ll give them what may be the one thing they need to get ahead in life. And if you doubt that my story is true, let me know and I’d be happy to meet with you in person.
En la solidaridad con Whittier,
Cinnamon Cooper
10 August 10
Glorifying Domestic Violence, or Showing Domestic Violence in a New Light
This is the video with Eminem and Rhianna for the song “Love the Way It Burns” which demonstrates domestic violence. I’d avoided listening to the song for weeks. I have a love/hate relationship with Eminem. I enjoy a lot of his music, but then I hate some of it so much that it makes my stomach turn. I had read so many other blog posts about how other feminists online thought that this song and the video glorified Domestic Violence (DV). As someone who spent a good portion of my junior high years living attached to a DV shelter while my mother worked for it (after leaving an abusive relationship herself), I have a view on DV that hasn’t sat right with so much of what I’ve read, studied, learned about DV over the years.
I chalked up a lot of it class issues. Since so much of what I’ve read has been written by academics, I just assumed that because we’d been poor at the time, that’s why our experiences were different. I started reading the previously mentioned blog posts about how Eminem was taking advantage of Rhianna’s name and publicized abuse to make money, to glorify violent relationships, to further victimize women who are already being victimized. And it took me a while to have the courage to listen to the song or watch the video.
Then a few days ago when I saw it on Flip Flopping Joy, I figured I’d avoided it long enough and should probably watch it. And if you’ve read blog posts or articles or essays or editorials vilifying the video, I highly encourage you to read bfp’s words and to read the words of her commenters.
After reading her post, I felt that my conflicted feelings were safe in that space, I felt safe enough to comment on her site, whereas I didn’t and don’t feel safe commenting on the site of feminists who have complained about the song and video.
And then I read this post, guest-written, over at Pigtail Pals and as I read the words of Melissa D., I began to realize how I felt about this video. And how I am still conflicted, but hopeful after coming to this realization.
I think the vast majority of the people in a relationship that resembles the one we see about in this video, that we hear described in the song, DO NOT consider themselves in an abusive relationship. Whereas the number of people who have studied domestic violence, escaped an abusive relationship, watched a loved one suffer in an abusive relationship will see the abuse immediately and react to that with fury. Abuse should cause a fury reaction. And I think this is how the vast majority of the feminist blog-osphere is reacting, and I’m okay with that reaction, because I agree that abuse is wrong.
But I don’t think this song and this video glorifies abuse. Not entirely at least. Here’s what we know about Rhianna’s abusive relationship with Chris Brown. They had an argument. He says she slapped him. Whether you wanted to or not, you likely saw the images of Rhianna’s bruised and bloody face after he hit her. She didn’t leave him at first. And then she did.
It took the realization that, as a role model, her decisions could influence other victims of domestic abuse to return to their abusers to finally persuade her to stay away from Brown, she told Diane Sawyer on “Good Morning America” Thursday.
Those are the bare and simplified facts. And you know what? I bet Rhianna and Chris didn’t think they were in an abusive relationship. I bet their relationship mirrored that of the couple in the video. I bet it just seemed scary, intense, passionate, overwhelming, heart-breaking, needy, and at times violent. But I don’t think Rhianna ever felt like a victim of domestic violence until after the publicity around the incident that caused her to finally leave him. I doubt it was the first time he’d hit her. And I doubt it was the first time she’d slapped him. But that doesn’t keep it from being abusive, nor does it keep it from being wrong, nor does it keep it from causing widespread fury that the abuse occurred.
But, her leaving Chris and her talking about it publicly was probably watched by a lot of people who never watch Domestic Violence PSA’s or Lifetime movies about abuse, or read about patriarchal underlying causes. I bet there are a lot of women who saw Rhianna leave Chris and were rooting her on. And I bet, and I hope that many of those women who rooted Rhianna on for leaving Chris watch this video, hear this song, and see their relationship mirrored in this video and recognize that passion for the abuse that it is.
I see that recognition in the commenters at Flip Flopping Joy and I see that pattern in the words of Melissa D. And, as I think about it, I see and have seen this pattern in other relationships I’ve known about. Most of which involved couples who were very middle-class, who came from “good” backgrounds. I think of the friend who said she wished her boyfriend WOULD hit her, cause then she could justify leaving him. But because he only broke things when he was angry, she found herself continuing to go back to him, even though he threatened to hit her regularly. I think of the couple where he cheated and she ignored it until she couldn’t and then she attacked him and he took it and it created a pattern where he would abuse her trust, abuse her emotionally, abuse her mentally until she would blow up and attack him physically. And you know what both of these women said when we talked about this? “If it wasn’t for how amazing things are when we make up, I might be tempted to leave.”
But despite this hope, I still feel conflicted. I still believe that low self-esteem for all children (not just girls, because I firmly believe that boys and men who bully women suffer from very low self-esteem) makes abuse more common, especially abuse within romantic relationships. And I fear that the young men who idolize Eminem, who feel that he speaks for them and speaks to them, will see this video and feel their relationship style, their anger, their rage is justified. So while I don’t think this video or song glorifies Domestic Violence, nor glorifies abusive relationships, and while I hope that young women will see themselves reflected in Rhianna, I fear that young men will see themselves reflected in Eminem and cheer while continuing these patterns.
06 July 10
Teen Violence More Common Than Pregnancy
Teenage girls are more likely to suffer from dating violence than to become pregnant or be injured in a traffic accident.
This is something that I long suspected to be true, long suspected as in it seemed more common when I was a teenager than the media reported. I heard story after story about teenage pregnancy and how sex education wasn’t working, and how birth control availability was the problem, and how things were really better in the ’50s and we needed to go back to those days. (Of course, I didn’t hear about The Girls That Went Away until college or after and we don’t hear much about this side-effect of the shaming of pregnant women that took place before the 70s.)
But one thing the article mentions, and is something to keep in mind for most places, but reporting is controlled at a county level, not a state level. And counties vary on what they report about and how they react to domestic violence. Very few counties have domestic violence agencies within them, and counties that are more “old skool” are less likely to provide orders of protection or report domestic violence. I’m sure things have changed considerably since the mid-80’s when I was last involved with a DV agency.
And the other thing to consider is that this report only cases where dating violence got so bad that it required an order of protection, and pregnancies that didn’t result in miscarriage. I’m sure both of those numbers would affect the report results. And from what I knew in high school, the vast majority of girls who were “abused” by their boyfriends didn’t call it that, the same way that I think most women who are abused don’t call it that. They would say that their boyfriend was “really passionate when he was angry”, or that he “often did things he regretted”, or that he “just had a horrible temper sometimes.”
But it’s interesting. And it’s another sign that the pro-life movement is really just anti-abortion rights, and not pro-life, or they’d be concerned about what was happening to these children. Because even though teenagers get in relationships that turn violent, they’re still legally children and should receive all the protections that the law provides them.
« Older ·
