Archive for the 'Vanity' Category

“Better-looking when I leave”: a short note on vanity, aging, and Los Angeles

After a few days back in Los Angeles following a dozen on the East Coast — and after a few months of living in West Los Angeles again after thirteen years in Pasadena — I’m feeling once again twinges of discomfort about spending so much of my life in a place that, for all its merits, is so famously focused on looks.

Yesterday, I chatted with Meredith, who cuts my hair. Meredith is from Mississippi, and herself recently back from a trip to her hometown on the Gulf Coast. She asked me about my trip to the East, and I remarked “Everytime I leave Los Angeles, I feel as if I get better looking.” Meredith laughed loudly, and agreed; the stylist next to her and her client chimed in with their assents. What started was a four-way conversation among the two stylists and their clients (all non-natives) about the toll that living in L.A., particularly on the Westside, takes on one’s self-image.

I’ve always struggled with vanity and body issues; in previous posts, I’ve talked about my struggle with a serious eating disorder and exercise addiction. I’m much more content and self-accepting in my forties than I was in my twenties, and that is a blessing. But that doesn’t mean that I don’t, with disappointing regularity, find myself studying my figure in a mirror or assessing the fit of my clothes, wishing that I were as lean as I was when I was at my thinnest. (Never mind that my thinnest years, though they corresponded with very fast running times, were also in most respects my unhappiest.) Becoming a father has been a huge help; focusing on a child is an excellent distraction and an effective palliative for narcissism. (How awful would it be if it weren’t!) Yet there’s no denying that my desire to be thin has not yet left me. I’ve said it before: I’ve been blessed, thanks to therapy and hard work and grace, with great success in overcoming so many of my addictions. My body dysmorphia and my anxieties about weight, however, remain with me to a far greater degree than I would like to admit.

Here’s the thing: I don’t realize until I leave Los Angeles how much more comfortable in my own skin I feel in other places. In New York, I invariably feel less self-conscious, even on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, than I do here in Southern California. And when I’m in Europe — even in fashion-conscious places like Paris or Florence or Mayfair — I don’t feel that sense that I’m too old. To put it another way, I feel more visible virtually everywhere else. I’ve written before, and many other feminists have as well, about the ways in which aging women are made invisible. There’s no question that we erase “older” women from our gaze in a way that we don’t with men; I’m keenly conscious that my authority as a teacher, for example, only grows with age. But though middle-aged men (I am certainly middle-aged now) are far less often rendered invisible than their female peers, I’ve felt — perhaps because of my unfortunate character defect of vanity — the way in which I too am more likely to “disappear” as I grow older. At least, I feel this keenly when I’m in West L.A.

I’m not writing this post to fish for compliments. I’m certainly not writing to complain about how tough it is to be me. I’m a damned lucky man in virtually every imaginable respect. But this character defect that leads me to be unduly concerned with my own appearance, this anxiety about my weight and my attractiveness that, while blessedly diminished lingers with me still, this puerile self-absorption — this , this, this is exacerbated by place. I wouldn’t go back to my younger, presumably “hotter” days for all the tea in China; the anxiety was crippling and the narcissism repellant. But I will say, as I move more deeply into that long and ill-defined period known as mid-life, that there are many other places I would rather live than here.

Christmas madness

My lavender shirt may be askew and my hair unkempt, but I have a lot to say about Christmas in this video made by the Pasadena City Courier staff and one of my women’s history students, Polly. (I start at :45, but watch the whole thing, all the way to a final benediction in the end.)

Your loyal blogger…

… has had his dubious recent distinction publicized in this piece in the Pasadena City College paper. And of course, I hate the picture they took of me.

I have been teased all day at school by colleagues and students alike. Part of me loves it, and part of me feels humiliated, and part of me wonders in what particular way I am supposed to parlay this trivial but interesting distinction into something useful. It’s the sort of thing that one probably doesn’t want in one’s obituary, so I’ll simply have to accomplish enough to ensure that there’s no room to stick this “triumph” in there. But I’m not so embarrassed that I won’t note it here, and enjoy the fleeting notoriety.

Of sweat and scent: in defense of infrequent bathing

I will be posting on various things in the week to come. I’ve got reviews of a couple of books to put up (including Men Speak Out), and will try and say something intelligent about Planned Parenthood, race, and the complex legacy of Margaret Sanger.

