shadesofmauve | Entries tagged with culture

I am stubborn as a mule and have never had trouble voicing my opinion. It can be hard for me to empathise with people who really have trouble standing up for themselves; there are a lot of times when my reaction is pretty much 'grow up and deal with it.' There are issues where, if I encounter them in real life, I have no problem either proving myself or bulling my way through it regardless. In fact, the few times I've encountered really overt sexism*, I've kind of enjoyed basically ignoring them and being competent anyway.

But.

I've been engaging in more and more of these fights on the net, because I've grown up enough to realize that just because I can fight my way through a situation, doesn't mean anyone else should have to.

I'm slightly ashamed to admit that it took two instances in which I was really pushed to my emotional limits in order for me to gain that empathy. Both were egregious examples of bullying; one was at work, one a neighbor. In one case I did tough it out, in the other I finally called in help.

Because of the latter case, I still jump when someone rings the doorbell. My heart-rate shoots up. My family and friends have been requested to knock, instead. It's an awful, awful, helpless feeling. It took a lot to get me to that point, but just because someone else may reach it with less provocation, doesn't make it any less awful for them.

The realization holds true for a great many issues.

I've been paying more attention to various serious discussions online, and more often coming down on the side of the hard-core 'PC'** crowd than I used to. Part of that is having more innate understanding of how some issues trigger people. Some of it is because I'm seeing so much thinly veiled (or even overt) racism and sexism on mainstream media lately -- the fringe elements of the right wing have been driving their party, and some vile stuff has become almost commonplace***. And a lot of it is because over and over again, I see problems brought up that I seriously thought we'd matured beyond, and people pour out of the woodwork to prove me wrong.

Example: I really don't think we should be mutilating kids for our aesthetic or religious reasons; if I had a kid, they wouldn't get an infant earpiercing or a circumcision. But when the subject of circumcision comes up, we really need to be aware that female circumcision is pretty much brutally harmful in every case, which would seem to me to make it a rather more urgent issue than male circumcision. And yet every time I've seen a blog post about this, it has almost immediately become entirely filled with people saying "Why didn't you write about the men, too?!"

It's entitled behavior like that, rather than arguments from feminists, that has made me happier to self-identify as feminist.

(I thought about using domestic abuse as an example, since women are more likely to be injured in domestic abuse cases, but it's also clear that men under-report domestic abuse. Guys: This is not an example of eeevil reverse sexism. This is a perfect example of The Patriarchy Hurts Men Too).

Digression: Just because someone chooses to adress one issue in an article or blog post, it does not mean that they don't care about all the other related issues. It means that they decided on a certain scope for this particular discussion. Demanding that they they cover every related issue is derailing at best.(end digression).

I admit to being shocked by just how far we haven't come. I think part of it is that any time you're in a time of cultural flux, you're dealing with different rates of change. I can't believe we're still having arguments about the ethics of birth control. Seriously? But the fact is, we are. So we've got people who really, genuinely are doing their best to be even-handed and treat people as people, those who really do think a woman's place is in the kitchen, and every bus stop in between. There are also those who seem to have skipped all the middle stops and thing we're over all this and can't be bothered (apparently they haven't met the kitchen people). This can put you in the position of having several different debates at once.

On an individual level, I firmly believe in treating individuals as individuals. People are people, regardless of race, gender, or creed.

On a societal level, we need to be aware that we do NOT start on a level playing field, and we DO have a duty to be mindful of our own assumptions, because societally perpetuating crap holds us back from real equality.

This all came to a head because I've followed both the elevator crap in the skeptic community AND the recent femShep stuff in the gaming community, if anyone's wondering.

Anyway, be well.

*Directed at me, I'm not referring to societal/cultural stuff here.

**I have to point out here that 'hardcore PC' is usually a term used by their detractors; it's more often a case of 'this simple ettiquette rule will help you come across as a decent human being'.

***Everyone see the lady who equated insurance covering birth control to covering a mani-pedi? Yeah. THAT kind of crap.

WARNING! Following is a high-energy, disorganised meander-rant, written to get these things out of my head. This is first-draft quality barely-edited brain-spew. If I've offended or appalled you, please ask me about it -- it's possible I didn't communicate well. Or maybe I'm genuinely appalling. I can live with that, but I'd rather people be annoyed at me for the right reasons.

