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

Month: July 2011

Things that are ok:

Being vegan. Yay vegans, eat what you want, live ethically, you are not all insufferable sanctimonious pricks, etc etc.

Things that are not ok: Leaving your roommate an off-the-chain straight-up aggressive note telling them they’re no longer allowed to have any animal products in your shared space, and then implying that they could stand to lose some weight (although in the vegan lady’s defense, I totally understand her objections to SlimJims and Spam; I’m not sure she needed to call them “trashy snacks” where “gross” would have done just fine, but I see her point that mechanically-separated chicken is indeed quite gross).

I cannot wait until my roommate gets home and sees the note I left her, telling her that in order to respect my dietary preferences she is not allowed to bring any food item into the house that does not involve cheese, wine, shellfish or asparagus (I’m really feeling asparagus lately, BACK OFF).

Food Visibility

Bittman has a great column this week about the ridiculous proposed laws to ban filming and photography at farms. Animal rights and sustainable food activists have embarrassed corporate farms by publishing footage of how corporate farms actually treat animals, and the disgusting and cruel conditions that they maintain (the footage is often shot by brave employees of the farm who are offended by what they see at work every day). In response, the food industry pushed legislators to just make it illegal to record what goes on in their facilities. The laws haven’t passed, but it’s still nearly impossible for journalists (or anyone else) to get into factory farms to see how things are run. Bittman tried, and was repeatedly refused.

When a journalist can’t see how the food we eat is produced, you don’t need ag-gag laws. The system’s already gagged.

The videographers that have made it into closed barns have revealed that eggs are laid and chickens are born and raised in closed barns containing (literally) hundreds of thousands of birds; an outsider wouldn’t even know what those barns were. Pigs are housed cheek-to-jowl, by the many thousands, in what are called concentrated animal feeding operations, where feeding, watering and monitoring are largely mechanized. Pregnant sows are confined in small concrete cells. Iowa is industrial agriculture’s ground zero. But when it comes to producing animals, zero is pretty much what you’re going to see.
…
Which would bring us a step closer to China, whose Health Ministry is trying to clamp down on news media outlets that “mislead” the public about food safety issues. (It’s worth noting, on the other hand, that the Chinese Supreme Court has called for the death penalty in cases of fatal food poisoning.) “Mislead” apparently means reporting about pork tainted with the banned drug clenbuterol, which sent a couple hundred wedding guests to the hospital; watermelons exploding from the overuse of chemicals; pork disguised as beef, or glowing blue; and — my favorite — cooking oil dredged from sewers. (Check my blog for the details.)

Our watermelons don’t explode and, for now, I can write about it. Yet when a heroic videographer breaks a horror story about animal cruelty, as happens every month or so, the industry writes off the offense as an isolated incident, and the perpetrators — usually the workers, who are “just following orders” — are fired or given wrist slaps. Business continues as usual, and it will until the public better understands industrial animal-rearing techniques.

And until the food industry stops intimidating journalists, suing anyone who speaks ill of them, and using their economic and political might to obliterate small ethical farmers.

The Rise of Afghanistan’s Fearless Young Feminists

A must-read over at UN Dispatch. A taste of the interview with feminist activist and Dickinson College sophomore Noorjahan Akbar:

UN Dispatch: The abuse of women in Afghanistan is generally associated with rural conservatism and lack of education, but you recently initiated a facebook debate about sexual harassment and highly educated men from Kabul responded with statements such as “If you dress immodestly, prepare to be treated immodestly,” excused violence against “bad girls” and even blamed Afghanistan’s corruption problems on the “wishes of women.” At least one woman in the discussion agreed with those sentiments. Why do you think such resentment toward women persists among the upper strata of Afghan society?

Akbar: I think part of it is competition in the workforce and opposition to affirmative action policies that are creating opportunities for women. But the reality is that a person doesn’t need to be a suicide bomber to think like a Talib [a member of the Taliban]. I know many educated men who think of themselves as intellectuals but would never let their mothers leave the house, would never let their sisters attend a concert.

I know a couple of men my age who are egalitarian in the way they think about women, but they are not the majority of intellectuals or the majority of university students. Just two days ago, I had a conversation with a few university students in Kabul who believed that women should be allowed to show only their eyes and nothing else. They thought that was required by Islam. They thought that should be the reality of our lives. It’s going to be a long journey and ten years is not enough time to change the minds of the majority.

Another issue is that when the government proposes regulations that restrict women’s behavior, conservatives are encouraged. For example, you have the government’s proposed regulation for weddings. If this becomes law, it won’t just limit how much people can spend; it will also regulate how women can dress at weddings. And there has been talk in the government for years of reinstating a moral police. These policies support the Taliban worldview.