But it’s Saturday, and if I post at all on the weekends, it can’t be about anything too serious. My wife has been in Europe (doing various volunteer things) since last Sunday, and I miss her. She’ll be home in two days time. The stereotype of the generally neat married man who reverts to appalling slobbery when his spouse goes off for a few days is a time-honored one: yes, things are looking a little chaotic around the homestead these days. Newspapers and magazines on the floor; laundry arranged in sensible; adequately folded piles; coffee cups resting on any ledge they can find. And Hugo, unbathed as yet today.

I’ve let go of so many bad habits over the last few years. An earlier incarnation of Hugo on his own would have seen me in a home littered with filled ashtrays. Liquor bottles would have poked their heads out of the trash as well. Bits of clothing and long strands of hair, forgotten and discarded by those whose visit had had but one purpose, would have lingered under chairs for weeks or months. On these scores, all is different now. Continue reading ‘Of sweat and scent: in defense of infrequent bathing’

A rambling post about blogging, hubris, narcissism, and the longing to be liked

This will be my last post for a week. We’re off to the Philippines tomorrow night; I’ve got lectures in Makati City (Manila) next Tuesday and Wednesday. We’ll be home to Pasadena late on Thursday of next week, and then off on another trip as of January 16. I will post about the Kabbalah and Christianity lectures next Friday, deo volente.

(Just as I finished the last sentence, one of the chinchillas in the next room made an “I’m having a dream” call — a series of little grunts signalling not distress but something else. Perhaps just a desire for me to come into the room and make cooing noises to all of them.)

Re: Iowa. Thrilled by the strong turn-out, and deeply moved by Barack Obama’s speech. I said before that if Romney and Edwards were the nominees, we’d have debates between two immensely handsome, articulate men who struggle with slickness. But a debate between Obama and Mike Huckabee would be a thing to behold; two consummate “outsiders”, two men running on two differing visions of hope, two men who have an extraordinary ability to connect with a wide variety of people. The establishment right has underestimated Huck’s political skills. The left better not make the same mistake by assuming he won’t be the GOP nominee, and if he is, that he is unelectable.

Re: blogging. I’m not going to complain about the criticism I’ve received here and elsewhere for yesterday’s post on evangelism, feminism, purists and popularizers. But it reminds me of what I like least about blogging.

I’m an ENFP, and though I enjoy writing, I enjoy conversation more. When I’m talking with someone, I feel so much more confident, so much more at ease. I’m at my best “off-the-cuff”, with as few notes as possible. (I’ve got these two, two-hour lectures next week on a topic I’ve never talked about — and I’ll go up with a few quotes scribbled down and nothing more. I love the thrill of improv, the challenge of constructing a coherent argument extemporaneously. That’s not laziness as much as it is thrill-seeking.) But over the course of a debate or a conversation, there’s so much more opportunity to avoid misunderstanding, to avoid the accidental infliction of hurt. I know others feel the opposite is true, but honestly, I’m more careful with the words I speak than with the words I write, even though I write far more slowly than I speak. Continue reading ‘A rambling post about blogging, hubris, narcissism, and the longing to be liked’

Off for eight days, and an anecdote about wrinkles: UPDATED

For my last post before Christmas (I’ll return to blogging December 26 or 27), a little anecdote:

Students say the darndest things.

A woman came into my office last week to talk about her final. After we’d finished talking about her strategy for the exam, she said: “I hope you won’t mind my saying so, but I notice you have a lot of wrinkles for your age. My Dad’s a cosmetic surgeon, and he does great work, and we can get you a really good package. Your wife will love the change, though I’m sure she already loves how you look!”

Now, mind you, this was the second time this year someone had randomly suggested plastic surgery to me. But from a student in my office hours, it was a bit stunning. I thanked her politely, and told her that I loved each and every one of the well-earned, well-deserved lines that cross my face. She smiled and said, “Well, talk to your wife about it!” I assured her I would do so.

I suppose the little dear meant well. And I’ll admit, it stung a bit. I’ve had a couple of moments recently where I’ve looked in the mirror and been taken aback — just for a moment — by how old I look. But that’s more a reaction of surprise than of dejection; it’s akin to being surprised that Christmas is upon us once again, and that it seems to come faster each year.

