4 July, 2008 | 2 Comments

It’s the 4th of July, but I don’t feel like celebrating. Right now I’m too ashamed to be an American.

I’ve been reading about the case of LaVena Johnson, which is making the rounds in the blogosphere and left-wing media. Who is LaVena Johnson? From Salon’s blog:

In July 2005, 19-year-old Johnson became the first female soldier from Missouri to die in Iraq. She was found with a broken nose, black eye and loose teeth, acid burns on her genitals, presumably to eliminate DNA evidence of rape, a trail of blood leading away from her tent and a bullet hole in her head. Unbelievably, that’s not the most horrifying part of the story. Here’s what is: Army investigators ruled her death a suicide.

This article by Ann Wright details much more extensively the injuries Johnson suffered and how it is impossible for her to have killed herself. Johnson’s death was initially ruled a homicide, then quickly changed to suicide. The case is closed. This young woman volunteered to serve in Iraq. In return, she was beaten, raped, mutilated, murdered and set on fire by other soldiers. Rather than bringing her killers to justice, her superiors and by extension the government of the United States is complicit in her rape and savage killing. Is this what America stands for? And to think, we’re in Iraq now to bring the people democracy and teach them how to be “civilized.”

(more…)

27 June, 2008 | 1 Comment

A shock at Wimbledon yesterday, as 20-year-old Alla Kudryavtseva, the no. 154 ranked player, beat Maria Sharapova.  Bwahahaha!  Not surprisingly, Sharapova was all dressed up in her designer clothes, since her looks matter more than her game.  Kudryavtseva, on the other hand, is not one of the “glamour girls” of tennis:

“It’s very pleasant to beat Maria,” she said. “I don’t like her outfit. Can I put it this way? It was one of my motivations to beat her.”

I love it.

19 May, 2008 | 6 Comments

There are a couple articles in the NYT about Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the deep-rooted misogyny it has revealed in American society. Unless Obama turns out to be an ax murderer, I guess Hill’s campaign is over. One of the NYT articles asks:

“If many of Mrs. Clinton’s legions of female supporters believe she was undone even in part by gender discrimination, how eagerly will they embrace Senator Barack Obama, the man who beat her?”

I certainly won’t be embracing him. I am going to write in Hillary Clinton’s name on my ballot. My choice has already been made. This will be a protest vote against all those sexists in the Democratic party and the so-called “progressives” of American society who have acted in a disgraceful way throughout this entire campaign. It is also a protest against many of Obama’s supporters. During this campaign, I have been literally shunned by Obama supporters who I thought were friends. I’ve also witnessed [young white male] Obama supporters saying vile sexist things about Hillary in my presence with no qualms whatsoever, as if they are entitled to say such things because this is war and Hillary the bitch must be crushed, lest someone without a penis move into the Oval Office. I’m not too keen on Obama himself, either. The whole Obama camp leaves much to be desired and they’re all quite delusional if they think they can win this election without the support of Hillary’s voters who’ve they’ve pissed on and offended throughout this campaign. Perhaps their smug behavior is about to come back and bite them in the ass. Though I won’t be following the campaign closely, given that I’ve already made up my mind about who I am voting for, it will still be interesting to watch how this plays out.

I’ve already had Democrats warn me that if I don’t vote for Obama, I am essentially voting for McCain. First of all, I am not a Democrat and as such, I have no loyalty to the Democrats. I am no longer registered as a Democrat. Why? There are many reasons, but it’s mostly because of their spinelessness. They stand for nothing. They elected as their Senate Majority Leader a man who is “pro-life” and against gay marriage. If that doesn’t sum up the Democrats, nothing does.

Of course I am not a Republican and I would not vote Republican, but if McCain wins because me and other Hillary voters desert the Democrats, so be it. Obama and his supporters have no one to blame but themselves.

Link:

Devil in a Pantsuit or the Demonization of Hillary Clinton 

21 April, 2008 | 5 Comments

Don’t you just love this photo of Hillary Clinton currently displayed very prominently on the homepage of the Times:

I can just imagine them publishing such a photo of Obama or McCain. When Hell freezes over. This may seem like something silly, but it’s not. As someone who has worked as a photo editor and seen her fair share of contact sheets, I know for certain that a rather large percentage of photos from any shoot or spontaneous news event will look unflattering or weird like the one above. Such photos are usually always deleted, not placed on the homepage of a “reputable” newspaper like the Times. But then, Hillary Clinton is not always afforded the same respect that her male colleagues receive. For shame.

