Pop Culture: Wedding Shows!

So, I think this Target: Women series is hilariously funny. BUT this edition illustrates one of the reasons I (more often than not) feel disillusioned by marriage: weddings. Aren't they getting a little ridiculous? In Wood County, Ohio (of which my recent home, Bowling Green, is the hub) the average wedding costs twenty-seven thousand dollars. Not to get too personal, but that is more than I currently owe in student loans. Is this extravagance really necessary to demonstrate the quality of our love? With the economy and the country in the state they are in, I personally could not justify spending so much money on party, especially a party that is so often seeped in religious and misogynistic traditions- but that's a whole other post.

Here's another hilarious Target: Women video!

An Open Letter To Johnny Vegas

Yeah, I have never heard of him either. But this story caught my eye, and I became outraged. So outraged, in fact, that I decided to write him a letter and tell him that I think he's a disgusting human being. What drives me to have such an extreme hatred of some second rate British comedian of whom I have never heard, you might ask. Apparently "Vegas" sexually assaulted a nineteen-year-old woman on stag- and called it a joke. Here's a link to the Guardian post where it was first reported (Wikipedia credits it as such, for what that's worth).

Anyways, back to this letter: Five minutes of google and MySpace searching yielded no address or website to which I could send Johnny Vegas my thoughts about his little joke. Not wanting to waste any more time on it, I decided that posting it here would suffice. Here goes:

Mr. Vegas;

Today, I read about your recent comedy act, where you had six audience members carry a young woman (barely legal, at eighteen or nineteen) on to the stage, where you fondled her breasts, pulled up her skirt, and fingered her through her underwear. Mr. Vegas, you are a rapist and it is a travesty on part of the British legal system that you are not being prosecuted. I am disturbed beyond words that anyone would consider the public sexual assault of a young woman to be comedic. You should be black-balled for life- for the good of the public (actually, you should spend some time in jail). I think you are scum.

Sincerely,
EW

Reproductive Justice Week of Action

According to Feministing.com (my favorite feminist news source), last week was Reproductive Justice Week of Action. Lately, I have been doing some work in the field of reproductive justice. OWI is casually working with Choice USA, a national reproductive rights action group founded by Gloria Steinem. We’re participating in a campaign to lower the price of birth control on college campuses. Last week we collected another hundred or so petition signatures, and educated many more students about the new law that is responsible for the price hike.

I am also part of an advisory committee that is helping to plan Choice USA’s national conference. In July, Choice is hosting a four-day training workshop and membership conference focusing on reproductive justice. Through participating in the advisory committee, I recently got a gig on their blog team, Choice Words. My focus in women’s studies is human sexuality, so I am going to do an advice column on sexual health.

Although my career right now is in politics, I am glad to have an opportunity to advocate on behalf of reproductive justice. Not enough people realize the fragile state of reproductive freedom in America; it is important to continue fighting to protect these rights.

SAGA Awards (Finally, a happy post!)

So I'm a little late in reporting this, but gimme a break. It's been a busy week what with the anti-feminist bake sale (which I'm sure I'll continue to post about) and, ya know, graduating in two weeks.Plus, the highly anticipated Women's Studies/Center Reunion Gala is starting tomorrow! Indeed, it is a good time to be a feminist at BGSU.

Anyways, on Monday night, BGSU's Transcendence hosted the second annual Sexuality and Gender Activism (SAGA) Awards. The awards honor individuals or groups in the community who work to promote sexuality and gender rights, as the name suggests. I was fortunate to be honored, along with some great women. One of the other honorees was Andrea Adams-Miller, aka "The Sexuality Tutor." She co-hosts "Sex Talk," a sexuality talk show on our campus station, 88.1fm.

Confession time: Sex Talk shows happen to be one of my biggest weaknesses. Human sexuality is my focus within Women's Studies, and it is also in the shortlist of "Things in Which I Would Consider Getting A Graduate Degree." Consequently, I'm interested in how fellow sexologists (and I do like to consider myself a budding sexologist, as well as political pundit) tackle the issues, and I've been listening to Sex Talk sporadically since it started over a year ago. I enjoyed the chance to talk to Ms. Adams-Miller, and I couldn't help snapping a photo with her (which I would post if I could figure out how to rotate it; it's on Facebook though).

