On the Québec Student Strike

 

           The strikes in Québec universities, notably and centrally the francophone universities in Montréal, have been going on for over 100 days now. Québécois students are opposing tuition hikes and rightly so; the rest of Canada should not be blaming them for having lower tuition, but asking why we ourselves are not fighting harder to keep higher education affordable. Recently, their provincial government put into effect Bill/Loi 78 in an effort to quash protestors and strip their rights away. Unfortunately, the media outside of Québec is presenting only one side of the issue.  So this post is an aggregation of links that explain things, and help to explain why I am in support. (These links and this information is due mostly to the internet communities I frequent, and the friends I have made there)

 

- Student Strike in Québec 2012 (Fr)

- Bill 78 (Eng)

-Timeline of tuition issues in QB

-Manifestations de casseroles (video)

-Concordia University’s media (Both Fr/Eng)

- Translating the Printemps Erable  (translated articles from Fr to Eng)

- McGill article on the 100th day of protest (Eng)

- Bloquons la Hausse (Fr)

- On public spaces and protest (Eng)

 

What Not to Wear, Self Love, and “Flattering” Clothing

By a fluke of circumstance, I only have two days of classes this semester, so I’ve been watching some bad daytime television while I eat lunch at home before homework starts. Which, of course, includes lots of TLC. Which means repeats of What Not to Wear (US). So stop and thinking: is WNTW really empowering and helpful, or does it just push us back into the same old societal norms?


What I have the biggest problem with is the combination of the pseudo-psych nonsense Stacey & Clinton spout and the ever-present focus on ‘flattering’. Since the majority of the makeovers on this show identify as women, I’ll focus on that here.

This problem is double edged : 1) flattering has come to mean that (for women) it makes you look slimmer, taller, have an hourglass shape. And that concept of flattering is ridiculous. 2) The hosts promote loving your self, embracing your true self, being authentic, being good to yourself, but this does not necessarily entail embracing the norm silhouette of flattering. They make it sound like “if you really want to be the real you, dress to make yourself look skinnier! yay!”, an ultimatum, a necessary condition.

Gisela Ramirez’s collection includes a “F*ck Flattering” crop top.

You can wear whatever you feel good in, you don’t have to wear what makes you look skinnier or hour-glassier or taller in order to feel good about yourself. If you want to, that’s okay. But don’t think that it’s a prerequisite to living a good and fulfilling life, to loving yourself and accepting your body or becoming more outgoing or anything. In this day of pseudo-psychology and pseudo-therapy, London & Kelly mask their normative ideas behind claims that they are ‘helping you discover yourself’, ‘love yourself’, ‘be more confident’.

Angela McRobbie noted some of what she overheard in a WNTW episode:

‘'What a dreary voice', 'look at how she walks', 'she shouldn't put that
ketchup on her chips', 'she looks like a mousy librarian', 'her trousers are far too long', 'that jumper looks like something her granny crocheted, it would be better on the table', 'she hasn't washed her clothes', 'your hair looks like an overgrown poodle', 'your teeth are yellow, have you been eating grass?' And 'Oh my God she looks like a German lesbian'. (McRobbie 2004: 118)

This is not empowering women. This is beating women down, telling them that if they do not conform to society’s standards then they are not allowed to feel good about themselves.
If you want to change your fashion sense, by all means go for it.  I enjoy fashion, style, dressing to show my body as much as the next person. I’m constantly struggling over whether this is ironic/performative or falling into the norms. But I do not think that following these norms, this cookie-cutter ideal, is the only way to love yourself and be authentic. Next time you switch on some of these TLC reruns, try looking at it with a skeptical eye.

Some links:

• Rejecting the notion of the flattering outfit @ Definatalie
• How Stacy London thinks about WNTW and self-esteem
• WNTW and Post-feminist Media Culture by Rosalind Gill
• Already Pretty: What IS Flattering?
• Fat Aus talks about flattering clothing and breaking the paradigm [Video]

Public Service Announcement: RIP Jack Layton

Less than a month after he announced a temporary withdrawal as leader of the NDP, Jack Layton died this morning at the age of 61. If you've been seeing his name trending on twitter and have no idea who he is - he was a great political leader who has done the most for the Federal NDP since Tommy Douglas. This is a sad day for his family, for the New Democrats, and for Canada. 