Good luck tomorrow, Hill!

16 April, 2008 | 1 Comment

</patriarchy>

hat tip

14 April, 2008 | 4 Comments

This video on YouTube is a must-see (particularly the first half).  It’s a really chilling look at the vile, misogynist mainstream media attacks against Hillary Clinton.  Just a warning for Hillary supporters: It’s very demoralizing.  The sexism we’ve seen in response to Hillary Clinton’s run for the presidency represents a disgraceful chapter in American history.  Sadly, it’s not just from right-wingers but also from so-called “liberals” and from Obama supporters.  I recently had an Obama supporter tell me Hillary would lose this nomination “because she is a bitch.”  At this point, I have no plans whatsoever to support Obama if he wins the nomination.  I obviously won’t be voting for McCain either.  Perhaps I just won’t vote.

6 April, 2008 | 4 Comments

I went to the National Portrait Gallery recently to see the exhibit on the celebrated 18th-century Bluestocking Circle, “a group of celebrated women writers, artists and thinkers who…were not just brilliant, they were exceptional, both for their individual accomplishments and for breaking the boundaries of what women could be expected to undertake or achieve.”

I’m fascinated by the Bluestockings. The exhibit, while quite small, is very educational and worth seeing (and has free admission). There’s a companion book that I’m tempted to go back and buy.

I aspire to be a Bluestocking myself, at least in spirit. Only this morning I said to the men with whom I was eating breakfast here in the hall: “I’m a sophisticated woman of letters who’s been stuck here all year with you jerk offs!” Brilliant women are never appreciated in their own time…

30 March, 2008 | 11 Comments

I’m a little late on this, but I wanted to write something about the state visit to the UK last week by Nicolas Sarkozy and Carla Bruni. The media and politicians made fools of themselves by falling all over “Mrs. Sarkozy.” It was sad, really. Apparently MPs were all dying to get a glimpse of her. Her image was splashed across the front page of every newspaper and she was the subject of endless column inches. Political news took a backseat to what Bruni was wearing, from her laughable Jackie Kennedy imitation to her shoes (featured on the front page of The Independent, above). Based on the coverage, you would think that Britain is just some hillbilly backwater where they’ve never seen a woman with a full set of teeth.

I really doubt the average person on the street gave a care about any of this. I certainly have no interest in Bruni and I don’t understand the allure of someone who looks like a cat. I’ve been thinking about the hysteria she caused, though, and why people reacted the way they did.

The British news media views women in a very simplistic way — women are either saintly models of womanhood or whores (or, even better, crazy-whores). There’s really no in-between. The Queen: Saintly. Camilla Parker-Bowles: Whore. Heather Mills: Crazy-Whore. Angelina Jolie: Originally a Crazy-Whore, now firmly a Saint. Princess Diana: Originally a Saint, but then a Crazy-Whore. Most female victims of crime in this country are reduced to one of these categories as well. Meredith Kercher: Saintly. Scarlett Keeling: Whore. [Ladies, for a bit of fun, imagine you were brutally strangled to death by a psycho. How would the British tabloids portray you? Saint or Whore? Hmmmm?]

(more…)

8 March, 2008 | Comments

Today I went to a demonstration in Trafalgar Square to end male violence against women. It was rainy and dreary outside, but I was glad to mark the day in some way.

5 March, 2008 | 5 Comments

Yay Hillary!  I think she’ll go all the way. I can feel it.

You know what annoys me? Women who think that by voting for Obama, they are somehow proving their feminist credentials. It’s like, “See, I’m such a feminist that I’m voting against the female candidate!” Oh, how clever. You know what I say to this?

Yawn.

Meanwhile, my favorite quote of the day:

“Come on guys; I answered like eight questions.”

–Barack Obama in response to being grilled, for once, by the media. He said this before he walked out of a press conference while being shouted at by reporters.