Keynote speaker was Chris Beam, professor at Columbia and author of Transparent, a book about raising transgender teens. What an interesting woman! Ms. beam was both funny and insightful, and I totally want to read her book.

All things considered, it was a lovely evening. Big thanks to Transcendence for sponsoring the event. I think it is wonderful that someone within the community is taking the initiative to recognize the work of other activists.

Like I said before, exciting things are happening at BGSU right now! Look for posts on the 10/30/100 Reunion Gala, celebrating ten years of BGSU's Women's Center, thirty years of the Women's Studies program (represent!), and one hundred years (give or take) of BGSU; AND the continuing coverage of the campus' response to the anti-feminist bake sale.

Anti-Feminist Bake Sale

This morning, I was shocked at something so disgusting and perverse , I could not understand its place at an institution of higher learning. On the steps of the education building sat three girls at a card table, with a sign that said “Anti-Feminist Bake Sale.” No joke.

Certain that these girls who happened to be attending college were secretly feminists at heart, I decided to engage them in a conversation about how feminism has, in fact, enriched their lives.

The girls agreed that, were they married, they should have legal control over their own money (as opposed to their husbands). They were all registered to vote, and did vote regularly. We agreed that women should be able to serve on juries, and the right of a woman to divorce an abusive husband and press charges. After finding so much common ground, I pointed out that we all have the feminist movement to thank for these basic rights.At this point in our conversation, a few fellow activists joined the talk. We unanimously decided that, in spite of the offensive sign, the girls were actually big proponents of feminist ideals! In spite of their affiliation with the College Republicans (that’s right- the same group who brought you “Catch an Illegal Immigrant Day” and speakers like Ted Nugent and Dinesh D’Souza) these girls clearly believed in liberal feminist ideas. We suggested that they change their sign to something more tolerant, like “Exploring Differing Feminist Ideas,” Why? Because they were protesting the radical feminist agenda, which aims to destroy family values by encouraging women to enter the workforce. I was then handed a flyer with six different quotes, featuring “feminazis” from Betty Friedan to Margaret Sanger.

Unable to deal with the random assortment of outdated, out-of-context quotes, I allowed the f-bomb to distract me from the issue at hand. “You know, feminazi is a term coined by Rush Limbaugh to put down assertive women, smack us back into place. It is a misnomer, and does not accurately describe contemporary feminisms.” At this point, one girl admitted that she liked Rush Limbaugh, and only watched Fox News- never CNN. Personally, I feel that if you want to wallow in the lies and propaganda championed by Rush Limbaugh and Rupert Murdoch, you are too indoctrinated already; I am not going to waste my time arguing. Plus, I had to get to Environmental Soc. After my afternoon classes were finished, I wouldn't help visiting the bake sale again. However, this time I saw surprised and delighted by what I saw there. Dozens of people spontaneously arrived to protest the College Republicans tasteless stunt. In addition to members of Amnesty International, College Democrats, the Organization for Women's Issues, Transcendence, and Vision had arrived, as well as many people I had never seen at progressive events. Some held homemade posters bearing catchy slogans like "Anti-Feminism is Half-Baked" and "Not all Feminists are Women." Others gave out free candy to feminists and allies (unsurprisingly, the pro-feminists had a much wider variety of sweets to choose from), in a stroke of PR brilliance that quite peacefully divested potential funds from the bigoted bake sale. It was truly inspiring to see so many people from all different backgrounds come together in support of feminism.

The College Republicans need to do some research next time. As a Women’s Studies major, I have met many wonderful feminists in my day, and I have read the work of many more. I have never heard of a feminist who wanted to force all women into the workplace. Feminists do not want to “destroy the family” or devalue motherhood. Contrary to popular belief, we do not even hope to replace the patriarchy with a matriarchy. And no matter what Ann Coulter says, we do not hate men. The goal of contemporary feminism (and I really should say “feminisms,” because there are many schools of feminist thought, from liberal or socialist to radical or even lesbian) is simply to ensure that all people have a voice in society, regardless of their gender, race, class, ability, and so forth. We want to make sure all people- women and men- are able to make their own decisions based on what is best for them. A true feminist would never restrict another person’s ability to choose for him or herself.

Get Out Her Vote!