UN Dispatch: Do you think the current trend is toward increasing conservatism?

Akbar: Yes. I’ll give you an example: two years ago men would not stop me and question me if I was alone in a car with a man. Today the police in Kabul do this all the time and the government supports them. Nobody stops the police from harassing me. Men who think like the Taliban are encouraged by this kind of behavior.

Go read the whole thing.

But sometimes it is about you.

This article about Mac McClelland’s piece documenting her PTSD and how she used violent sex to cope illustrates pretty well why too many women who experience trauma don’t speak out, and why the varied truths about women’s lives are too often missing from public dialogue. Marjorie Valbrun writes:

I wondered if I had read the same piece because the only adjectives I could come up with were: “Offensive.” “Shockingly-narcissistic.” “Intellectually dishonest.” To me the piece was a stunning example of journalistic malpractice, the kind that reinforces the public perception that deep down journalists think every story or major news event is somehow really all about them.

McClelland, who covered Haiti for Mother Jones, has provided us with yet another clichéd, egocentric article about documenting unimaginably terrible things experienced by powerless, broken, poor people who are victimized on a regular basis. But here’s the rub, we get a mere few lines about the pain experienced by a Haitian rape victim named “Sybille” but a long screed about McClelland’s pain, albeit with the provocative spin of needing violent sex to cure her of all that ails her. Sybille’s violent rape feeds McClelland’s need to feel victimized.

McClelland didn’t have a “need to feel victimized.” She spent years reporting from war-torn and devastated countries, and she become psychologically overwhelmed. It’s not narcissistic or intellectually dishonest to discuss the very real impacts that can result from seeing suffering day in and day out.

Really? You need to get punched in the face by a man during sex in order to get over Haiti? So I guess mimicking a violent sexual assault is acceptable as long as it is wrapped in compelling prose and sold as self-healing.

As a journalist, I understand wanting to make sense of the senseless and trying to put events into some larger context. I’ve reported from Haiti for some 20 years now; I was also born there. I know something about the perils of working and living there. But McClelland has not spent that much time there and doesn’t seem to know much about the place so she gives readers a limited and flawed view. She does what most journalists do soon after they’ve visited Haiti for the first time – make broad generalizations drawn from personal anecdotes. Given that the earthquake occurred a year and half ago and there have been many stories written about life on the ground and rapes at the camps, she had to reach for something different and more sensational so she put a new spin on an old story and personalized it to the nth degree.

I’m annoyed that people are often more interested in a story about poor black people/poor black country/genocide in the Sudan/etc. when the central character in that story is a white person. I mean all of Port-au-Prince is suffering from PTSD and I’m supposed to care about some woman who parachutes in for a couple of weeks and has the luxury to leave whenever she wants because she’s been inconveniently traumatized?

Read More…Read More…

On colonial holidays

This weekend marked celebrations of nationalism all across Turtle Island, with canada day on july 1st and independence day today. But while we enjoy a long weekend, bbqs and fireworks, we must recognize the expense that was paid by the Indigenous peoples of this continent for us to enjoy such revelries.

We must remember that these nations are invented, that their borders were drawn by white men without respect or consideration given to the existing Nations who lived here before the colonials’ violent arrival. We must remember that these borders are maintained by political and economic ideologies that benefit imperialist powers. We must remember that the lines drawn across Turtle Island have fractured Indigenous families and communities, and that the wall separating Mexico from america keeps Indigenous peoples out of their rightful home, calling them illegal immigrants.

We must remember genocide, the beginnings of biological warfare, the displacement from ancestral lands, the denial of culture, the sterilization of Indigenous women, the stolen children, the residential schools, the assimilation, the continued poverty within and isolation of Indigenous communities, the death of languages, the fetishization, commercialization and appropriation of Indigenous bodies, identities and cultures.

For those of us who are descendants of settlers, we must recognize and analyze our privileges and understand the historical context and complexities of our presence on this land. We must commit to being better allies, without dwelling in guilt. We must listen, and offer up our voices in support when we are asked. We must stop treating the Indigenous peoples of Turtle Island as an afterthought in our organizing. We must commit to being more respectful, critical and loving in our diverse allied communities.

Most importantly we must remember and recognize that Indigenous peoples are not extinct, are resilient, are brave, are struggling and are brilliant.

For more thoughts on the pain of national holidays in Indigenous communities: this article is more particular to canada day.

And for a wonderful counter-narrative to colonial imagery of Indigenous peoples, take a look at this tongue in cheek tribute to Edward S Curtis.