Gotta love it!

11 January, 2008 | 9 Comments

I’m already sick of election coverage and it’s only January 11th. Sigh. I’m also…sick, but then who isn’t sick right now?

Most of the election coverage on both sides of the Atlantic has been barf-inducing and breaks down roughly as follows:

Obama = America’s only hope for change, an Oprah-endorsed modern-day Jesus, the answer to all of our prayers

Hillary = bitch

I think that about sums it up, at least observing it from over here. It’s been sickening.

Yesterday the Times, also known as The Misogynist Times, featured a front-page headline about Hillary’s New Hampshire victory that said ‘Liberated’ - Women voters seize the day. The print version featured a very unflattering and creepy photo of two fiftysomething white women embracing in happiness. The headline and cover image had the feel of a horror movie about it and you know what, I love it! There’s tons of coverage like this all over the place and what it represents is the worst nightmare of The Patriarchy™. It’s fun to watch them squirm. The fact that women might use their collective power as voters — finally — is scaring the hell out of them. They dreaded this day and they are wetting their panties in fear. This is why a vote for Hillary is so great. It’s a vote to f–k them up.

(more…)

11 December, 2007 | 13 Comments

Dear Editor,

Since you are the editor, I assume you approved the absolutely sickening, misogynist article up on the Times website today by Tad Safran? I’m quite astonished that your so-called newspaper would publish an article whose only point is to state that British women are ugly slobs. I am not going to critique the contents of this article because as an intelligent person, it is simply not worth my time. This is the kind of article that appeals to people who read novels by Jordan and probably can’t locate their own country on a map (and given the quality of your articles as of late, I’m guessing these kinds of people are a significant part of your readership). It’s difficult to imagine that even a magazine like Maxim would have sunk as low as you have.

(more…)

6 December, 2007 | 6 Comments

The Washington Post and the New York Times have both released their lists of the top books of 2007 (as if we wait all year with breathless excitement to see what these bunch of hosers will recommend). Neither newspaper chose a single novel by a woman. That’s right. In the year 2007, you had to have a penis to write a great novel.

The nation’s two most prestigious newspapers apparently had no qualms whatsoever about excluding women from their Top 5 “best of” fiction lists. Anyone who knows anything about the literary establishment knows that it is terribly misogynist. This is not news, which is probably why the female-free lists have not made news that I have seen. We just expect it.

Well, as a woman who is writing a novel, I cannot let this pass without comment. At least once a year I have to do a post on the sorry state of affairs in the literary world and since 2007 is almost over, voila.

(more…)

2 December, 2007 | 23 Comments

This photo is part of Amnesty International’s new campaign against female genital mutilation. I came across this image, quite coincidentally, while writing this very post on the topic of FGM, which was prompted by a disgraceful piece of writing currently up on the New York Times blog. I won’t comment on the Amnesty image now, but there are plenty of other people commenting on it.

Plenty of people are also commenting on NYT “science” writer John Tierney (formerly of the op-ed page) and his piece about “female circumcision,” which is astoundingly ignorant and dangerous. In his post, Tierney uses the term “circumcision,” explaining that “critics” of this procedure refer to it as “female genital mutilation.” (The UN, the WHO and most international health and women’s rights organizations use the term “female genital mutilation.”)

First, FGM is not circumcision. If we must equate it with something that happens to boys (and why must we always equate it with something that happens to boys?), then let’s call it castration. He focuses on the story of an American-raised woman from Sierra Leone who chose to have this procedure done as an adult, who describes it as something empowering. This woman holds a Ph.D. and is a professor, so therefore, her singular experience (being educated and essentially, a Westerner) overrides the experiences of millions of little girls in Africa who’ve been held down and mutilated against their will with a dirty razor blade or shard of glass.

(more…)

25 November, 2007 | 2 Comments

Violence against women and girls is a universal problem of epidemic proportions. Perhaps the most pervasive human rights violation that we know today, it devastates lives, fractures communities, and stalls development. - UN report

Today is International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women. This is a UN-sponsored event and their website contains a wealth of links and information on this topic.