Seeing as I'm not a morning person, I've kinda forgotten what 6:00 am looks like. However, this morning I was not only awake at the ungodly hour, but driving to Columbus. Why, you ask? Feminist Majority Foundation's Get Out Her Vote Ohio Summit. I went as half of a delegation representing the Organization for Women's Issues, one of BGSU's feminist groups (of which I am president, at least for three more weeks). And in spite of the fact that I was running on like, three hours of sleep, it was a great time!

As the name implies, the conference focused on the importance of women's involvement in the political process- from voting and volunteering to running for office. Speakers included OH Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, Cleveland Mayor Jane Campbell, and other women from varying levels of local government. I moderated a panel on running for office, which featured great advice from Lucas Co. Auditor Anita Lopez and and Columbus City Council member Charleta Tavares. The best thing they had to say? If you want to run for office, start with a small position (like running for the local school board) and go from there. Only run when you have a purpose (ie: you can create positive change for your community).

The opening and closing speakers were Jennifer Brunner and Jane Campbell. Both women have been working in public service for a number of years, and it was great to hear their stories. Brunner: "An election is like giving birth- it's gonna happen whether you're ready or not." Campbell was funny and gracious, and Cleveland was lucky to have her (read: screwed themselves over by not re-electing her). She once had to hide her pregnancy to get on the committee she wanted. Fun fact: there are diaper changing facilities in public rest areas because of her!

All things considered, it was a great conference and I can't wait to be more involved with politics myself (luckily, I only have to wait until May).

What's the Deal with Polygamy? (or: Take my Wives, Please!)

On Wednesday BGSU held this "health fair" on campus. I went hoping to mounge some free food, but left with tons of free condoms instead- which I see as a totally fair trade. Anyways, most of said condoms were left in my tote bag and promptly forgotten. Until this morning. After my first class (Social Psychology) I was talking with my presentation group and our prof, when one of said condoms fell out of my bag and onto the floor. Mortifying! I think only one girl noticed it, but it was still funny*.

On a more serious note, have you heard about this polygamist ranch in Texas?
I first read about it on Monday, but it grows increasingly disturbing as details continue to develop. Last weekend, authorities raided a ranch in Texas inhabited by members of the Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter Day Saints. Apparently, a sixteen year old girl called the police with reports of abuse be her much older husband. The girl has not yet been identified, but over four hundred children and one hundred and thirty-nine women were rescued from the ranch. This fundamentalist church broke away from Mormonism over a hundred years ago, apparently because they disagreed over polygamy. The Mormon Church wanted to ban polygamist practices; the Latter Day Saints disagreed.

After reading about this creepy ranch, I am filled with tons of questions. First of all, how could anyone accept such an unbalanced, misogynistic religion? As far as I can tell, women were treated like chattel. Can sixteen year old girls legally consent to marry in Texas? Did they give consent? Is consent valid if you’ve been brain-washed by a creepy, cultish religion? How many men were there for one hundred and thirty nine women (or, what was the average number of wives per husband)? How did so many people fly under the radar for so long?

Maybe I have a harder time comprehending such an event because I am not a religious person. But I really think this is more of a cult than a religion. I know lots of Christians (and Mormons, for that matter) who would have similarly revolted feelings regarding middle-aged men sleeping with teen girls. Statutory rape is still rape, even if the rapist is invoking the name of God.

*I actually don't think incidents like the one (ie: getting caught with contraception) above should be anything to get embarrassed about. Healthy practices should be commended, right? Even if it is a sociology professor who catches you.

**Photo taken from the HBO series Big Love, in which Bull Paxton plays a man- with three wives.

Ivy League Abstinence Clubs

So, this is totally a paper I wrote for Psych of Gender, but I think it's relevant. Enjoy!