Feminism
I read some stuff I'd written in college and marked as memories. Had to think about whether or not I still felt like I did here, because I don't like much of the tone of that post now. I've pretty much concluded that I still agree with the 'meat' of what I said, but I'm much more willing to claim the label feminist now, because damnit, it shouldn't be a dirty word. I believe in gender equality, period. I'm still not fond of overarching labels, but I have to aknowledge that our brains seem to be stuck on 'em. I will still distance myself from anyone claiming that one gender has mystical power or different spheres of excellence or any other separate-but-equal crap.

"if men demonstrate behavior x, they are assertive. If women demonstrate it, they're called bitches."
I'm curious about another perspective on this: is it possible that since many women have internalized the "be nice, don't fight/stand up for yourself" role, they don't know how to be assertive without being a bitch? It's possible that in many instances it's not just perception that is biased; it's a failing in how people were raised. I'm sure you've all met someone who honestly thought they were being 'assertive' when they were just being an asshole.

Thought: Clear, assertive (not domineering) communication is a learned behavior
I've had women at work scream at me; men who use every passive-aggressive trick in the book. Both genders seem to behave equally badly! This leads me to think that we ALL need more training in assertive communcation -- I certainly don't see it demonstrated often. Workplaces hire trainers to teach this, but let's start it earlier. I was taught methods of assertively dealing with conflict when I was a teenager (by my father). These are lessons I try to internalize and apply to this day, but it didn't come naturally -- communicating through conflict is hard. Let's not expect people to magically become good at it, male or female. We can teach ourselves to behave in a more productive way.

While we're at it, can we please clarify the meaning of 'confrontation'?* "An open conflict of opposing ideas or forces" works for me. I don't think it's a bad thing. I want people to be open in their conflict. It's way easier to deal with productively than sneaky-passive-aggression. What I don't want to be is nasty or disrespectful. I know people who are totally non-confrontational; it causes problems. So does spoiling for a fight.

Dealing with differences in a forthright manner is a good thing. Is there another word we can use for 'dealing with differences in an argumentative and bastardly manner'?

So, I'm an atheist.**
If we didn't have a predominantly religious society, I'd be an apatheist (there's probably not a God, but I don't really care, let's play in the garden/make music etc.). However, since there's such stigma attached to atheism, religious people who don't believe atheists are even human***, so many ways religion tries to get into government, it seems nessecary to stand out and be counted. Hardly a new problem. The ideal is that everyone is quietly accepted and no one has to yell, but getting there from here requires making noise. Many people who would probably rather their sex life stayed private have instead stepped up to be loudly Here and Queer. I don't know of any rights-type movements that didn't involve this, and yet everytime a new one comes along people act all surprised about it. "I just wish the atheists wouldn't be so loud." "I just wish the black people wouldn't whine." "I just wish the homosexuals would keep to themselves." Bull.

Just don't use the word 'just' like that
Newsflash: including the word 'just' before your desire does not actually make your request any simpler/easier/more rational. It does not make the project you want me to do take any less time. It does not make you sound like less of a bigot. 'Just' is not a magic word that makes problems go away. Let's leave the word 'just' in conversations about fairness, and remove it in all those other places.

*gasps for air*

Okay, I think I'm done for now. Hopefully my brain will stop being all spinny and I'll be able to panic about house projects and website issues again instead.

*Btw, dictionary.com? Your first two definitions used forms of the verb 'confront.' Definition FAIL.

**Except for my rock-steady belief in Clarence, of course.

***Don't believe me? Ask about how my conversation with Erik's mom went...

Current Mood: rantish

My creation, it lives! It purrs! It's going to take all morning to configure it's hard drives because they are the SIZE OF THE INTERNET.

While it configures hard drives the SIZE OF THE INTERNET, I need to decide what to call it other than it. My favorite name, Heironymous, I'm saving for my next small fuzzy animal. I considered Lucien (the librarian from Sandman) but I'm leaning towards Gonzales, named after Speedy. Arriba, Arriba! I bet politically correct kids channels today don't air Speedy Gonzales. Do they? Is it culturally insensitive to name a 3.16 Ghz Dual processor computer with 4 gigs of ram after a small cartoon mouse with a caricature of a Mexican accent? Do I care?

