In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

We like dancing and we look divine

We don’t have ideology; we don’t have theology; we dance.
-Shinto monk to Joseph Campbell

It’s not my revolution if I can’t dance to it.
– my version of the oft-paraphrased Emma Goldman line. also the tattoo on my forearm.

From an elite perspective, there is one inherent problem with traditional festivities and ecstatic rituals and that is their leveling effect, the way in which they dissolve rank and other forms of social difference.
-Barbara Ehrenreich, Dancing in the Streets

It could be a bad joke. What do a Shinto monk, Emma Goldman, and Barbara Ehrenreich have in common? Though it could be a lot of things, really. But right now, I’m thinking about dancing. Dancing as ecstatic ritual. Dancing as celebration. Dancing as bonding, as a way to work out problems, as self-care and love for your body.

Dancing has been reality-show-ified (see below! ha) and commodified and sold to us again and again, but it remains something that anyone can do. It’s not about perfection and skill, at its most basic level, it’s about moving to a beat you can feel as well as hear.

Women are so often divorced from our bodies, taught to see them as a site of shame. They’re not perfect! But dancing has always been a way for me to reconnect with mine, to love it, moving it, using it, reminding myself that while it is not “perfect” it is strong, and it is mine, and it gives me pleasure. I dance in the elevator to music on my iPod and I dance in my apartment, alone, while the dog cocks his head and follows me.

Trying to write about dancing is difficult because I’m always fighting to make the words dance as well, to put a sentence together that echoes the feeling when the first chords of that perfect song (for me it’s “Rebel Rebel” or “Lust for Life” or “Just Like Heaven”) brush your ears and then swell and I can’t sit still any longer. If I’m somewhere that I can’t just dance I have to move anyway, twisting my waist and moving my hips in my seat, bobbing my head, shimmying my shoulders just a little. Writing about dancing should make you want to dance.

Nothing is more threatening to a hierarchical religion than the possibility of ordinary laypeople finding their own way into the presence of the gods. -Ehrenreich

Ehrenreich was writing about ecstatic ritual as a form of solidarity, as something that breaks down all the boundaries between classes and races and genders. She wrote of Carnival, where costumes and masks let you shed your very identity and toss social norms to the winds. She writes of a revolution that could come through dancing, not through armies marching. And isn’t the use of bands to march to just a way of stylizing and controlling the dance?

Music is my religion, or as close as this non-practicing, tattooed Jew gets. The slam-dancing of the punk rock shows of my wayward youth where boys find ways to dance touching one another without having to admit that desire, the high school dances where my girlfriends and I felt no such shame, holding hands and spinning, dipping each other. My college days where I lost my fear and scrambled up on a go-go girl’s box on a New Orleans stage or climbed up on the bar in my red glitter platforms and shook it for everyone to see. A few weeks ago on a London dancefloor mostly empty where I spun madly across the floor because there was no one to get in my way and then sat down for a breather and made a new friend for life.

It’s not a surprise that a few of my college boyfriends were bouncers in the club I danced at twice a week, 80s Thursdays and Glam Rock Saturdays, because it was their job to stand and watch the dancefloor and not join in but they watched me as I got bolder and bolder and it was Bowie, Madonna, the Bangles, Prince, Michael, T. Rex, Iggy, Siouxsie and more who brought me there. High school girl’s neurosis about extra pounds around my waist melting away as the makeup ran down my cheeks. No room for hate on the dancefloor, baby, not even self-hate.

To extract pleasure from lives of grinding hardship and oppression is a considerable accomplishment; to achieve ecstasy is a kind of triumph. -Ehrenreich

Social justice work can get you down. This morning I read what Matt wrote at 4am and though he gives me too much credit it’s true, this work crawls into your soul and hurts. And we need to realize that taking our pleasures in the face of it is liberatory in itself. In a world that denies you basic humanity sometimes, where you can be thrown out of a city or country or job you desperately need, where some corporation’s cutting corners can lead to the death of your livelihood or even the end of your life, it is positively fucking revolutionary to find something beautiful. And to do it in a group, a roomful of people moving at the same fever pitch?

Well, there’s a reason that conservatives have always tried to shut down the party, and it ain’t their concern over offensive rock and rap lyrics or drug deaths. No, it’s because they know full well what happens when we all reach that moment together when we look around and we don’t know how much the person next to us makes or where they were born or what their citizenship status is or who they sleep with or voted for, we just smile because we are there, together, and none of it matters but our basic humanness.

In my perfect society we’d subsidize musicians and public free concerts (I love you, Celebrate Brooklyn!) and dance nights to the level we subsidize corporate oil drilling and weapon-making and bailouts of massive banks. And we would all dance more. Dance however we define dancing. We would spend less time looking in and wanting (Ehrenreich is great on the difference between spectacle and festival) and more time being and being together.

Festivity–like bread or freedom–can be a social good worth fighting for. -Ehrenreich, because she’s RIGHT.

Today, in confusing media messages!

NY Daily News: Being obese can lead to less sex – and poorer sexual health: study

Sociological Images: roundup of pro-anorexia t-shirts.