If you know nothing else about Canadian politics, I urge you to check out these links, photos, videos. 

Chiming in on the Julie Klausner debate

 

Since Julie Klausner posted the rant “Don’t Fear the Dowager: A Valentine to Maturity” on her site and on Jezebel, a rant against women who embrace whimsical fashion, tumblr debate has been raging.

 

I have a lot of problems with this article – in fact, there are very few things in it that I don’t have a problem with. Let’s see how she starts out.

adult women are acting more and more like little girls, and it’s really starting to get on my nerves

Yes, the infantilization of women in society is highly problematic (1, 2, 3, 4 ). What does Klausner blame this on? ukuleles, cotton candy, bunny rabbits,whoopie pies, craft fairs, kitten emphera, converse sneakers with mini skirts, and the trendiness of birds.

 

These things are not necessarily infantile, but definitely whimsical and light-hearted. I think Julie Klausner is conflating these two ideas to a dangerous degree. Yes, the two might overlap often, but they are not one and the same.

And more: bunny tattoos , women with master’s degrees who are searching for life partners – this one is pretty disturbing, what’s wrong with wanting someone who is a partner? – rompers, liking ‘rainbows, Girl Scout cookies, and laughing a lot’.

 

And Klausner sees this as so disturbing because

“these manic pixie Muppet Babies are really just in it for the peen”

Wait, what? I’m not a fan of the manic-pixie-dreamgirl-posing-in-a-field-with-a-typewriter too often, but the ~whimsical~ trend is one that I really, really don’t think is all about getting male attention. If I, or anyone, wears a floral dress or bakes cookies, it’s not most of the time about trying to “tell men we won’t bit their dicks off"". I, and most women I know, don’t dress or accessorize to impress men: we do it for ourselves, or for other women.

 

Zooey Deschanel, the apparent incarnation of (almost) everything Klausner hates.

 

Ripped knees points this out :

The result is hugely disparate blogs like The Man Repeller, Hipster Musings or even Karla's Closet, which are about more than Cosmo-style spreads on How To Dress To Please Your Man and Hiding Your Body's Flaws Forever and so on. It's real fashion for real girls who care about more than how big their tits look and how tiny their waist is. It's something close to - and even I am rolling my eyes at this turn of phrase - a sisterhood of style, a clubhouse where the kind of dudes Klausner thinks we're after aren't even invited, for once.

 

\Instead of blaming other women for being too whimsical, Julie, maybe you should be looking at the societal structure that not only tells us to be like children, but tells us that all these whimsical things are bad and worthless. Instead of telling us we can’t be feminists because, god forbid, we like kittens, why don’t you look at the real effects of the male gaze? Or at least, stop being a hypocrite.

 

And  one more time: Whimsical =/= Age Inappropriate, although her title implies that it does.

 

I for one say, if you want to wear ribbons in your hair, eat brownies, buy jewelry from Etsy, and only read vintage books from thrift stores, go ahead. It’s Your Choice - More Power to You. I might even join you every once in a while (or more).

 

from servingofcute@tumblr

 

What do you think? Does Klausner have a point after all? Where is the line between whimsically cute and infantile or childish? Are women really doing this for men, or just for themselves?

Canada Votes Against Voting Against People?

The following post is largely Canada-centric.

Here’s a live stream of Lady Gaga’s HBO presentation of the Monster Ball as appeasement.

However, if you don’t know much about the Canadian political system and are interested, this post might help.
So, my personal political views, as I probably have intimated, are largely left-wing. I’m not super happy with the majority Conservative government which has just been elected, but I’m thrilled with the NDP as official opposition. I want to talk about another thing here – this election seems to have had a backlash against strategic voting.
The first-past-the-post electoral system and its flaws have convinced many people to vote strategically. That is, rather than voting FOR the party of your preference, vote AGAINST a certain party by voting for the party most likely to beat them in your riding. Websites like ProjectDemocracy.ca help you figure out how you should vote.
It’s a morally frustrating and unhappy way to vote, always voting against rather than voting for. But it’s what we have to do often. But it’s what we don’t want to do.
Example:

Let’s say you hate Party A and would personally like to vote for Party B. However, Parties C and D are also running in your riding (~ electoral district). If we’re voting strategically, and Party C has a better chance of beating A than B does in your district, you should probably vote for Party B’s candidate.

