Though I have taken a break from the computer, I have managed to compile a list of noteworthy items.

1. Alternet brings us two retrospectives on 2004, Arianna Huffington’s list of Things to Forget and the Top Ten Conspiracy Theories of 2003-04. My favorite is the “conspiracy” that the war on Iraq is not about control of natural resources. In my circle, we call that propaganda.

2. The Stepford Way: a female fantasy? Amanda of Mousewords has plenty to say on the notion of the general attractiveness of female submission.
3. A guest blogger at Buzz, Balls, and Hype examines Mommy Lit, big sister to Chick Lit, and the notion that motherhood is not interesting to those who aren’t mothers. (And for that matter, that literary accounts of women’s experiences aren’t as interesting as men’s.)
4. Sixteen Tons of Fun: Dave Eggers of “A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius” writes on Monty Python. I received Eggers’ most recent work, “How We Are Hungry,” for Christmas and it is wonderful, better than his sophomoric effort.
5. New to my blogroll is Whirled View, a blog by three highly credentialed women on liberal and progressive politics. Patricia Kushlis writes Selling Cars, Colas and Countries.
   People in the White House and Pentagon are baffled. According to The New York Times on December 13, American policy makers can?t understand why a country able to market cars and colas to people deeply hostile to the U.S. can’t also “sell its democratic ideals” to them. Madison Avenue is infamous for its ability to persuade people to buy things they don’t need and can’t afford, and yet, our leaders observe, the U.S. falls short in persuading most Arabs (or even most Europeans) that the Iraq invasion was a good idea.

   The Bush administration has been fixated from day one on the “marketing” and “sales” models for influencing foreign publics. Soon after the inaugural a successful ad woman was appointed to head up the Public Diplomacy section of the State Department. To the surprise only of those who recruited her, the lady failed to generate a love fest for America in the Middle East. So she’s gone; wanted to spend more time with the family or something like that, the usual pretext for the departure of a high level political appointee.

   Why am I not surprised or baffled? [more]

6. And finally a fun link, Bollywood for the Skeptical. I have been drawn into the glory of Bollywood this year after taking two movie-heavy classes on South Asian culture. If you don’t know where to start, begin downloading the songs from the 1950s and 60s and anything performed by Lata Mangeshkar. You won’t be disappointed. While you’re at it, rent the 2001 Academy Award nominee “Lagaan” over the new year.

Happy New Year to all! Be safe and smart, as all of you undoubtedly are, over the holiday weekend.

Unfortunately, I underestimated just how awfully slow this dial-up connection here is in backwoods Small Town America (TM), so I’ve dug up an oldy but a goodie post of mine from Brutal Women, and I’m posting it here for your enjoyment.

Cheers…

On Merit. And Sex. Of Course.

So, it bugged Amanda and Echidne, too, which I find quite funny, because when I hopped over to Kos’s place and read his justification for the lack of PC diversity among his guestbloggers, something in me went, “Huh?” too. Amanda explored the issue further, I think, in this post about the democratic party’s seeming reluctance to forward a progressive agenda for women.

Kos’s comment actually read a lot like the backlash against affirmative action. I would love it if we lived in a world where merit alone really decided whose voices we hear, but as Amanda and Echidne pointed out, we don’t live there. Bringing in a voice that comes at issues from a new and different perspective (non-white, non-male, non-Christian) is a merit in itself.

Now, I’m not going to harp on Kos, because blogs are, of neccessity, very personal endeavors, and you have a right to run them the way you want to: but if you’re looking to put forward voices for progressive change and you take out women - those bold, powerful women and minorities whose campaigns for equal rights shook up this country so enourmously and so quickly in the 60s and 70s, then you’re missing a whole lot of shit. You’re missing the whole point. You’re not looking to change the world, you’re just looking to change your own place in it. And when you’re on top, you’ll switch sides and go conservative, because you’ve altered the system so that you and your white male buddies are in charge, instead of rich guys like Bush and his buddies.

Shuffling around old white men within the same power heirarchy isn’t getting any of us anywhere. It’s got the dollar dropping, healthcare sucking wind, social security going out the window, and a backlash against women’s rights that’s been steadily getting worse (in some circles) since the 80s.

Because what are we really talking about, when we talk about these “huge issues” “dividing” the country? Sure, the war in Iraq is huge. The war on terrorism is huge. But creating Big Bad Enemies is supposed to unite a country, not divide it.

The issues that were put up front to handwave people away from the war are the two big issues that people in the US are now most passionate about, and clawing at each other about: abortion/reproductive rights and homosexuality.