A recent issue of the New York Times Sunday Magazine featured an article that I found a little disturbing, although not altogether surprising given the current administration’s anti-sex policies. According to Randall Patterson, virginity clubs are rising in popularity at Ivy League universities. His article, “Students of Virginity”, focuses primarily on True Love Revolution, Harvard’s own pro-abstinence organization. Lead by president Janie Fredell, these celibate men and women are “pushing, for reasons entirely secular, the cause of premarital sexual abstinence.” Fredell states that she is disgusted with the “hook up culture” saturating not only college campuses but also mainstream society at large. She describes the sentiments of the majority of her peers as “men pushing for sex, just to have something to say in the locker room, [and] women feeling pressured to have sex in order to maintain a relationship.” Although Fredell believes that all women should abstain until marriage, she argues that her position is a feminist one. She believes that men use sex to control women and their bodies:
“People just don’t get it” Fredell said. “Everyone thinks we’re trying to promote this idea of the meek little virgin female.” She said she was doing no such thing. . .
[Fredell] said she read in Mill that women are subordinated in relationships as a result of “socially constructed norms.” If men are commonly more promiscuous than women, it is only because the culture allows it, she said. Fredell was here to turn society around.”‘It’s extremely countercultural,” she said, for a woman to assert control over her own body.
In other words, Fredell is describing the cultural double standard that encourages sexual promiscuity in men, yet discourages it in women. Too many people still believe in the age-old virgin-whore dichotomy when it comes to sexually active women. Yet Fredell chooses to reinforce said dichotomy, rather than fighting the stereotypes that feed it.
Fredell traces the difference in male and female sexual behavior to psychological make-up. More specifically, they point to a greater presence in women of oxitocin, the hormone released during both sex and breast-feeding. According to Patterson:
True Love Revolution gives it the utmost significance, claiming on its Web site that the hormone’s “powerful bonding” effect can be “a cause of joy and marital harmony” but that outside of marriage it can create “serious problems.” Released arbitrarily, it can blur “the distinction between infatuation and lasting love,” the Web site cautions, making rational mating decisions difficult.
As I mentioned briefly, I am disturbed by Janie Fredell’s insistence on reinforcing the virgin-whore dichotomy. Mustn’t there be a healthy middle ground? I refuse to believe that the issue of women’s sexuality is so strictly black or white. I first read about “Students of Virginity” on Feministing.com, a feminist news blog. In response to this story, blogger Jessica Valenti, who identifies the “abstinence-only, modesty, chastity, or whatever they're calling it at the moment” movement as “bad for women”, has what I believe to be a healthier view. In a blog post entitled “Ivy League Hymens: Why Glorifying Virginity is Bad for Women”, Valenti states: “isn't the problem the double standard - not the sex? If we don't like that women ‘suffer’ from sexual double standards, how is not having sex fighting back?”
Wanting to hear more about Valenti’s ideas concerning how women can have a healthy sex life without glorifying their virginity, I turned to her book Full Frontal Feminism: A Young Woman’s Guide to Why Feminism Matters. I found that Fredell and Valenti agree on how the current climate regarding sex can enable men in controlling women’s bodies: “We’re all trapped by the limiting version of sexuality that’s put out there- a sexuality that caters almost exclusively to men” (Valenti 42). The founding mother of Feministing.com, Valenti has a masters degree in women’s and gender studies from Rutgers University and has worked with both global and national women’s organizations, including NARAL Pro-Choice America. As a reproductive rights activist, Valenti works to promote safer sex practices, as well as a more empowered female sexuality than the restrictive one demanded by Janie Fredell.
In her book, Valenti also sufficiently describes how the old negative double standard affects the modern women. “If we don’t approve of the porn culture that tells us our only value is in our ability to be sexy, we’re prudes. If we accept it and embrace it, we’re sluts” (Valenti 43). However, Valenti fails to describe what a healthier middle ground would look like. Yet where she falters, journalist Ariel Levy steps in.
In her 2005 book Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture, Levy critiques “the new brand of ‘empowered woman’ who. . . embraces raunch culture wherever she finds it.” Simply put, today’s sexually ‘empowered women’ makes a sex object out herself and other women. This is what Janie Fredell and True Love Revolution describe as “hook-up culture.” Yet Levy manages to have an empowered sex life without abstaining:
If we are really going to be sexually liberated, we need to make room for a desire of options as wide as the variety of human desire. We need to allow ourselves the freedom to figure out what we internally want from sex instead of mimicking whatever popular culture holds up to us as sexy. . .
If we believed that we were sexy and funny and competent and smart, we would not need to be like strippers or like men or like anyone other than our own specific, individual selves. That won’t be easy, but ultimately it would be no more difficult than the kind of contortions FCPs are constantly performing. . . More importantly, the rewards would be the very things Female Chauvinist Pigs want so desperately, the things women deserve: freedom and power (Levy 200).
