bad feminist. roxane gay. (234)

i, first came across roxane gay's collection of essays, bad feminist, via flavorpill.  i didn't give it much thought but after she was all over my instagram feed (i follow a lot of bookish accounts), i decided i needed to check it out.  and i am glad i did!  this is a must read for every woman  . . . and man too.

i consider myself a feminist, i believe that women are not the weaker sex and should be treated the same as men.  women should not be restricted by the boundaries that society had deemed appropriate and acceptable for them.  i took a women studies course at ucla and did very well in it (i should have minored in women studies.) i have made it a point to read more women authors this year.  it's not a title, most people associated me with, but feminist is one that i would proud about if labeled it.  (and this is prior to bey making it cool to be a feminist.)

however, i do realize that like gay, i am a bad feminist.  and like gay, i embrace that title.  as gay shared,

i embrace the label of bad feminist because i am human.  i'm messy.  i'm not trying to be an example.  i am not trying to be perfect.  i am not trying to say i have all the answers.  i am not trying to say i'm right.  i am just trying--trying to support what i believe in, trying to do some good in the world, trying to make some noise with my writing while being myself:  a woman who loves pink and likes to get freaky and sometimes dances her ass off to music, she "knows" is terrible for women and who sometimes plays dumb with repairmen because it's easier to let them feel macho than it is to stand on the moral high ground.

this felt spot on.  i do believe in equality between sexes but love it when men open doors for me and if on a date, i do expect them to pay for dinner.  if i am carrying something heavy and with a male, i expected him to carry it for me.  it doesn't make me less of a feminist, just human.

the term bad feminist allows for these inconsistencies not only with us as humans but also feminism as a movement.   feminism, like all movements, covers a variety of concerns and issues, gay's point is that in order to be a feminist you don't need to be true to everything, but simply believe in the progression of women's rights.  she does point out that feminism is flawed with its lack of concern for women of color and homosexuals.  however, though it is flawed, gay is hopefully that her voice along with others will help create room for everyone within feminism.

before i go, i must add that as i read the intro, i felt bad about my judging of beyonce.  my dislike of beyonce came with an anthem that i should have loved, "run the world (girls)."  i felt like she was stealing other artists' thunder, the cool funky part of this song was actually major lazer and then she performed that billboard awards she totally copied another artist.  all this left a bad taste in my mouth.  then, the whole feminist thing seemed more like a marketing ploy than anything else.  i mean it was great that she sampled chimamanda nogzi adichie, because the world needed to hear that ted talk and read her novels.  i read americanah because of "flawless". however, i felt like adichie's words were being bastardized by the context beyonce put them in.  how does "my man made me feel so god damn fine, i'm flawless!" align with the discussion women not fighting for or finding worth in the attention from men.  and as my cousin kristel pointed out, doesn't "bow down bitches" go against adichie's words that women should not be in competition with one a other.  for these reasons, my dislike began to grow.  also the music video for "pretty hurts" was so self-righteous, yes i am sure beyonce struggled with her body and it not finding into the model mold, but lets get serious, she now has designers creating for her, so can she not preach about the world putting pressure on women to be pretty in her couture.  the fashion industry she shows off via her dazzling outfits is the beast that feeds these high standards of beauty.  however, gay made me realize that i was being a bad feminist for critiquing bey like this.  it is ignorant of me to expect her to be perfect, so bey, i am sorry.  also, i should be grateful that she has made it so that girls and women today are not afraid to be labelled a feminist.

just like i don't always agree with beyonce, it was the same with gay.  for the most part, i agreed with points she made however, i did reach some points where i lost interest in what she had to say.  but regardless of how i felt, i was engaged, i loved her writing style and her witty little quips made me feel like we could be friends.

the essays are divided into the following sections:  [me], [gender & sexuality], [race & entertainment], [politics, gender & race].

[me] as expected discussed gay, her work and her hobby, competitive scrabble.  yes, competitive scrabble, that essay was a hoot and gay is good!

the first essay in this section discussed her work as a professor and what she encountered as an advisor for a black students association.  she also explained how a co-workers remark about affirmative action drove her to work hard, ultimately gaining her ph.d but still worried she isn't good enough.  

the second essay, "peculiar beliefs" made the interesting point of everyone neglecting to recognize their privilege and only wanting to focus on their oppression.  though i am a person of color, a female and came from a single parent home and lived in a rural area, i was aware that i was privileged growing up.  this knowledge came via kids pointing out the material goods (aka nike shoes and guess jeans) that i had in elementary school.  we weren't rich but i was privileged for the area.  i also had a family that was very involved and cared about my education.  now i am not saying that i life the high life, but just demonstrating the fact that i never saw myself as disadvantaged.  as gay called out her readers at the end, "if you are reading this essay, you have some kind of privilege . . . if you cannot recognize your privilege, you have a lot of work to do; get started."

