Imperfect Lies

The common theme I found in these pieces was this: if you aren't thin, if you aren't light skinned, if you don't fit into the Western ideal of beauty then you are other, a freak that dares to deny the so-called normal and ideal their "perfect lie".
LeBesco tells us in Citizen Profane that "The fat person makes the ultimate bad citizen in that she or he reveals the American Dream for what it is : a fabrication." ( pg. 56). It was nothing new to be told being fat equated to laziness and that social stigma led to yet another type of discrimination. Turn on the telly, listen to the radio, surf the internet and within seconds of beginning any of these activities you will be exposed to a commercial that relates to weight loss or exercise. From the most appealing to some of the silliest things ever to be put into the media, all of these ads are aiming to make people feel bad about themselves and long for a better body. The vanity displayed by our culture when it comes to this constant exposure has come to border on the extreme. It assumes that everyone who is overweight is non-productive and merely lazy. Yet I continue to be somewhat at odds with this because I know several hard working people who are overweight that I would never label as merely lazy. Perhaps the most significant thing to recognize that the hatred for bodies that are "other" because of weight is that unlike race or gender, there is the belief that the person has made a choice to let themselves be obese. They're being willingly defiant. And keep in mind that hate and fear go hand and hand: people fear even the idea of that presumed choice. That no matter how hard they may try now, eventually, for whatever reason, they will become the thing they hate and in turn be looked down upon by others.

"...the meaning conveyed is that the pursuit of beauty is natural and timeless: it transcends race, gender, colonialism, etc. In this way, it cannot be critiqued or reigned in." (Hunter, pg. 64) I've noticed when I go to the make-up section at the store (yes, I support the monstrosity that is such the money monger...but I kinda look the corpse bit if I don't, so I've come to terms with it after a fashion)that there are more representations of women of color for the different companies in their displays. Celebrities such as Halle Berry and Eva Mendes are spokeswomen for Revlon, yet I've never thought of them as being "made white". I've always thought of the celebs, no matter what their ethnicity, that do make-up more along the lines of "well, of course they would want them for their ad. They're gorgeous and these companies will make a killing because women who buy into the whole beauty myth will want to try and be as beautiful as they are." Queen Latifah created her own special line of make-up specifically designed for women of color for Cover Girl. But again, while I noticed the direction of the advertising, I just didn't think of it in such a way as to think that black women were less than white women. I just thought okay, their skin has darker pigment, so it would only make sense for them to have shades of make-up specifically designed for their skin tones. Why shouldn't they have that? I simply don't understand the persistence to make so many into one norm when there are boundless magnificent alternatives that should be cherished instead of persecuted.

"We must create a dialogue that extends beyond these forums and into our daily lives, a dialogue that leads us to less shame, less denial and more room for individuality. It's up to the third wave of feminism to make sure this conversation continues and that a support network exists." (Richards, pg. 200)

There is something about beauty that appeals to all of us in this world, be it in literature, music, film, or people. I think what is imperative to remember is that just because someone does not fit into a neat little box of what one single person or one single group's ideal image of what is beauty doesn't mean that this person should be made to feel less, made into that loathed "other". We should support each other and cherish our differences and what we can learn from them instead of being so critical and trying to make everyone conform to limiting, biased "norm". We are all unique and have something very distinctive to add to the world around us. And after all, wouldn't the world be damned dull if we were all carbon copy perfect cookie cut-outs of the same person over and over again?

Passing Reality/ Passing Fiction

Of all of the things we have read this semester, nothing has connected with me, nothing has spoken to me, nothing has-to borrow a turn of phrase from Dr. Pelle-paralyzed me in the way that Dorothy Allison's memoir did. Now I don't say that to belittle any of the other pieces and works that we have read. Les Feinberg's and Cheryl Chase's works (just to name a few that stuck with me) are amazing and so crucial and the other issues, ranging from those that blur the lines between gender/queer theory to those that we've learned most recently about the horrific working/living conditions in Juarez, Mexico, have opened my mind, my eyes, and my heart to issues that I would not have encountered-at least not to this extent-had I not been in this class. But Allison's words are the ones that speak to me the most. I adore reading...it's been a favorite hobby of mine since I was old enough to read, yet never in all the years that I've been taking in prose has a book so spoken to me. Though I adore the works of incredible writers like Laurell K. Hamilton, Kim Harrison, and Thomas Harris, I've never felt that a book was somehow put there for me to read when I truly needed it, when it would be the most influential on me, until I read Two or Three Things I Know for Sure.