But barring — God forbid — some sort of horrific disfiguring accident, I’m not going to have any sort of work done to improve my appearance. I have no desire to appear one day younger than my forty years. But of course, I’m a man. Even here, in deliciously vapid Los Angeles, I know that my success as a teacher, mentor, blogger or public speaker has little to do with my perceived youth or looks. I understand that the pressures are much greater upon women, and so I am careful not to condemn those who do choose cosmetic surgery. What I don’t do is give any credibility to the suggestion that the decision to go under the knife is inherently feminist, but that’s a different discussion.

I notice that just this autumn, I’ve picked up some more wrinkles on my forehead and around the eyes. They make me look just a bit more like my father, and that makes me very happy indeed.

A happy holiday to all.

UPDATE:
the wonderful Jenell Paris — fellow academic, and with me, one of the founders of the North American Evangelical Gender Studies Association, offers this suggested grading scale. Suggesting plastic surgery is definitely a minus on the Paris Plan.

The next right thing? Pink.

If the first post of the day was on the theme of “doing the next right thing”, the second deals with a small practical tip from Jeff at Feminist Allies: What Men Can Do: Resist Gender Essentialism (with Accessories!) Jeff was inspired by Melissa’s remark, regarding the seemingly never-ending struggle for gender justice: All I ever do is try to empty the sea with this teaspoon; all I can do is keep trying to empty the sea with this teaspoon.

One of Jeff’s “teaspoons” is his phone:

And it got me to thinking about one of the themes of feminism for me:Small Daily Acts of Feminism. I tend to think that (1)The ‘little’ things are often only seemingly little and (2)Lots of (seemingly) little things add up. Take, for instance, my little pink phone.

Jeff has a picture of his little pink phone.

I’m with Jeff wholeheartedly here. No, Jeff’s pink phone isn’t going to save the world. But as he does point out, it does start a lot of conversations where good can happen. I don’t have a pink phone, but as anyone who looks through my Flickr or Facebook albums can attest, I wear a lot of pink shirts. And I wince when I hear people say things like “Real Men Wear Pink”; I prefer “pink is for everyone”. A willingness to subvert common assumptions about gender is always helpful, especially when that subversion is simple and elegant.

Hurrah for pink on all of us. It’s one of my favorite colors (along with yellow, which I can’t wear), and it has been a staple of my wardrobe for a long time. My fondness for pink isn’t evidence of virtue — but if it inspires any reflection in anyone at all about gender essentialism, then it’s one more teaspoonful.

“She’s so pretty”: some thoughts on compliments, looks, and “trophyism”: UPDATED

Here’s one I haven’t discussed.

Not unexpectedly, most of the photographs on my desk are of my wife and me, including a formal wedding portrait. Time and again, students and colleagues come in, look at the pictures, and say “Your wife is beautiful” (or something similar). And after a long time, I’ve grown very comfortable saying “thank you.”

Years ago, I was at a wedding (remarkably, it was one of the few in which I wasn’t involved as either groom or minister) with an ex-girlfriend of mine. I introduced my date to some friends, and one of them, an older woman, blurted out, “Hugo, she’s very pretty.” She said this right in front of my date as if she wasn’t there, and I said “thank you.” When my date got me alone, she punched me firmly in the arm and asked “Why did you say ‘thank you’? Are my looks your accomplishment to be praised? Some feminist you are!”

Ouch. There’s no question that within a great many different social circles, it is considered customary to offer praise of a woman’s looks to her husband, boyfriend, or father. It often doesn’t seem to matter whether the praise is entirely justified, either. Ever since I started dating, I noticed that it seemed standard protocol to make a remark about the perceived prettiness of the woman in my life. I note that with my fourth wife, I get the remarks more frequently because she is truly striking, but by now I know enough to know that this particular compliment is almost a cultural universal.

I understand why a visitor to my office might remark that my wife “looks lovely.” They can’t tell from looking at her picture that she’s brilliant, that she’s got an absolutely brutal left hook that can floor most men, that she has hundreds of phone, account and credit card numbers memorized in her head (it’s part of her job). They can’t tell that she’s a great salsa dancer or that she is a marvelous cook or passionate about Gabriel Garcia Marquez. They can tell that she’s lovely, and so that’s what they remark upon.