(That NY Daily News study raised a whole boatload of issues, like how obese women have a harder time finding partners but obese men don’t, which, you know, hello double standards. Still though, can we talk about how, much like how women are presented with a virgin/whore definition of their sexuality, our society has so skewed what our weight/bodies should look like that we’re left with this really weird dichotomy of obese vs anorexic? Like, show a little cellulite on the thighs and all of the sudden you’re on the cover of US Weekly with a big red circle around your jiggly parts. Start a new diet or exercise routine? You’re on the cover again, only with SCARY SKINNY written in big red letters across your hip bones. Not that real life is like an actual issue US Weekly or anything but I get so sick of this obsession with weight that we can all fall into, especially when you know in 20/30/40/50 years you’re going look at pictures of yourself now and be like “Damn I looked so good! What was I worried about? Why was I not naked all of the time!?”)

(Also, to be clear, I’ve got no hate for the NY Daily News. My first journalism teacher was also an editor there. But you can’t deny they’ve been providing a wealth of material lately.)

SYTYCD Season 7 Top 11

Spoilers below!

Alrighty folks, it’s officially here, the real start of the competition on SYTYCD. Which means that recap posts are back in action!

I suppose I’ll start with some general thoughts on this season:
Top 11 instead of a top 20 or top 10 – I’m fine with them cutting 20-10, I just wish they’d stuck with an even number (partially because I loved Ryan Ramirez).
All-stars – As I expected, for some of the dancers, having the all-star there is distracting because they’re just SO GOOD. But, any excuse to see Twitch, Dominic, Kathryn, Ade, Mark, Allison and Neil again.
Mary – I think it’s strange that there wasn’t even an announcement or anything. She was there to choose the top 20 and is gone again… How bizarre. I’ll miss her a bit, though I’m fine with the quieter judge feedback.

Okay, on to last night.

Read More…Read More…

Bikinis and Bridesmaids and Blubber, Oh My!

As a member of the Order of Fat Curmudgeonly Feminist Hermits, there are few months that I view with more trepidation than June. Not only am I deluged with invitations to social events I dread attending, but I’m also deeply immersed in the advertising that surrounds such social events.

I am referring, of course, to pool parties and weddings.

You’d think that I’d be fans of both of these events because they involve many of my favourite things, like water, free food, dancing, and opportunities to observe drunk people in their natural habitat. However, there’s a big elephant in the room at these events. The elephant in the room being, naturally, the lack of elephants in the room; if you plan on attending a pool party or being the guest of honour at a wedding, you had better be as svelte as possible.

Read More…Read More…

Tuesday True Blood Roundtable: Bad Blood

Spoilers Below

Sookie, wearing a white dress, and Bill, wearing a gray shirt and dark slacks with fangs out, are standing next to each other in front of a house.

After the demise of the Thursday Lost Roundtable, Sally and I decided to open up the floor to our undead friends for a weekly roundtable discussion of Feministe’s vampire show of choice: True Blood.

There is a lot going on, so to do our very best to figure it all out, the vamp-obsessed members of the Feministe team will be having a discussion every week. Sally and I will lay out our analysis and predictions, whatever they may be, and take turns introducing and moderating the discussions.

To recap:

Read More…Read More…

Expect lots of extroverted, neurotic babies coming soon.

Adorable Baby PicWho read NY Daily News this weekend? Did you see that article? One called “Extroverted men, neurotic women are the most fertile combination: study“?

If you’re anything like me (Jewish, New Yorker, and yes, neurotic) you glanced at this and were like “Really? Then how am I not pregnant already?”

But then you actually *read* the article instead of just skimming the headline, and realized the following:

First of all, the study took place in Senegal, where, as the Daily News points out, “residents practice polygamy and typically don’t believe in birth control [can we can a reliable confirmation?].” Still, the Daily News goes on to extrapolate:

    “But whether in Senegal or America, extroverted men tend to make more money and presumably have more sex. And more frequent sex leads to more babies.”

And

    “So why do neurotic women make more babies? They tend to have “attachment anxiety” and so are very motivated to have sex with their husbands, according to [study author Prof. Virpi Lummaa of Sheffield University in the U.K.].”

Which, wait, what? As for the money thing, I have dated a fair number of extroverted men. Most of them were broke. Their extroverted personalities may have been what attracted me to them in the first place, but it was that and not, you know, their earning potential that drew me in.

And as a slightly neurotic woman myself, I resent the idea that “attachment anxiety” would be driving me to have more sex. Is it the neurosis or my gender that’s preventing me from having sex because, let’s say, I want to, and not because I am anxious? You weigh in!

(I’m not even go down the road of how, depending on your neurosis, you could actually be *less* inclined to have sex, or at least unprotected sex, for health concerns/germs… That’s a whole other topic.)

Questions I would have liked to know the answers to (Which to my knowledge the study didn’t answer, but look for yourself to be sure!): Are extroverted men and/or neurotic women actually using birth control less often? Or are they just more fertile? Are they really having more sex? Or just more babies? And what does this mean for me exactly — be extra careful if I date someone with a boisterous personality? Are the results different for neurotic men and extroverted women? Also how, exactly, did they define neurotic?