"Two or three things I know, two or three things I know for sure, and one of them is that to go on living I have to tell stories, that stories are the one sure way I know to touch the heart and change the world." -Dorothy Allison, pg. 72

I've had an urge to do more than read, to actually add my voice to the world of writing, for a little over fifteen years now. Creative writing is my major, the career in which I've wanted to pursue, in one fashion or another, for all these years, and the way in which I hope to someday support my family and even inspire others. Lofty ambition, no? But in the pursuit of this dream, I come to a chance here to tackle a memoir. I seek the importance of telling a story and what it means to tell that story to others. I've never thought much about telling my own story before, though I am fully cognizant to the fact that there is a story there to be told. Inevitably, I've always felt that the characters I create in my fiction are far more interesting than myself.
And it is to this extent that I reach a rather interesting quandary in my choice for the final project. My decision is to write a memoir-or at least a fair portion of one-but I'm stuck as to whether I should tell my own story or if I should present that of a character that I've been working with for a few years and wish to explore more. Am I truly ready to recount some of the darker stories of my own past while I dwelve into some of the tales of wonderful people and places that have made me into the woman that sits in class with you twice a week? "There are wounds that never show on the body that are deeper and more hurtful than anything that bleeds." (Laurell K. Hamilton, Mistral's Kiss) It is dangerous, but perhaps not impossible. Or would it be better, mayhaps safer, to relay the experiences of my character, which are in many ways vastly more tragic but staggering in their intrigue than my own?
With either option, I seek the purpose of two things: to show that we are all individual examples of intersectionality and to open a space for dialogue. Just as Allison's story has connected with me and gave me the courage to start dealing some of my own issues, I would love to give that chance for someone else. It is my hope that either story can touch a heart, reach a mind, and give them the knowledge that they are not alone. That we all have the right to our voice, our story, that we all share equal place of darkness and light, and that there is no one clear definition of "normal". Of course, while the character's memoir would be pure creation that must be able to "pass" as reality, it's important to remember that my own story can just as easily be ruled as fiction. Afterall, it is only one point of view on a series of events.
I welcome all constructive suggestions.

Global Labor: More Than the Sum of Their Parts

Within the last six months, I have learned that it is impossible-lest you be truly close-minded-to begin to make an honest attempt to understand the world I live in (be it on a local, national, or global scale) without taking the time and effort to look at those inhabiting these places with an intersectional point of view. The phrase "We are all more than the sum of our parts." plays over and over in my mind like the repeated bits of song piped through speakers when the vinyl was scratched on records as a little kid. There is no one thing about me that makes me fully unique as an individual. And if that can be said of myself, then why would the same truth not apply to those around me and indeed, every single person in this world?
The commonality amongst many of the workers in all of the pieces is that the majority of the third world labor force are women of color. Most prominent of these are the Hispanic women being over-worked and under paid in the maquiladoras along the U.S.-Mexican border in cities such as Juarez. But they are also those being mistreated by poor working conditions in countries such as Jamaica, China, Canada, and Indonesia. They work ungodly hours in jobs that are more or less deemed beneath any task a man should be doing. "...it is believed that women can endure "monotonous" tasks, garment work is viewed as "women's" work, women are believed to be more compliant and less likely to complain, mothers "need" their jobs, women make better "part time" or temporary employees." (Levis Whirlwind Tour). They can be fired for trying to organize unionization. In a cruelty that shows major prejudice against women, many of these workers are required to take pregnancy tests in order to prove to the company that they won't hinder their profits. On page 467 of "Sex Discrimination on the Maquiladoras", we are told, "Absence of pregnancy has become a condition of employment in most of the factories in the zone, the maquiladoras, which employ a total of half a million workers, 70 percent of whom are women, and earn the Mexican state $20 million in export income...Keeping costs down is precisely the reason companies insist on the test, which is contrary to Mexican law and international conventions."
Most disturbing to me was the way that these women and their children were treated after being brutally raped and/or murdered. They get labeled as women of questionable morals or explained away as victims of organ-trafficking or snuff films. "Juarez, Mexico: since 1993 over 400 women maquila workers have been raped, tortured, and then murdered. Claims to justify their murders: they were prostitutes, they shouldn't be out in the public sphere, they were wearing revealing clothing, and/or they travel late at night." (Levis Whirlwind Tour) The perpetrators that commit these atrocities against women are never caught. And when someone who has violated innocent children whom the mother [out of necessity] has left with them, their confession as to why they sexually abused their young charge is utterly chilling, to say the least:

"May 17, Lomas De Zambo Said, "she leave her children to me because I am now without work. She should know how tempted, and no right has to anger with me when she is not there." (Kirshner,Ciudad Juarez)

It is important to note, in looking at a complete view of intersectionality, that while women and children are often given the short-sheet of things in so many different places, men are not completely exempt from being gendered and thought of as "less". True, we find that the majority of non-major "community", aka "conventional" growers of produce who choose to grow their crops and sell them in their local farmers' markets are still women, men make up a portion of those working the earth for production and profit, but they are viewed as "less" because they do not fit into the corporate model of trying to feed the world. "...small farmers, male and female, are feminized. They are other to economic man...Not tough enough for the competitive real world." (McMahon, pg. 483).
As a descendent of generations of struggling farmers, I really wish that I could say that I had some idea of a way to even begin to make the living and working conditions better for the people that we've been learning about. Do we boycott the companies making the multi-million dollar contracts and completely quit buying the products that these workers are forced to produce for pathetic wages? I just honestly don't see the consumerism stopping. So what are our alternatives? We must seek out, using the tool of intersectionality, ways to benefit those not just in our own nation, but worldwide. If we only seek to help one particular group, chances are that in the end, we potentially stand to not really help anyone.

Concerning Sarah Baartman

Monsieur Cuvier,

It is in regard to your simplistically analytical use of the remains of Sarah Baartman that this letter finds its way to your desk on this warm summer's eve. I suppose it was your belief that you were contributing to the advancement of the cause of scientific discovery that you dismembered her body before removing chosen organs, preserved them, and proceeded to put them on display in Paris at the Musee de l'Homme. I wonder, had the woman on your medical slab been a fellow Parisian or one of your female European neighbors or even a spunky American lass, would you have been so willing to butcher her corpse and display it for the curious, gawking eyes of your fellow scientists and the general public?

"...the history of science has long been the history of failed efforts to justify...social beliefs. Along the way, various minds tried to fashion practical human typologies along the following physical axes: skin color, hair texture, facial angle, jaw size, cranial capacity, brain mass, frontal lobe mass, brain surface fissures and convolutions, and even body lice. As one scholar notes, "the nineteenth century was a period of exhaustive and -as it turned out-futile search for criteria to define and describe race differences." (Lopez, pgs. 52-53)

What exactly were you hoping to accomplish by putting Sarah Baartman's remains on display? To show the masses the general inferiority of such an "exotic creature" to that of a stronger, smarter, infinitely more elite persona? Did you prove that there was actually a difference between the "proper white woman" and the "lowly former black slave"? Did you have a so-called "normal" female specimen on display for comparison? Most likely not. That would have been an affront to civilized society. Because this young woman was not white, was not "dainty", but was instead black, with abnormally large buttocks and genitals, she was quite clearly the perfect example for the scientific community and the general public of the "inferior and oversexed" who are simply better for nothing than a mistreated side-show freak.

In her article, "Sarah Baartman, at Rest at Last", Lucille Davie tells us,"Baartman was born in 1789. She was working as a slave in Cape Town whe nshe was "discovered" by British ship's doctor William Dunlop, who persuaded her to travel with him to England. We'll never know what she had in mind when she stepped on board-of her own free will-a ship for London." I wonder if the situation had been reversed, Monsieur, if the subject of your scrutiny had been white-or of an otherwise less "wild" breed of woman- would she have been treated so unjustly? Or perhaps if Sarah had been given the same chances of education and other societal privileges as a woman of lighter skin, limited as they were in your time, would she have encountered a more civil farewell to life? Sarah Baartman, because of her color, her class, her difference became a freak to those she was paraded before, fit for nothing more than degradation and lecherous staring by her observers. She died in a foreign land, with no family to speak for her loss, and no means of having her body returned to her home for a proper burial.