But saying “thank you” to a compliment paid to your wife or girlfriend about her looks is at least somewhat problematic. The friend at the wedding who praised my date’s prettiness directed that praise at me, and there seemed to be an implication then — as there often is now when folks comment on my wife’s pictures — that I am to be credited with having succeeded at something by “landing” a “hot” woman. One of the things that feminists work very hard to reject is the notion that women’s looks are currency for men to measure their own status. The phrase “trophy wife” or “arm charm” resonates painfully. Ask women whose husbands or boyfriends have dumped them because they couldn’t provide sufficient “hotness” to boost the ego of their male partners. Using women’s attractiveness to measure a man’s status is as disastrous as it is (still, sadly) ubiquitious.

On the other hand, I can’t give everyone who compliments my wife’s looks a lecture. Most of the time these days, especially since she and I have been married, I do say “thank you”. I say it not because I believe that my ego has just been boosted, but because I take very seriously the idea that my wife and I are joined together. We have become a team, a union of flesh and spirit. Her triumphs are my triumphs, my triumphs are hers. A compliment to either of us is a compliment to both, an insult to either is an insult to both. That doesn’t mean I need to fight all of her battles for her. That doesn’t mean that we don’t retain a considerable degree of autonomy even within marriage. It means that in terms of how the outside world perceives us, we are a unified front, standing shoulder to shoulder. (This unity, however, does not impose an obligation on my wife to look a certain way; if she gains a huge amount of weight, for example, I am not entitled to use the “but we’re a team” card to badger her into looking good for my benefit.)

On the other hand, I’m very reluctant to praise the looks of a male friend’s wife or girlfriend, at least until after I’ve gotten to know her much better. When shown a photograph that requires a compliment, I usually say something (fashionista that I am) about clothing or accessories. “What a great suit”, somehow, seems far less sexist than “She’s a knock-out.” Perhaps that’s not a distinction everyone sees as meaningful, but it works for me.

Please share your thoughts.

UPDATE: I’m bumping this up from the comments, because when I wrote this post, I gave the impression that I only say “thank you” when someone compliments my wife’s looks. What I almost always add afterwards is “I think so, too.”

And of course, perhaps the most feminist response would be the “I think so, too” without the “thank you.” But sometimes etiquette and ideology conflict and etiquette wins; I was raised to thank everything that moved.

Short campus anecdote

Earlier this morning, I walked across campus with a colleague to get some coffee. The Gideons were out in the quad, distributing free New Testaments. When a small green bible was offered to me, I refused it — but thanked the Gideon who offered it, warmly shook his hand, said “It’s great to see you on campus, God bless you.” I got the same blessing in return.

As we walked away, my colleague said, rolling her eyes, “What a hypocrite you are. I’ve heard you complain about campus evangelists before.” I protested that the Gideons were hardly the same as the sign-carrying doomsayers who wander around with bullhorns.

“Besides”, I said, “I’m not a hypocrite. I’m just, uh, indiscriminately sincere.”

Hugo is a Martha too: on addiction moving laterally, and struggling to be still

My alarm went off at 5:30 this morning; I had a relatively easy seven-mile run scheduled. Though I had had gone to bed before 11:00 last night, and slept well, I woke up drained. I lay there for a few minutes, trying to decide whether to get up and force myself through the work-out, or turn off the alarm and catch another hour next to my wife. I’m glad to say I did the latter.

It’s very, very easy for me to neglect my self-care. Like a great many people, I make lists in my head of the various things I want to accomplish in any given day. Time for sleep and time for spiritual reflection usually get bumped to the bottom of the list in favor of both fulfilling vital obligations (teaching, grading, writing letters of rec, taking care of chinchillas, doing laundry) and not-so-vital ones (reading blogs and exercising several hours per day.)

I’ve got to keep a close eye on my addictive nature. When I first got sober many years ago, my sponsor said to me “Watch out, Hugo, the disease moves laterally.” I wasn’t sure what he meant at the time, but quickly found out. I gave up the alcohol, and turned (in no particular order) to compulsive sex, disordered eating, and — briefly — fundamentalist religiosity. It was in sobriety that my weight dropped to 145 pounds on my frame (I’m a lean 175 now, for comparison). It was in sobriety that I experimented with intolerant zealotry. It was while sober that I began to struggle both with pornography and reckless promiscuity; I traded physical intoxication for the high of seduction. The disease moved laterally indeed. Continue reading ‘Hugo is a Martha too: on addiction moving laterally, and struggling to be still’

Men, women, ageing, and the “slide into invisibility” after 35

Mythago links to this post by “jolt” about women, ageing, and objectification. Read the post, and the one to which she also links.