[gender & sexuality] cover just that.  the first essay, "how to be friends with a another woman" is a definite must read!  i wanted to copy it and share it with all of my friends, primarily to thank them for being just great friends!  just great sound advice.  i even instagramed my favorite:

the second essay "girls, girls, girls", as i was anticipating, discussed hbo's "girls" and i understand all of gay's critiques, but still think "girls" is the best,  gay's brings up the color issue which i have discussed before, but just add some food for thought because gay also discussed how women need a television show that shows women with their act together.  to which i say but that is not the point of "girls".  dunham created the show to demonstrate what life is like for twentysomethings now and i think she is spot on.  i am a thirtysomething but see my past messy self in the girls of "girls".  secondly, it's unfortunate because the lack of diversity on show is not due to dunham's racism but probably from the lack of diversity in her action life.  and i don't hate her for it, it's just a reality of life.  i have always had very diverse group of friends, but not everyone is like that.  people tend to stick to their own race, it's unfortunate but it happens.  also growing up, i never new any jewish people so a depiction of my life would exclude jewish people but it shouldn't make that work anti-semitic, it is simply a reflection of the reality that i knew.  gay recognized that it is unfair to expect "girls" to be everything to everyone and that we have put an unjust demand for it to be inclusive.  and that the real issue is that programming as a whole needs to change.  i have to add that gay mentioned "girlfriends" in his article, and how it showed women of color being responsible and having jobs.  i really need to start watching it, i hope netflix or hulu pick it up to show.

in "i was once miss america", gay plays tribute to the girls of "sweet valley high". i read part of that series but was not into like gay was into it.  and though reading the novel as a haitian girl, she was able to identify with the twins of sweet valley.  as she explained, "some experiences are universal.  a girl is a girl whether she lives in omaha or sweet valley."

in "garnish, glorious spectacles", i recognized how bad my television guilty pleasures, bravo's housewives and all of the celebreality vh1 shows, truly were, not due to it being bad television, but the horrible, female stereotypes it upheld.  gay loved these shows too, so i don't feel as bad.  but it is horrible how we watch these shows to feel better about herself and be thankful that we aren't such train wrecks.  and in the end, gay points out that perhaps we watch it because its actual a reflection of ourselves.  

in "the careless language of sexual violence", i was appalled to learn about how the new york times framed the gang-raping of an 11 year old girl as the victim's fault and sympathized with the rapist.  i'm not always up to date on current events, so this was not on my radar when it happened.  however, i did google and read the article and other posts about it.  i still can not believe that the nyt allowed for this story to be ran.  i will add that i am thankful to life in an each in which i can google a story and also see all of the critiques of it as well in a search.

another thing that i did not agree with gay, her love of the hunger games trilogy.  though her love for these works, kind of makes me want to actual finish all three books.  i read the hunger games on the advice of friends before the movies and all the hoopla around it.  i, for one, did not enjoy it.  there was a lot of living going on for something that was suppose to be a fight to the death.  i mean i get it, its a young adult novel, but i was still disappointed that it turned into some kind of weird love story.  so i saw the first movie, and actually enjoyed it more.  then just stopped caring about the hunger games.  however, now i feel like i should read it, because katniss is a good role model for girls, as gay pointed out.  so i feel like i should read them in the name of girls that rock!

i am so thankful that gay wrote "dear young ladies who love chris brown so much that they would let him beat them".  i, for one, do not understand how chris brown is still famous and how women still love him.  this article addresses my confusion.

"blurred lines, indeed" made me feel so bad.  i absolutely loved "blurred lines" when it came out.  it was my jam, i once had a dj play it for me twice in one night.  i loved the beat and it was catchy and the lyrics were funny.  however, i did not realize just how misogynistic it was, okay, maybe i did, but i still loved to dance to it.  i like the music but i i hate the message.  i know i can solve this problem by not listening to it, at the same time its just music.  though gay points out that this "lighten up" mentality does not alleviate these problems.  i guess i can just hope for a future in which misogynistic undertones in pop culture will go away because it has gone away in our culture.