I wonder if you would have let this crime against a human being go without impunity should she have been of a color closer to your own skin. Would you have been okay with knowing that their body would remain a displayed mockery of existence until its pieces were finally petitioned for centuries later? Or, perhaps, would you have let the atrocity occur so long as it was "beneficial" to your precious, if ultimately useless, "science"?

Regards,

~B~

Ignorance is Not Bliss When the Truth is Necessity

In Transliberation: Beyond Pink or Blue, Feinberg tells us that sie is "a human being who would rather not be addressed as Ms. or Mr., ma'am or sir. I prefer to use gender-neutral pronouns like sie and hir to describe myself." (pg. 1) I'm not sure if it's my ambition to pursue creative writing as a career or if it's my new understanding of looking at others with an intersectional point of view-or both-but I totally get that someone who identifies as transgender would not want to be referred to in such gender-entrenched terms. I wonder if these terms are beginning to be used not only in works of pioneering authors like Feinberg, but also in new works of fiction? I think it would be a truly fascinating way to help us begin to use these new pronouns in our everyday vocabulary.
Also, being raised in the South, I was taught that you said "Yes/No, Ma'am", "Yes/No, Sir", and addressed an adult by the appropriate title of "Mr." or "Mrs./Ms." even if you were allowed to follow that title with the person's first name. This lesson was not only enforced by my parents but also by both sets of extended family including grandparents, uncles, and aunts. It was also occasionally enforced with a spanking should you be disrespectful. To this day, I remain uncomfortable-to a certain extent-addressing my "elders", teachers, and other people who might be deserving of such title simply by their first name. So what would one do in a social situation with someone who identifies as transgender and prefers not to be addressed by a gender-specific title? Are there gender-neutral titles to go along with the gender-neutral pronouns?

"By using the mass media, the Internet, and our growing network of allies and sympathizers to make the general public aware of the frequency of intersexuality and of the intense suffering that that medical treatment has caused, we seek to create an environment in which many parents of intersex children will have already heard about the intersex movement when their child is born. Such informed parents we hope will be better able to resist medical pressure for unnecessary genital surgery and secrecy and to find their way to a peer-support group and counseling rather than to a surgical theater." (Hermaphrodites with Attitude, pg. 40)

Cheryl Chase's hope for a support group for parents of intersexual children is, as we have read, quite frankly something that is clearly needed on not just a local or national scale, but a global one. Could such intersex education be offered in conjunction with the Trans Ally Training that Miami offers? Also, is such training easily accessible to those outside of the collegiate community?And finally, I had the great privilege to attend the "No Hate on My Campus" rally in Oxford at the end of April and was greatly moved by the show of strength and support for the GLBTQ community at Miami. It was truly, truly amazing! I'm curious as to if there has been continued work with the efforts that were so well represented that day and what have been the results of such hard work.

Real Life Ain't a Game

Ever play the "Game of Life" when you were growing up? It's a bit
of a favorite past-time for my aunt and I. We'd play if we had the chance when my mother brought the family to her home state of Florida on vacation over the summer. While not exactly my favorite game of all time [though it still greatly amuses me that the only time I remember winning was when I played my little peg as a lesbian], it never occurred to me to question why the pegs were only colored in pink and blue. Oh sure, I remember wanting to play with the blue peg because I didn't like pink-I would have really preferred red-but I never thought about how much the game plays into the binary of heteronormativity.
Let's think about how the "Game of Life" can parallel Feinberg's Transliberation: Beyond Pink or Blue. Sie tells us,

"...if you do not identify as transgender or transsexual or intersexual, your life is diminished by our oppression as well. Your own choices as a man or a woman are sharply curtailed. Your individual journey to express yourself is shunted into one of two deeply carved ruts, and the social baggage you are handed is already packed." (pg. 6)