Levy argues that it is quite possible to have a healthy, empowered sex life without buying into popular culture’s message of what it means to be sexual. Women can “assert control over their own bodies” without giving up all forms of sexual pleasure. In doing so, we are tearing down the socially constructed norms that allow women to be routinely subordinated in relationships. Valenti asks “if we don't like that women ‘suffer’ from sexual double standards, how is not having sex fighting back?” and here Levy provides an eloquent answer.
So now we know how contemporary feminists respond to Fredell’s assertion that abstinence (and she does mean abstinence from all forms of sexual activity- when asked if she masturbated, Fredell replied “Oh, God, no!”) is the only path to sexual empowerment for women, I would like to scientifically address some of True Love Revolution’s beliefs. I simply do not believe that a majority of men see sexual activity as nothing more than “something to talk about in the locker room.” Similarly, I refuse to believe that a significant percentage of sexually active women engage in the behavior only because they feel pressured to maintain a relationship. In order to find data on how today’s young men and women feel about their sexuality, I turned to the book Human Sexuality: Diversity in Contemporary America (Strong, DeVault, Sayad, and Yarber, 2005). After doing some more research, I found that men and women are not as different in their sexual attitudes and behaviors as Fredell asserts.
According to Strong et. al., the moral standard of non-marital sexuality held by the majority of today’s students is known as “permissiveness with affection,” which “describes sex between [partners] who have a stable, loving relationship” (Strong 191). In other words, most college-age adults do not buy into the “hook-up” culture that Fredell believes is plaguing our campuses. They do have premarital sex, but tend to do so in the form of serial monogamy. According to research conducted by the authors, “Americans are largely exclusive.” The median number of sex partners for men and women since age eighteen is not very high, with six for men and two for women. Men do have a slightly larger lifetime median; perhaps this is simply because women still internalize the cultural message that it is not alright for women to assert their sexuality. Regardless of the reason, the difference itself is not very significant (Strong 191).
Strong et. al., also explore the Youth Risk Behavior Survey, a survey of 13,601 high school students conducted by the Center for Disease Control and Pervention. The 2001 YRBS shed an interesting light on Fredell’s beliefs regarding the prevalence of hook-up culture. “Forty-six percent of students (forty-three percent of females and forty-nine percent of males) reported having had sexual intercourse during their lifetime,” yet only “fourteen percent of students (eleven percent of females and seventeen percent of males) report having had sexual intercourse with four or more partners during their lifetime” (Strong 57). While we do not know for sure how many of these teens were having sex within a relationship, we do know that most of them are being a little more discerning regarding partner selection. The statistical differences between male and female behaviors are not very high- never more than six percent, in the cases referenced.
The data gathered from Human Sexuality demonstrated that men and women may not be as different as Fredell suggested. Jessica Valenti and Ariel Levy argued that it is possible for women to find a healthy middle ground somewhere between the virgin-whore dichotomy. As a sexually active adult female, I believe that I myself fit this healthier middle ground. I share Fredell’s disgust over the hook-up culture that some of my peers perpetuate. However, I have still managed to have a healthy sex life. Since losing my virginity at age eighteen, I have had only a small number of partners (four). I’ve made informed choices about practicing safer sex, always using at least two forms of birth control and getting tested for infections regularly. I am also discerning about whom I sleep with; I have never randomly “hooked-up” or had a one night stand. I have only had sex within the confines of a stable, loving relationship (aka permissiveness with affection). I have never given into a partner’s sexual demands because I “felt pressured to save the relationship.” In fact, I have never felt pressured by a partner to have sex. Fredell’s assertion of the values driving men and women is grossly over simplified. It is quite possible for women- and men- to have a healthy, empowered sex life without giving up sexual activity altogether; I myself have been living proof for the last four years. I am not trying to say that my experiences are true for everyone. Rather, it would be impossible to find one prescription that fits for everybody. As Levy said, “we need to make room for a desire of options as wide as the variety of human desire. We need to allow ourselves the freedom to figure out what we internally want from sex.” We are not automatically whores if we choose not to stay virgins. Both men and women need room to explore in order to determine their own healthy, empowered sexuality.

Works Cited

Levy, Ariel. Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture. Free Press. New York, NY 2005.

Patterson, Randall. “Students of Virginity” New York Times Sunday Magazine. 30 March, 2008.

Strong, Brian, Christine DeVault, Barbara W. Sayad, and William J. Yarber. Human Sexuality: Diversity in Contemporary America. McGraw-Hill. New York, Ny 2005.

Valenti, Jessica. Full Frontal Feminism: A Young Woman’s Guide to Why Feminism Matters. Seal Press. California, 2007.