Let’s get that straight (ha), once and for all. The attacks on freedoms have to do with women. Yes, yes, terrorism is a big issue, and racism, and I don’t want to forget those - but reproductive rights and attacking homosexuality and preaching Back to Bible Basics is about controlling women.

Gay men are scary because the conception of “gay men” in red-staters heads likely brings to mind anal sex (whether or not said men engage in anal sex), and the gender binary says that means one of them’s gotta be passive, one of them’s gotta be the woman. Which means any man can be passive. Any man can be the woman. And in a society whose fear and disgust for women is shared by many women who spent their childhoods believing they could grow up to be “real” people, this is a terrible revelation.

And there’s nothing scarier to people who love to argue biological and/or Bible determinism than two women who not only can support themselves, raise children together, and provide one another emotional support, but don’t need men around for sex either, cause they’re quite fulfilled all on their own.

That’s some scary shit.

And, scarier than that: women who can decide to have children or not. Women who decide, therefore, whether or not a man has children.

That’s why people are angry about abortion. That’s why the father’s rights freak-outs are freaking out.

Women control fertility. Children don’t come out of thin air. They’re created OF a woman’s body: her blood, the food she eats, the air she breathes. That’s what makes a baby. A woman. Men submit a string of DNA, which triggers a chemical reaction inside of the egg, and the egg begins to divide itself. An egg is cells. Dividing cells attach to the wall of the uterus. Attaches back to the woman. And it’s women’s bodies that take over from there. Life depends on women. Life is women.

Get over it.

This pisses people off. It’s always pissed people off.

If the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world, then the people who control women control the world.

That’s why controlling women is a major part of pretty much all major religions. That’s why women should be quiet in church, and obey their husbands, and not fall in love with women.

And yea, this world doesn’t benefit all men. There are lots of geeky guys who don’t want to be violent, and hurt people, and be mean to women, and play sports, and rule the world. There are a lot of guys who really do want to just have friends, and love people. In fact, I think most people are like that, male or female. If we let sex be more social and less romantic-kill-me-I’m-dying-you-must-marry-me-cause-I’m-lonely/pregnant/can’t do my own laundry, then I think we’d be getting back to what the hell sex is really about in the first place. There’s a reason women’s clitorises are outside of the vagina, and a reason 70-80% of women don’t have orgasims with penetrative sex alone.

Sex isn’t all about procreation.

::gasp::

The biological “facts” about men and women like to ignore the clitoris, and the fact that men can get off just fine without a vagina.

Sex is about keeping people together, forming social connections, it’s about showing affection. And when women are allowed to control their sexuality, when they decide that no, maybe, they’ll live in a house of women and raise children, or a house with some guy friends and some girlfriends, or a house by themselves, they have the power to cut men out of the affection loop, and eventually, the children loop, if they so choose.

This is real power. And women are raised to believe their bodies are wacky, abberant, dirty, disgusting, bloody, awful, fat things.

The bodies that could rule the world.

We’re told we don’t have merit. We don’t have voices, because if we were really all that good, obviously, someone would have noticed us. If we were quieter, prettier, if we preached violent foreign policy, men would like us, and if we parrotted their own views back at them, we’d be allowed to talk.

We would talk about what they wanted to talk about: We’d stop talking so much about those silly bloody uteruses that are so obviously so bloody fucking unimportant that the women carrying said uteruses have been the targets of rage, hatred, and Biblical control for most of recorded history.

In fact, women’s issues are so completely frivolous that men don’t even talk about them, except to harp about how women being able to take care of themselves and kiss each other is biologically abberant because it leaves men out, and how women should be forced to carry around a man’s strand of DNA until her body creates a child with it because “killing” a man’s DNA is so much more awful than forcing women into slavery for said DNA.

Yes, we’ve been over this before. Women bloggers aren’t read because in addition to screaming at the world and talking about healthcare and politics, they talk about their uteruses, and talking about uteruses doesn’t interest men.

In fact, it doesn’t interest anyone at all.

That’s why entire religions, social mores, and scientific theories have been built up to control them.

Women have no merit at all.

I don’t know why I didn’t see it sooner: being a woman, and all.

This is old-ish news, but I don’t want it to fall off the collective map.

One hundred and fifty sexual abuse cases are under investigation by the United Nations, and the offenders are the peacekeepers themselves.

From the NYTimes:

Accusations include rape, prostitution and pedophilia, and there is photographic and videographic evidence for some.

The NYTimes article also exposes one of the more uncomfortable aspects of this kind of widespread allegation, that some of the teen girls interviewed were comfortable with and liked the sex-for-money exchange with their foreign “boyfriends.”