Violence against women is indeed a universal epidemic, from the lenient rape laws in Britain, where according to Tory leader David Cameron, “at least 75 per cent of all rapes are never reported to the police, which…is partly due to a lack of support for female victims during the legal process,” to a country like Saudi Arabia, where a young woman who was recently gang-raped was sentenced to suffer 200 lashes, prompting even the United States government to criticize their great pals the Saudis. And then of course there’s the ultimate example of violence against women, the “honour killing” of Du’a Khalil Aswad, which I wrote about so much earlier this year.

(more…)

16 November, 2007 | 11 Comments

I have been roundly attacked for my Hillary Clinton post. Well, at least James Wolcott at Vanity Fair magazine thinks that I’ve made a good strong point.

15 November, 2007 | 23 Comments

I have not really been following the 2008 presidential race. The election seems like such a long way off, though I guess the primaries are looming. Even though I haven’t been following the coverage closely, if I had to pick the person I’d choose to represent the Democrats, I’d choose Hillary Clinton. Why? Because she’s a woman.

Gasp!

Yes, I know that’s not the “correct” thing to say. Most women I know trip all over themselves to declare that they would never (never!) vote for a woman because she’s a woman, that a candidate’s gender does not influence them at all.

My question is, why the hell not?

I will [most likely] vote for a Democrat for president. Hillary Clinton is qualified to be president — she’s a senator and has a long history in politics. So I prefer her over the other candidates because she is a woman. I’m not ashamed to admit it. I’m sure people will ask me why I just don’t vote for the most qualified person. This question annoys me in many ways. Implicit in this question is the idea that female candidates are less likely to be qualified than men. Secondly, I am not an idiot. I would not vote for someone who is not qualified and who does not believe in values that are important to me. What I am saying is that gender is a factor that I will consider. In a circumstance such as this Democratic primary, it can sway my vote.

(more…)

12 November, 2007 | 11 Comments

Just a follow-up to my recent post on bias in the British media. I had to laugh when I saw this headline. The papers just can’t help themselves. How is the fact that Amanda Knox is American even relevant to this story? I can understand that her national identity will come up in the coverage of the case, but why is it the persistent focus? It seems like a childish reaction on the part of the press. It’s as if all of Britain has been wronged by this American — and by extension, all Americans somehow had a hand in creating this monster before she was unleashed on the innocent people of Europe.

There are at least two (possibly three) other people involved in this murder of a British student, one of them an African immigrant, but even the potential explosiveness of that cannot take the focus away from Amanda Knox, the media obsession. I’ve noticed many stories in the press here about young British women who have gone abroad and have ended up savagely murdered. Two women who went to Japan to teach English were killed in horrific fashion and there are other stories. I wonder if any British men who travel abroad are ever killed? I have no idea. Men being killed is not as interesting, since when a woman is killed, there’s often some kind of sexual component. We all the know the media gets off on that.

(more…)

3 October, 2007 | 11 Comments

I’ve always been irked by Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty, which in my view just co-opts the language and ideals of feminism to sell beauty products. But their latest commercial is really just brilliant. It’s heartbreaking and it’s true. See below or here.

[gv data="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei6JvK0W60I" width="425" height="350"][/gv]

Also check out this older commercial. Working in the magazine industry, I saw this happen with my own eyes.

What kind of world are we creating for young girls — and for young boys? It’s too painful to even think about.

15 August, 2007 | 2 Comments

Yesterday’s terrorist bombings in Iraq — the deadliest attacks since the war began — targeted Yazidis, the Kurdish religious sect. Sunni Muslims view the Yazidis as infidels and devil worshipers and there is much sectarian violence. I’m mentioning this because Du’a Khalil Aswad, the teenage girl horrifically murdered in April about whom I wrote so much in the spring, was part of this minority community. Tonight’s leading report on the BBC’s Newsnight about the bombings showed part of the video of Dua’s death at the hands of a bloodthirsty mob. Dua’s murder inflamed tensions between the warring religious factions and has been a justification for further violence — but not because of any concern over the horrific treatment of women in this region. That’s not even an issue for these groups, given that they’re all guilty of it. Instead, Dua’s death is used for propaganda purposes, thus further dehumanizing her and her unspeakable suffering.

(more…)