So what does this election’s result mean? I think it means that Canadians are not happy just with strategic voting. And that, at the base of it, means that we are not happy with our electoral system.
Some good points against strategic voting are shown here, I personally think the answer is electoral reform, preferably in something close to proportional representation.

Stephen Harper Poses With Things and People

I don’t have time or ideas to make a ‘real post’ right now, but here is something to tide you over. My father is a member of the Conservative Party (the only one in the family thank goodness), and recently received a 2011 calendar free of charge, but encouraging him to donate.

 

The following is a selection of the lovely photos that could grace your walls this 2011.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, what a swell guy! [/sarcasm]

M.I.A.’s new single ‘born free’

Specifically, the video. Short film, a collaboration between M.I.A. and Romain Gavras. Amazing. Warning: It is NSFW and contains graphic violence.
 
View the full video here
This video reminds us about the treatment of minorities by subbing in red-haired caucasian folks instead of PoC: society has become far too complacent and desensitized to images of people of colour being treated harshly, tortured, killed by Western forces of one sort or another.

This is one of the reasons – perhaps THE reason – why M.I.A. is always on my radar. She is unwaveringly politically-oriented in not only her personal life, but in her music.

For my readers: What do you think about mixing politics/music?

Campus Elections: Platforms or Posters?

University of Alberta is having another, yearly Students’ Union election! Hurrah? If you’re like me you haven’t heard much about the elections other than seeing a ton of posters suddenly assaulting you in the past week. Here’s a quick run down of the candidates for Students’ Union President – whether you vote by platform or poster.

VIKRAM SETH
 Poster: Well-designed, stand out, original. Seen over most of campus.
Website (http://votevik.com): Less than satisfying. Poor design, difficult to read. The hover text is annoying.
Platform: Increasing programming events, publishing a quarterly review of all SU executives both in the Gateway and online, implementing a sustainable tuition plan

 ADAM ZEPP

Poster: Haven’t seen around campus at all. I like the font, but not necessarily the neon green.
Website (http://votezepp.com/): Again less than satisfying. Inconsistent capitalization, missed apostrophes. Has testimonies from the Mayor and owner of the Oilers, who is he kidding? Ugh.
Platform: Transparency of student government, greener campus, supporting student groups.

NICK DEHOD
Poster: I had to track down and snap a photo of this myself, so minus points for not having the poster online. But in general: Seen over almost all of campus, good marketing.
Website:(www.picknick.ca) Much more well-constructed than the others. However, small font and grey colors make it difficult to read. Pages fall into danger of becoming “walls of text”.
Platform: Take action on tuition :address the $550 fee,  develop the infrastructure of student government ,  pursue a Fall Reading Week.

Well that’s my nutshell guide to our Presidential Candidates!

Anniversary of the Ecole Polytechnique Massacre

20 years ago on this day, a young man entered the Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal, Quebec and killed fourteen female students. Twenty-five year old Marc Lepine claimed in his suicide note to be motivated by the fact that he judged many of the women to be feminists. He also injured some men, but his target in this shooting was women, and specifically because they were women.

This is one of the reasons I would advocate for both stricter gun control laws, and education about women's rights and feminists. A killing spree such as this, where women were targeted merely for being women, is terrifying.

Please take a moment to remember these women, and if you can dedicate yourself to either of the causes, restricting gun use or educating about feminism, please do.


Read more about this incident here.

CBC Book Reviews and Sexism

I don't mean to be continually writing about sexism, but it's something that really incites me.

Okay, so we remember that I listen to CBC radio often in the morning. They have a woman guest who comes on once a week and reviews a book, that she read during the past week.
This morning she reviewed this book:

It's a collection of short stories, written in the 80s, by a woman who died of cancer in 89.
All right.
The presenter talks about this book as "ridiculous, 80s, big-shoulder-pads stuff". What does she mean?
Each story is focused on the life of a woman, or a few women. And the male characters are on the periphery, flat characters, general antagonists.
"That's almost like reverse misogyny!" says the regular radio host.