Jolt writes:

I have definitely experienced all sorts of verbal harrasment, but not as frequently as I used to. It may be that years of suffering these unwarranted intrusions have made me oblivious a lot of the time, worn down from the constant onslaught. But I think it’s also that now I am in my late 30s I have moved from “potentially fuckable and thus subject to any and all pestering that any idiot male chooses to provide” to “eh, not old, but why bother.”

Part of me is really enjoying this slide into the invisibility of females over 35. Part of me is just pissed off. Look, I don’t need the hassle, but when even the lack of hassle pulls you into the swirl of the patriarchy and assigns you your rank therein, it’s annoying as hell.

Obviously, one of the most insidious aspects of patriarchal culture is the way in which it teaches women to assess their own value through the desire that they arouse in men. Even more toxic is that your average 17 year-old girl will receive more catcalls and sexualized comments on the street than her 45 year-old mother. No less an authority than the infamous John Derbyshire insists that women hit their “sell by” date somewhere around twenty.

Of course, rude, crass, and decidedly unwanted sexual attention can be annoying and disillusioning at best — and soul-scarring at worst. Yet we teach young women that that attention — no matter how vulgar — is a measure of their value. It’s easy to dismiss that connection intellectually, but I’ve known plenty of women who have found, much to their own frustration, that on some level they’ve “bought in” to this notion that strange men on the street do have the power to assign their value.

As a forty year-old man on the cusp of what was, traditionally, middle-age, I am ever more keenly aware of my male privilege. I’ve been teaching full-time since I was 27 (and I was a very young-looking 27 when I started). In my first few years, I felt as if my youthfulness was an obstacle to being taken seriously. I felt as if a great many of my students were asking themselves, “How much can he possibly know? He looks too young to be a professor.”

In the last thirteen years, I’ve gained a tremendous amount of experience. That experience has made me a better teacher, of course. But I also am keenly aware that ageing has brought me a degree of respect from my students and colleagues that I simply did not enjoy when I was younger. In 1994, my students looked at me as a slightly older peer, and I know that for some, that proved an obstacle to their learning. While in those early years I received far more validation for being “cute” or “hot” than I do these days, the concomitant perceived lack of gravitas compromised my legitimacy as a teacher.

I’ve heard from a number of female friends in my age group (late thirties, early-to-mid forties) who are coping with what jolt so accurately calls the “slide into invisibility of females over 35.” These are accomplished, creative, brilliant, interesting, beautiful women. None defines herself solely by her sex appeal, but several have quietly pointed out their own considerable ambivalence about ageing and this increasing “invisibility.”

Earlier this year, right before my 40th birthday, I was telling a group of colleagues in the faculty “party room” about how excited I was to be hitting this chronological milestone. One of my female peers reminded me, gently, that my enthusiasm was at least in part tied to male privilege. There is little that men lose by ageing, she noted. Not only do we traditionally tend to see older men as more desirable, even when older men lose their looks, we don’t hold their slide into middle-age against them. I can’t remember exactly what her words were, but my colleague — who has known me since I first came on board at the college — said something like “What you, Hugo, lose in ‘youthful hotness’ you gain in ‘weight’; men who get older don’t get noticed less, they just get noticed differently. Women sometimes don’t get noticed at all.” (She had a cleverer way of saying it than that, and when I remember it, I’ll revise this post!)

I’ve written many times about the “older men, younger women” problem. Make no mistake, our cultural obsession with sexualizing very young women is inextricably linked to a dismissiveness of “older” women’s desirability. While the catcalls and the wolfwhistles and the cheesy pick-up lines may become less common (to a not inconsiderable amount of relief on the part of their targets), as jolt writes, “even the lack of hassle pulls you into the swirl of the patriarchy and assigns you your rank therein.”

I’m really, really, really happy being forty. I like my wrinkles. I like watching my body change. Age is not my enemy today. To put it simply, when I was a boyish 27 I felt my youth was a decided liability in my work; at 40, I have no such concerns. But even when I enjoyed the flattery, I never connected my worth to my (brief) status as the “young hottie” on the faculty. Male privilege meant that my perceived attractiveness was essentially irrelevant to my work as a professor, and its disappearance has not impacted my credibility. The same has not, I’m sorry to say, always been true in the experience of my colleagues. And in that sense, the freedom to celebrate ageing without a trace of anxiety is, at least in part, considerably easier for men.