Current Mood: accomplished

I ran into a whole boatload of FiddleTunes friends at Folklife! Cathy and Sally were down from Alaska and just as cheerful as ever. Steve has a large selection of home brew to cart to FT happy hour. Warren is no longer with Centrum, which I already knew and which totally fubar'd my plan for an FT work-trade, but Gordy is still working on his next album and is still planning on having me do the cover, so not all is lost on the schmozing-graphic-design-work front.

Erik was my roadie, lugging Baby around, which would have drummed up a whole lot of business if A. He played fiddle and/or B. The music played on that fiddle was primarily Scottish. As it was we just confused people. Isn't having the kilt-wearing guy who plays Indian classical music on anything but a violin carrying the violin for the gypsy-dressed girl who plays mostly irish music the kind of culture-soup folklife is all about?

We discovered the cultural dance of skinheads and heard the extra-terrestrial contribution of cheerleaders. Also, gravity is run by gremlins who hold your feet to the earth, if you're bored in Juneau the thing to do is drive to LA and compete on the Price is Right, and my mom is certain that Eskimos hear more notes because it's cold, which is kind of a musical super-conductor theory.

Now I have to go balance my checkbook, which is seriously hurting from my lack of room-mate and driving around to entertain my Japanese friends.

Also, I think I have an electrical fire in my stove. Ta!

I've been thinking a lot recently about the differences between liberals and conservatives. The differences that go beyond stated aims, values, and priorities, and into the way we act - specifically, the way we speak about our beliefs, and the different ways we function (or fail to) as groups. Of course I make some generalisations here. I am aware that there are always exceptions to every rule.

I was tense during the election. No, let me rephrase that - I was a nervous wreck. Tuesday and the days following several people who I respect preached patience, coolness, intellect over emotionality, philosophical fatalism. These were called the 'reasonable voices', the words of maturity. The counsel? Live your life - remember, the election doesn't affect you in particular right now. Don't get worked up - it will change again in four years. There's nothing we can do now - sit back and wait. Don't be childish. Don't be overly emotional. It's bad, but nothing to get depressed over.

I disagree.

It's time we admit to our intellectual selves that this is more than a matter of theory and logic. It is important, so important that it is not an over reaction to weep with grief or sing with joy. People live or die based on what this nation does. Whether my life is directly affected or not is not the point, or I would be no better than the rich who cut welfare, the safe who deny protection to others. I want to see the passion and depth of feeling that we decry as immature. If I'm not going to get worked up over this, what is worth getting worked up over? Grades? Broken dishes? When I walked through Western's campus on wednesday, the aura of depression was almost visible. At my mother's state office employees were sobbing on wednesday. That gives me hope, because it means people care. We have to care to make a change, care at a deep visceral level, care with a strength and intensity that matches the fear and religious fervor we are faced with.

Most of my friends and family, myself included, belong to what NPR termed the 'educated secular sophisticates' - a group which tends to be liberal, middle class, and a-religious. In our educated way, we attempt to consider arguments from all angles, to be guided by reason rather than gut feeling, and be stoic when things don't go our way. But human beings are above all emotional creatures. Our counterparts in the conservative camp use that emotion, especially the most manipulable of all - fear.

Liberals are at an idealogical disadvantage. We try to see all sides of an argument, but the people on the other side of the argument are NOT going to extend the same courtesy to us. We value dissent - rebellious voices need to be heard, are nessecary to true dialog. We are a fractured group, while the right rallies around solidarity. We will ALWAYS be at a disadvantage, because of our strengths - because we support the rebelious voices, because we consider the other side, BECAUSE we consider it deeply wrong to manipulate the emotions of the less informed. These are some of our values. I don't suggest we change them - but we have to face them. We could learn to stop stifling each other, to let ourselves show how much we care.

Being passionate doesn't have to mean leaping to conclusions or ignoring new information. You don't have to turn your brain off when you turn your heart on (except in matters of romanc - please don't confuse THAT with politics!). By all means, spend time in logical thought. Push away the emotion, examen the facts, and reach a decision. But once you've reached that decision, stand up for it. Re-evaluate it when new information comes around, but if you really think you're right - well, go ahead and act like it.

Before the accusations' made
Before the charges have been laid
Before your best friend is betrayed
Before your last card has been played
Be right.