I guess in the end, the lesson is this: don’t depend on the New York Daily News for reliable medical information, and if you don’t want to get pregnant, use birth control. But you knew that already.

Photo is mine, of my adorable nephew. Yes, this post may have been an elaborate excuse to post a photo of him. What?

Shameless Self-Promotion Sunday

You know the drill: Post something you’ve written this week, along with a description. Make it specific; don’t just link to your whole blog.

In other news, congrats to Ghana for the win this morning — that game was the only thing that could have gotten me out of bed at 10am after being out until the bars closed last night. I’m very sad it came at the expense of my team (Serbia!), but it was a history-making win. First African team to win a World Cup game on African soil? Pretty awesome. If my team is going to lose, I’ll take that context for it. Good job, guys.

Now, Germany-Australia. Who are you cheering on? (I will alienate half of the Feministe blogging team when I admit: GERMANY!!).

Gender Performance, Athletic Events, Costuming, and Editorial Decisions

I metaphorically unfolded my copy of the Los Angeles Times this morning and was immediately struck by this image:

Four women in tutus and tank tops holding hands and raising their arms in the air. They are slogging through mud on a race course and wearing big numbers on their chests, marking them as competitors. To the right of the image, a cutoff fifth figure can be seen. The figure seems to be a man in a tutu, although it's a bit hard to tell because we can't see much of him.

(Photo by Irfan Khan for the Los Angeles Times)

The picture is from the World Famous Mud Run, an annual event at Camp Pendleton where civilians are invited to run on a Marine obstacle course. Judging from the people I saw in costumes in the photo set accompanying the article, it looks a lot like San Francisco’s (in)famous Bay to Breakers; a mix of serious competitors and people having fun, folks dressing up in silly costumes and people in running gear, cheering bystanders, and, in this case, a whole lot of mud.

Here’s a picture from the Bay to Breakers—evidently tutus are a bit of a theme:

a person in a short red tutu, a blue t-shirt, and red suspenders, competing in the Bay to Breakers

(Photo by Flickr user M. Skaffari, Creative Commons license)

There are all kinds of fascinating things going on in these images. The tutu is kind of a troped image associated with performances of femininity and ‘grace.’ We don’t expect to see a staple of the ballet stage covered in mud and froth, or to see a woman in running shoes completing a marathon with a frilly tutu bouncing above her knees. These women have at least moderately athletic bodies, especially the woman on the far right in the Mud Run image, who appears to have pretty toned legs. I kind of love that these women are reversing the Serious Female Athlete image you usually see in competition; here’s Teyba Erkesso competing in the Boston Marathon for contrast:

Competitor Teyba Erkesso in the Boston Marathon. She is a Black woman wearing athletic shorts and a tank top and is near the end of the course, sweating heavily.

(Photo by Flickr user hbp_pix, Creative Commons license)

Now, obviously, there are really good reasons to wear athletic clothes when you are competing in marathons and other athletic events. There’s a reason athletes wear that stuff, and it’s not just because all the other athletes are doing it.

That doesn’t mean I can’t appreciate, on a certain level, the sight of ladies having fun in the mud in tutus. It feels tongue in cheek to me in a way that I find rather delicious; I’m really interested in costuming and uniforms right now, in the sense of what clothing is appropriate to different situations and how people use clothing for performance, and so I’m intrigued by this image that clashes stereotypical femininity with athleticism. Especially since gender performance is often criticised for its impracticality; many women, for example, are uncomfortable in heels, or find ‘appropriate business attire’ restrictive and unpleasant to wear. Here, women are choosing to wear impractical garments that are not appropriate for the setting, subverting the norm even as they have bodies that are ‘allowed’ to do this; they are slim and athletic. If there was a team of fat runners wearing tutus in this competition, the Times chose not to include them in this photo set. Layers upon layers are going on here.

We see this happening with Halloween, too, where people feel a license to costume as something other than themselves, but there are also Rules about who is allowed to wear what, and in what setting. The same rules are very much in play with these images. Subvert the dominant narrative, but not too much, ladies! How subversive is it if there are unspoken limits in play, certain types of bodies that are allowed to do this while others are not?

What I found especially interesting about this image, though, is what we don’t see.

Who is that figure just to the right who is partially cut off? It almost looks like a man wearing a tutu. The person is clearly with the women, because ou arms are raised with the last runner we can fully see. Yet, either the photographer composed the photo to cut that person out, or the photo was cropped later by the photographer or an editor. Believe me, that decision was not unintentional. The Times undoubtedly had multiple photographers stationed along the route with high speed film, with hundreds of pictures to choose from, including probably multiple pictures of this group of runners. It’s not like they were struggling to find pictures to include in this article and said ‘well, someone’s kind of cut off in this picture, but I guess we can use it.’ There’s a reason that person is partially cut out of this image, why the photographer didn’t go just a tad wider to show the whole row of runners together.

Why?

Is it because slim women in tutus running is ‘fun’ and men in tutus is a scary challenge to gender boundaries? Because that runner isn’t obeying the Rules?