Cosmetic surgery and the co-opting of feminist language: an excellent new Ms. article

The summer issue of Ms Magazine is on the shelves this week. I was raised on Ms. Magazine in the 1970s, and though it has gone through many transformations in the years since, it remains one of the indispensable serious reads for feminists and their allies.

One particularly noteworthy article is Extreme Makeover, Feminist Edition: How the pitch for cosmetic surgery co-opts feminism. Written by Jennifer Cognard-Black, it’s a superb and timely response to the increasingly common strategy of marketing plastic surgery to women under the guise of “empowerment”.

… the cosmetic surgery industry is doing exactly what the beauty
industry has done for years: It’s co-opting, repackaging and reselling the feminist call to empower women into what may be dubbed “consumer feminism.”
Under the dual slogans of possibility and choice, producers, promoters and providers are
selling elective surgery as self-determination.

Those who are eager to make a fortune out of women’s fear of growing older use the language of the pro-choice movement over and over again: “it’s your body, shouldn’t you be in charge of how it looks?” The precious right to be sovereign over one’s flesh becomes, in the hands of the beauty industry, the duty to battle against the onset of ageing. Feminists who critique cosmetic surgery are accused of inconsistency, of refusing to allow women the full range of “choices” to which they are entitled. Cognard-Black:

The word “choice” obviously plays on reproductive-rights
connotations, so that consumers will trust that they are
maintaining autonomy over their bodies. Yet one choice
goes completely unmentioned: The choice not to consider
cosmetic surgery at all.

One of my first posts to attract a lot of attention appeared in April 2004: Surgery, Sex, and Shame. I compared liposuction to nineteenth-century clitoridectomies (which were done far more often in the USA than many realize). Excerpt from my post (not Cognard-Black’s article):

…clitoridectomies were regularly performed on young girls in America and England to cure them of what one doctor called “the moral leprosy” of female masturbation. My students are always stunned to hear that; they falsely assume that female genital mutilation was never a Western practice. Young women were shamed for the inevitable (menarche) and the normal (masturbation) to a far greater degree than they are today.

But what occurs in the 20th century is a shift from morality to aesthetics, with shame being the constant. Though public discussions of menstruation and masturbation (even in an academic setting) are still sometimes awkward, most of my students seem to consider themselves far more educated and enlightened on those subjects than their Victorian sisters. But all too frequently, my students loathe their bodies with the same puritanical intensity as their forebears. They may not be as ashamed of their sexuality as their great-grandmothers were (though some are still understandably shy), but they are still ruthlessly critical of their own flesh. The negative judgments however, are now rooted in aesthetics. Fat has replaced desire as the primary enemy to be contained and controlled. If self-control and exercise fail, there is always the surgical removal of the offender (fat) through liposuction and body sculpting.

I try — with limited success — to make the case that Victorian clitoridectomies and contemporary plastic surgery are remarkably similar procedures from a feminist analysis. Yes, the former were performed on the young and the vulnerable, often against their will. But I’m not sure that the young students of mine who save and scrimp and go into debt for liposuction and breast enlargements (and I can think of quite a few who have done just that) really have much more agency and autonomy than their forebears. Slicing up the body to conform to a societal ideal is inherently a woman-hating act, whether the offending body part is the clitoris or thigh fat. There is no progress in moving from a culture that shames sexuality to a culture that shames any divergence from an unrealistic aesthetic ideal.

Yes, I have heard from my students who say they feel better about themselves after their surgeries. But the number of women in Somalia or Mali who support female infibulation are high as well. The fact that some women feel personally empowered by cutting up their bodies (or allowing their bodies to be cut) does not vitiate the essential horror of the practice. Some feminists are so in love with the notion of “choice” that they will defend any action a woman takes to alter her body. But choices are only exercised within a cultural context that decrees that certain choices are better than others. In this culture where even slight physical imperfections are seen as barriers to happiness, most young women who choose plastic surgery are not making a genuinely free choice

Feminists must be careful to walk a thin line — judging and condemning those women who do “choose” cosmetic surgery isn’t helpful, even if (as my use of quotation marks suggests) we are doubtful about the feminist authenticity of their “choice.” Our anger and our energy, rather, ought to be directed at those who repackage feminist language to market their wares. Feminism critiques the very standards of beauty that the cosmetic industry seeks to uphold; the surgeons offer women (at least the ones with money) the freedom to choose to alter their bodies to chase an ideal; feminists want women to have freedom from that very ideal.