And if you think that you've really got the answer
You've got to move with all your heart
And if it feels like it's taken you a lifetime
It's just the start - It's just the start.

So, whats it mean? I'm going to sob, I'm going to weep for the plight of our country and the world. And then I'm damn well going to get up and do something about it. I'm going to talk about issues I avoid, to people who disagree with me, people who awe me with the strength of their unshakable faith, their religious convictions. And I'm going to show them some faith and convictions of my own.

Current Mood: determined
Current Music: Be Right - Spirit of the West

Er, that's World Health Organisation to you and me.

Today's Le Monde headline is about a recent broadranging survey of depression in France. Among other interesting points, depression seems to become more prominent when one is unemployed - good one, Sherlock. More interesting, the rates in general seemed high - it's the 3rd cause of mortality in the country. This lead me to a bit of inquiry - is it that high because the suicide rate is high, or because other causes of death are low?

Yes.

Found a few good sites on health statistics. First I looked at US, France, England. For your noggin's thunkin'*, here's a distillation of some interesting findings:

*Also known in the german, Noggenzthunken.

France has fewer per capita abortions than the US. yes, Catholic country - but a society where it is actually considered a more normal alternative than it is here. Judging by what is easily readable on their newspapers, I really expected it to be a lot higher - really it's around 2/3s of the US.

Hmm...I wonder why....

Well, it COULD be because the teen pregnancy rate is around a 5th of the US'es.

We spend, per capita, quite a bit more on health care than either the french or british - and that's taking into account both public and private spending. Possibly because...We die of diabetes, heart attacks, and other body-weight/nutrtion causes a great deal more often (NOT suprising). Of course, the French smoke something like twice as much as we do. Also, NOT suprising.

On the other hand, less of us are killing ourselves. Of course, in that area the UK has us all beat.

What do we learn? Eat like the french, smoke like...well, not at all, and, sorry to say it - keep a stiff upper lip and pass the tea, luv!

Current Mood: curious
Current Music: Weird Science

I've decided to treat you to the conversation in my head as I walked home from class today.

It should come as no suprise that, what with recent personal travel and a lot of experience with AUAP students, I've been doing a lot of thinking about cultural differences, the what-how-why of them. I'm not thinking about the obvious things, like mcdonalds, sushi, and red wine, and I'm not going to try to draw conclusions about other cultures, because I have only the vaguest idea of everything they might entail. But I can take the perspective gained from traveling and apply it to my own culture, which I theoretically know a thing or two about.

Now, I'd be among the first to say that I'm not particularly 'with it' as regards mainstream US culture. But pop culture is by definition a transient thing, and what I'm far more interested in is the underlying psychology - and that is something which is very much a part of me, whether I want it or not.

The international stereotypes about Americans are personality ideas - loud, brash, unrefined, movers & shakers, especially when someone doesn't want to be moved and/or shook. They all seem like pretty nasty things - on the other hand, why are we a super power economy? Because we're loud, brash, movers & shakers. Not sure how unrefined fits in, though in my experience that is one of the least true stereotypes (I could go on about how certain sectors of US society take pride in being unrefined, which is in contrast to, say, France and Japan...but later).

The 'why' (or possibly 'how') question to ask is "Why did the US develop such a different, bold approach as a nation, considering that at the begginning immigrants came primarily from western Europe?" Yes, easter/southern Europeans, and later Asians, also immigrated, but those were later phases. More and more, I'm thinking the asnwer is another question - why did *those* particular Europeans come all the way across a disgustingly big peice of water to a place with no civilized ammenities, leaving behind everything they'd ever known? Because of who they were - Criminals. Fortune Seekers. People who had a hard time fitting in with old world order, because of being too lax or even too strict (Puritans). Face it, we were NOT exactly the cream of the crop. There's even been a published theory (Oliver Sacs, perhaps...?)that part of the reason ADD is more commonly diagnosed in the US than elsewhere is that as a population we have a genetic predisposition, because ADD type personalities might be the first to want to immigrate. Dude, new continent, lets check it out! Let me off this boat, I'm bored...

speaking of bored, I'm tired of typing, and I need to bathe my mouse. Heh...lookut all that writin' I doned.

Current Mood: contemplative
Current Music: Young Americans - David Bowie