Wait. Wait. Several short stories where men are in the periphery, because the stories aren't about the men, but are about the women and suddenly we're feminazis?
After centuries of domination of men in literature, with female periphery characters.
The host and presenter talked about this book as "behind the times". What is this? NO.
Men are not always to be seen as flat people, but male characters can be on the periphery, can be flat. There are some flat characters in every book.

Stop doing this book a 'favour' by proclaiming it an outdated frenzied 80s-fueled statement of women's domination over everything. If you read the stories, you'll see that it's more about women dealing with their problems.

Celebrities Photoshopped Show Fatphobia and Sexism

I was stunned to find a link to a gallery with various celebrities "photoshopped fat" today.

Celebs: What If They Were Fat?

FATPHOBIA AND SEXISM EPITOMIZED

Things to note:

-most of the photoshopped celebs are women
-most of the photoshop is HORRIBLY DONE. It serves to portray the overweight as monstrosities, deformed, or unproportional at the least. (See: the Olsen twins, who resemble White Chicks).

-several of the photoshops, that were better done, do not look "oh my goodness morbidly obese", but rather normal woman. (See: Victoria Beckham and Kristen Bell).
-a few of the photoshops, for example the one of Katie Holmes, reinforce the stereotype of overweight women, or overweight people in general all being fatties who are spilling mustard and ketchup on their shirts.


This website gallery is disgusting and demeaning not only to the overweight and women, but to people everywhere. I've submitted the link to both Sociological Images and Jezebel for further discussion.

Iams: Cute Commercials, Un-Cute Policies

Just a reminder that adopting a pet does a world of good. Think about it this 'holiday season'!


That being said, I want to discourage each and every one of my readers from purchasing Iams pet food. Although this site is funded by PETA, their information has been proven true. Countless animals have been mistreated in the testing of Iams foods. Read more about it here.

On a Recent Campus Scandal

 

I don't mean to be terribly UofA-centric, but I thought I'd write a bit about what's going down on campus lately.

Our university president, Indira Samarasekera (who may I mention is one of the highest paid university presidents in Canada), recently made statements to the local newspaper about how women are starting to outnumber men in undergraduate studies, how she wants to be an advocate for white males, and her worries that in 20-30 years we will have a lack of white male talent to be CEOs and run businesses.

Wait, what?

Samarasekera, herself a woman and a racial minority, seems to be undermining her own position and the position of women in post-secondary institutions everywhere. God forbid women be excelling in universities!

A campus group - which I'm sorry I didn't hear about earlier, or I would have helped out - put up a series of satirical, GREAT posters. Unfortunately, they face possible charges under the Code of Student Behaviour for merely exercising their outrage at the president's behaviour.

 

As if our university weren't in a dire state with this president already, I am just FLABBERGASTED at her behaviour. Seriously, Indira, haven't you heard of privilege? No? 

More on this story:

The Gateway

CBC News

SEXISM AND CBC'S BATTLE OF THE BLADES

 

SEXISM, CANADIANA, AND REALITY TV

I like you, CBC Radio, I really do. I even like CBC Television News. However, I'm getting tired of hearing numerous stories and ads for CBC Television's latest reality show, Battle of the Blades.

Right from the premise, this show bothers me. What's the idea? Well, small, fragile, female retired figure skaters show big, dumb, manly hockey players how to skate 'properly'. I'm sorry, can we get any more stereotypical? There's no lack of female professional hockey players OR male figure skaters in Canada, yet I don't see them included here.

So we have the big tough, sports hero, paradigm of masculinity men that we are meant to watch stumble around on the ice - but wait, who can help them? The dainty, tiny, graceful figure skater. A woman knows exactly how to be graceful! In the end, he still won't skate as well as she does, but that is either her fault or just a fact that he is too macho to flirt with such fragile movements. 

Although they're in pairs, this show is playing up the eternal 'Battle of the Sexes' story that we are all tired of.

This image is t striking - the men are standing with their arms closed, independent, or physically HOLDING the women, controlling them. The women, in contrast, are sexualized for the most part, with arms flung onto their partners, depending on the men for support.

Personally, I hope this is one of the shows that will not be renewed for a second season. And can we stop with Canada meaning we all love all winter sports?