Cognard-Black:

…it’s feminists who have emphatically and
persistently shown that cosmetic medicine exists because
sexism is powerfully linked with capitalism—
keeping a woman worried about her looks in order to
stay attractive, keep a job or retain self-worth. To say
that a preoccupation with looks is “feminist” is a cynical
misreading; feminists must instead insist that a furrowed,
“wise” brow—minus the fillers—is the empowered
feminist face, both old and new.

Pick up the new issue of Ms. at your local newsstand, or better yet, subscribe. And visit these sites:

Love Your Body
About Face
Real Women Project

Ten things

Taken from Rudy Carrasco, here are ten things you may not know about me, despite an extraordinary amount of public navel-gazing.

1. Since I was a child, my nightmares are almost all the same: I’m on a beach, a tidal wave is coming, and I can’t move. I still have them a couple of times a year. I’ve never dreamed of any other natural disaster or accident.

2. Of all of my button-down shirts, more are pink than any other color.

3. Of my closest friends, over half are Republicans. Several support the war and eat meat.

4. The combined total attendance at all four of my weddings: just over 500.

5. Number of people, besides me, who attended all four: eleven.

6. I took wood shop in high school, and actually loved it. My mom still has many things I made.

7. My senior year in high school, I was president of my school’s Model UN club. We represented Zaire at the state convention.

8. The first time I got drunk, it was on Andre Cold Duck . It was twenty-five years ago this month, and I was in ninth grade.

9. Sometimes, after a particularly emotional day of teaching (or, like last night, an emotional time with some of my youth group kids) I get into my car in the parking lot and cry before I drive home.

10. Though I love other breeds better, when it comes to dogs, I instinctively identify with whippets.

Why I’m not posting today

There’s some interesting discussion going on between both the DC Madam and Male Sex Drive posts below. I’ve got a post in my head that deals with lust, fantasy, fidelity, feminism, and the discourse of uncontrollable male sexuality, but it will have to wait until tomorrow.

Big bonus of being vegan (and, largely, raw): I need less sleep, as my body isn’t so tired from digesting meat, dairy, corn solids, and so forth. I’m now good to go on six hours a night on a consistent basis, and this makes me very happy, as it means I can fit more into my day.

Today I woke up at 5:00, did my morning meditation and journaling, had a cup of coffee (that’s one thing I have no intention of giving up) and headed out for a great 11-mile run. I’m now starting to ramp up training for July’s San Francisco Marathon, and that means one long run on Sundays and a “mid-length” run on Wednesdays. If I can get my mileage up to around 50 a week by the middle of the month, I’ll feel pretty good. By the end of the month, after my birthday, I’ll be ready for a little speed work.

Now I’m in the office, getting ready for office hours — I have several students coming, most to go over their midterms. At 10:25, I lecture on post-Napoleonic Europe and the rise of Nationalism; at 12 noon, I’ll discuss the rise of the Roman Republic and the Gracchi; at 1:25, I have my “dysfunctional family” humanities course, and we’ll be talking about Ibsen’s “Doll’s House” and the role of Christine Linde as proto-feminist hero.

After school, I have some student journals to finish marking. Then it’s off to the gym for some quick lifting, home for a quick shower and snack, and off to Wednesday night youth group. Then it’s home by 9:00PM for some chinchilla time, and some (Lord willing, quick) work on a proposal for some workshops I want to teach on men and sexuality. I’ll make my lunch for tomorrow, and lay out my clothes for the morning. And when all that’s done, my wife and I will sit down (she with a glass of Cabernet or Pinot, me with a glass of Gerolsteiner), and we’ll “de-brief” and laugh together. If all goes well, we’ll be lights out by midnight.

It’s gonna be an awesome day; I feel blessed beyond words to have the life I do. I don’t give a darn if I sound like a caricature, describing my day. This is an eponymous blog, after all.

More posting tomorrow.

The twelfth of Iyar

I was born on May 22, 1967; in the Gregorian calendar, that means my fortieth birthday is just over three weeks away. But I would like to point out that May 22, 1967 was also the 12 of Iyar, 5727 in the Hebrew calendar. Given that the Hebrew calendar is lunar, it means my Hebrew and Gregorian birthdays rarely match up.

And today is 12 Iyar 5767, so by that ancient method of reckoning time, I am forty today.