gay discussed the 50 shades of gray trilogy, and all i can say, is how did women read that crap?  i mean i am glad that women were reading, but seriously there was nothing sexy about a controlling man.  controlling in the bedroom, if you are into bdsm life style yes.  but controlling as in buying the company you work for and wanting to know where you are all the time, is just frightening and women should not tolerate it just because the sex is good.  i have never read it, and now i never will.   i will add, this essay discussed how prince charming is just an illusion and that women need to understand that they can not change men and if a man is not treating you as he should be, you need to get out of that relationship.

on last note about this section, in it gay discussed in pieces, how she was a victim of sexual violence as a young girl.  at the risk of sounding insensitive or using the wrong words, just wanted to share that i appreciate her allowing the reader into such a private matter.  her writing on it felt therapeutic though i can't speak for her.  i will add that she did create an environment in which her readers that are victims of sexual violence can feel comfort in knowing that they are not alone. 

[race & entertainment], this collection of essays, is where i disagreed with gay the most.  primarily, because i see movies as entertainment and though it is insensitive of me, just felt like sometimes you have to take movies just as an escape then rather analyze everything.  and i know that movies influence how we frame the world and also reflect how we frame the world, but i felt she was being too critical in this section,

[politics, gender & race].  her article "when twitter does what journalism can't" gay demonstrated the power of twitter.  again i am bad with the current events, but so i learned about senator wendy davis' filibuster the next day.  however, gay learned of it via twitter thanks to one activist that live tweeted the filibuster.  gay also explained that the larger networks did not cover it, but there was a livefeed via youtube, where she was able to watch it.  it is shocking how much of our news gets shared via twitter and facebook.  i have mentioned before in post that i always get my celebrity death news via twitter.  oh and just wanted to add kudos to senator davis for being an amazing woman!!!

"the inalienable rights of women" is another must read for women.  it was one that got my blood boiling because of the little control, we women have over our bodies.  and i think what is even more frustrating that there is so much discussion about birth control, yet men can just walk down to the corner store and pick up condoms whenever they want.  where is the regulation of that?!?!?  it was so upsetting to read about some states requiring women to get ultrasounds before receiving an abortion.  virginia went so far as to require transvaginal ultrasounds.  i have discussed it before, i have never been in a position in which i needed to decide whether or not i wanted an abortion.  however, i can not imagine being in that position and not only having to struggle with my making the right decision for myself but then having the government add in their ignorant two cents.  at the end of the day, it is my body and i need to make the decision that is best for me.  women need to be allowed to chose for themselves without the government interfering.  furthermore, i do agree with gay that if the government does continue to limit women's right in regards to abortions, women will go underground to take care of the situation as they have throughout history.

these are just some highlights from the essays.  gay covered a variety of issues and gave me a lot of food for thought.  this was an excellent read not only for giving voice to issues that are often ignored but for simply encouraging the reader to question the world we live in.  this novel doesn't have all the answers or solve the problems we face as society, instead it adds dialogue to ongoing discussions of gender, race, sexuality, politics, in hopes that the world will improve.     

1984. george orwell. (99)

george orwell's "1984" is on flavorpill's "30 to read before 30" and since i am two months away, i decided i need to crack down on my reading. so i picked up a copy of "1984" at the library. and before i go on, how great is this cover?!?! there was a paperback version i could have checked out but after i saw this cover, i had to read this one.

i guess i should clarify, this was my first reading of "1984". i never read it in high school, it wasn't assigned to us. my sister read it in college and i remember borrowing her copy to read but could never get into it. i tried twice. and thanks to apple and cbs, i knew about "big brother is watching" so was okay on the pop culture front. but in order to get its literary significance i needed to read it.

this book is always noted as a revolutionary novel and it is especially considering the time it was published. i remember checking the publishing year and surprised to find it was 1949. to question and portray governments in such a manner had to be shocking. however, as interesting as the concept of this novel is, i still became bored with it, there were points were i was like, get on with the story already.

let me clarify, i was not bored by the segments on oceania but by some of the story plots. i loved learning about the society of "1984" and how it worked. being a history major, it was interesting to see how the world we know could develop into oceania. for example, i believe that war has become more of a means of economic growth than anything else. just like in the novel, the boundaries for our countries are set, which is why we now fight for concepts like democracy and freedom and against terrorism and islam, fighting wars that truly do not have a means. i know we captured osama bin laden, but are we still at war with afghanistan? honestly, i do not know. can someone clarify this for me? my confusion is also an example of how majority of the united states is now like the "proles" when it comes to being informed about the war. we know nothing other than we need to support it and we have an enemy. also the switching back and forth between the enemies in the novel, foreshadowed what happen with the us and 9/11. i was always confused as to who our patriotism and nationalism was supposed to be directed against because i thought it was al-queida and then all of sudden, saddam hussein and iraq were targeted as enemies. another thing from the novel that reminded me of 9/11 was the labelling of things like "victory" gin or "victory" cigarettes, just like we had our "freedom" fries. and though we did not have "hate week" or "two minute hate" after 9/11, i did feel this odd peer pressure to demonstrated my patriotism via a flag. remember how everyone had flags on their cars and it was unamerican not to have one? it's scary to think of how simlilar the world was post-9/11 to "1984".