If you look at the game board, you'll notice that there is no deviation in the life course you are expected to follow. You go to school, get married, have a few ankle-biters, eventually retire, so forth so on. There are no single parents in the game, no alternative sexualities, no allowance for class or race even. Sure, just like in real life, you can encounter hardships such as tax fines or losing your job, etc, but pretty much everyone is on a level-heterosexualized, mind you-playing field. As most of us know, real life just isn't this way. For individuals like Feinberg, those whose gender cannot be easily defined by a simple glance, who prefer to be referred to with gender-neutral pronouns, being different means more than just liking a different color. It means that you can be punished for a simple choice of dress, turned away from a perspective job, and even denied basic health care all because you don't fit into that neat heteronormative binary that the general masses are very set and comfortable in. But it isn't just the "queer" that face the bigotry in this world for not fitting into the stereotypes. It's anyone who does not fit into the norm.
And in this mess of trying to "pass", of trying to just be normal, why is the debate between choice vs. nature matter so much for homosexuality? The simplicity of this concept is exactly what gives the mess its complexity: if it can be proven that being gay or being "other" is a simple factor of genetics, then there is possibility that it can be changed. "History indicates that current genetic research is likely to have negative effects on lesbians and gay men, particularly those living in homophobic societies." (Schuklenk, Stein, Kerinm, and Byne, pg 50) If geneticists are eventually able to alter a person's DNA for the parent who wants their child to have blue eyes instead of brown, to be tall and thin instead of petite and rubinesque, what's to stop them for also wanting that bit of genetic soup eradicated that determines one's sexual orientation so that their child doesn't deviate from what is considered to be "normal".
Consider this: if we were all alike, the world could (possibly) be a peaceful one-there would be no reason to persecute others because of their differences-, but it'd be pretty damned dull. We can add so much to the richness of each other's lives if we could only learn to celebrate one another's uniqueness.

A Mental Mind Fuck Can('t) Be Nice

"It's something you'll get use to/A mental mind fuck can be nice" - Dr. Frank 'n' Furter (Tim Curry), in "The Rocky Horror Picture Show"

Like the hilarious doctor says, a mental mind fuck can be a great thing. Think about it. You can allow your mind the freedom of an imaginary encounter with anyone you choose without any of the realistic consequences. Imagination can be exhilarating, a lucid dream in the daytime. But a mind fuck can be more than one thing. While it is a great way of escapism for some, for others it's just another way of suffering the real life torment and anguish that plagues them beyond their daily existence and into the chaos of their mind space.

"Tell me, though," I added, and shifted my shoulders like Aunt Dot leaning into a joke, "if people really believed that rape made lesbians, and brutal fathers made dykes, wouldn't they be more eager to do something about it?" -Dorothy Allison (46)

As Allison begins to pose in Two or Three Things I Know for Sure , if it were any one thing that lead to the victimization of women and children, don't you think more people would be raring to get down and dirty and do something to really make a change for those affected? While I don't agree that it's violence or choice that makes someone gay, I think it's clearly evident that the brutalities that those who endure rape and abuse will affect them physically and emotionally for the rest of their lives. For those like Allison, who were able to stand up to their abusers and eventually come to terms, after a fashion, with what happened to them, it is truly amazing to see how bravely and boldly they can speak out against the atrocities they suffered. Allison's blunt honesty is quite frankly refreshing and truly inspiring.

But what about the victims who don't have a voice? Crenshaw, quoting Diana Campos states in "Mapping the Margins" that "It is unfair to impose more stress on victims by placing them in the position of having to demonstrate their proficiency in English in order to receive services that are readily available to other battered women". Women of color, women who are poor, and children are quite often at a disadvantage when seeking help out of situations of abuse because they are simply not recognized as being worthy of assistance. They don't fit into a certain group that some are trying to help. It's almost as if these people are outside of the organizations comfort boundaries, just because English isn't their primary language, and they wind up losing what little courage they may have found for reaching out for help in the first place. And children...while I think so many kids now days need much more discipline than they are receiving, I also believe that they shouldn't be dismissed out of some archaic "Children should be seen and not heard" non-sense, either. I've heard far too many stories of kids being dismissed even by their own parents who don't want to see or hear that their spouse or family member is terrifying their offspring because it's just too much for them to cope with. Too many times I think we ignore such children, for a multitude of reasons, which can lead to more abuse and possibly even death, be it by their abuser or by suicide-an action that some feel is their only way out.

While by no means do I consider such measures an easy task, I believe that a difference in so many lives could be made if only we opened our minds and realized that with each individual comes a unique set of needs and we must make every effort to provide for them. If you don't speak the language needed for someone seeking help, find someone who does and work together to help that person who's come to you. Don't be judgmental or flippant when listening to a person's ordeal-don't be just another player in the terror of their mental mind fuck. Be they child or adult, no matter their race or class, if you just try to help, chances are you might be making a major difference in their lives for the better. And you just might make a difference in your own at the same time.

Video: The Dark I Know Well from the musical Spring Awakening