Nonetheless, the most salient point is that even those designated to promote and preserve peace in war zones are not above the economic and sexual exploitation of war refugees. Even if those refugees are children. Should I be surprised?

The UN, already under extreme criticism from right-wing groups that endorse abandonment of the UN by the United States, cannot afford this loss of credibility. Most importantly, the refugees cannot afford to lose international support.

Related Reading: The UN position on women and violence.

In my opinion, two of the best movies ever made are Ridley Scott’s Alien and the sequel to it, James Cameron’s Aliens.

I grew up watching Aliens all the time, but until last night I’d never gotten to see the original, Alien. A digitally remastered director’s cut of it, however, is currently on limited release in theatres so I jumped on the opportunity to see it on the big screen (even though I had to drive 60+ miles to Denver to do so). Suffice to say that I was floored and am half-way contemplating driving out to see it again next weekend.

So this is just a little post to say that if it’s showing in your town, or even if it isn’t, take some time out of your day to watch Alien. It is one of the best feminist movies I’ve seen (arguably; I think the sexual symbolism in the movie can be interpreted in multiple ways, but I think that the movie comes down firmly on the side of women as being smart, mature, compassionate, assertive, and worthy of respect), and is certaintly one of the best movies of any genre I’ve ever seen.

(On a related note: It’s not scary. Why the hell do people say it’s a horror movie? Because people die, it’s claustrophobic, and there’s a lot of tension? I could say that about a movie about the trenches of World War I, but few would call it a horror movie.)

While browsing around at Wired Magazine I came across this article about MAdGE, a New Zealand group opposed to genetic engineering, and their latest ad campaign revolving around billboards with this picture of a woman with four breasts hooked up to a milking machine.

The article and ad both caught my eye, and I was curious as to what Alas readers would think of it. Is the image degrading to women? Is there such a thing as “punk art” that can be degrading in order to promote a cause that the advertiser believes is just? This ad strikes me as being of a different character than the infamous PETA supermodel ads, but I haven’t entirely made my mind up about it and will have to think about it a bit more.

I don’t want this to turn into a debate about genetic engineering, but I’d like to hear what people think of this ad.

1. Drop by Lost in Translation, a site that specializes in making fun of translating software by turning it against itself. The site uses some sort of technological thing beyond my ability to comprehend to translate a phrase so many times that it makes even less sense than Engrish.

For example, something like this:

Becomes this nugget of clarity:

2. For those of you who remember Transformers, one of the better-written animated television series to come from this side of the Pacific, or for those of you who just want to see something a bit different, check out amateur-made but professional-looking movie clip of a new Volkswagon Beetle transforming into a giant robot.

3. Buy a CD (or download some MP3s if you’re a scurvy mate), or, alternatively, just stare at your empty (or in Amp’s case dearly departed) wallet and wish that you could buy a CD. This weekend I’ll be listening to M83’s Dead Cities, Red Seas & Lost Ghosts, Dntel’s Life Is Full of Possibilities, My Bloody Valentine’s Loveless, and Jóhann Jóhannsson’s Englabörn. What can I say? I’m in the mood for static and electronics, I guess.

4. See if you can come up with six ways in which this picture doesn’t look like a modern Gap or Abercrombie ad. And, yes, the fact that she’s clothed in the first place counts as a difference. (Bonus! If you want to prove to yourself that you’re more culturally literate than I, see if you can recognize the woman in the photograph without being told who she is.)

5. Read a study about the forces required to drag sheep across various surfaces, the (scientifically validated) uniquely simple personalities of politicians, the composition of belly-button lint, and how to make frogs and sumo wrestlers hover, courtesy of the Ig® Nobel Prizes. (I think my favourite story from there is the one about the village of the dead in India.)

6. Learn about and experience some truly wonderful optical illusions at Sandlot Science. Be warned, though, that the site is pretty Java-intensive so it might be problematic for persons with abnormal browsers (i.e., not Netscape or Internet Explorer) or persons with slower connections. I used to have a really great optical illusion page in my bookmarks, but unfortunately it’s slipped away into that great chasm that inevitably develops between a new computer and an old one.

7. Have some fun with Google and Ogden’s Basic English: go to a word list for Basic English; pick a few words at random; run a Google search for those words using the “I’m Feeling Lucky” button; see what sort of interesting things you can find out about. For instance, a search for “industry goat development” takes me to this abstract (in PDF form) from the International Goat Association (who knew there was such an association?) about the “Role and Strategy of Goat Rearing Industry in Poverty Alleviation and Development.”

I promise to post something a bit more serious on Monday. Until then, have fun!