another way our world is similar to "1984" is the news and stastistics. part of winston's job was to change the figures that big brother had projected in terms of production so that production was recorded as over what bb had predicted. in the novel, winston pondered how these numbers were all arbitrary. first of all, a prediction is a prediction so if it was not accurate that is fine. why go through the point of lying especially since people know that production is low because whatever was being produced was scarce. this reminded me of our news and the stastiscs it spews at us especially in terms of health. there is always some study that shows this or that but in real life, disease strikes whoever. there is j real means of preventing things. i mean explain ozzy osborne, with how he treated his body, yet he is still alive and kicking. stastiscs are just a means of manipulating society.

last but not least, i am worried that history would be lost like in "1984". not so much because it is being rewritten but because it is not being taught. i recently subbed for a fifth grade class and they only worked on social studies for 15 minutes. i worry that the youth today do not understand the importance of history. because as orwell wrote and zach de la rocha from rage against the machine sang "who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past", so if they learn nothing, they will control nothing.

this is all praise but there were also aspects of the story that i did not enjoy. for one thing i did not like julia. it just seemed so random that her character feel in love with winston. i thought she was part of the thought police and was going to betray him. (also the fact that the shopkeeper was a thought police totally took me by surprise though in the back of my mind, i wondered how his shop was still in existence). once i figured out she wasn't, i didn't care for her character. she wasn't a rebel because of any inner longing for a better life like winston, she was a rebel just to be against the system. i hate to get all women's lib but i felt julia was an unjustly portrayal of women in revolutionary movements. julia was not fully committed to the ideologies against the party and her primary act of resistance was sex. and i am all for women gaining liberation via fulfilling their sexual appetites versus following societies virtues. however, julia demonstrated no intelligence or knowledge when it came to protest against the current system, she often became bored by what winston had to share. she even feel asleep during his reading of the book. it just seemed like a copout to make her so shallow once the real revolting started especially since she was smart enough to get goods like real coffee and sugar and had came up with routes for them to meet. and sadly throughout history women's roles in revolutions sadly get reduced down to their sexual experiences.

since we are on the topic of sex, i was shocked by how much sex was discussed in the novel. and wonder how high schools that teach this present this. or is "1984" one of those banned books? and the sex is why "1984" is banned. anyway, i found it interesting how sex is a means of control. the party takes away the sensuality of sex and turns it into a duty. i know i have discussed it before but i really feel that being raised mormon, the emphasis on purity and chastity resulted in my obedience as teen. i was so focused on being pure, i didn't date in high school. i am not saying that as a teen one should have sex. i am just saying that for me, my abstinence from sex may have been a reason for my obedience as a teen.

also i did not buy that winston was so naive about o'brien. i thought it was too convenient how it all came together. it seemed too easy to become apart of the brotherhood and felt like a trap. but i guess winston was so hopefully that he was too gullible.

last but not least i did not like the ending. i was hoping the human spirit would have prevailed. i didn't expect winston to spark a revolution but i didn't want him to give in. it was also pathetic that he gave in because of rats. i would hope that the human spirit would have been stronger. it was heartbreaking to see all hope lost. i would have been happier with winston committing suicide versus loving big brother.

i enjoyed the appendix on newspeak. it is interesting to think of how important vocabulary is in terms of expressing our views. it is also interesting to think
how lack of a vocabulary restricts our thinking. the focus on language also demonstrated how important it is to read and expand our vocabulary. it is true with my recent reading of classics, i have been about to better expressed my view of the world by using literary examples. so let this be a lesson!

after reading all of that analysis, you are probably wondering, but you said you got bored. i did simply because though
"1984" raises important questions about politics, war, government, and history for someone that is already skeptical about their government it doesn't present anything new. i was a history major and so many of the trends discussed were not new for me. however if i had read this book while in high school or during college, it would have blown my mind. so i guess instead of being a book one reads before they are 30, it actually before 25.

last but not least at the lacma, while looking at the bcam elevator, i was able to imagine what it would like to have big brother watching: