critique of the nyt magazine: august 23, 2009

Thursday I read Mandy Van Deven's review on Feminist Review of this week’s edition of The New York Times Magazine. The edition is devoted to ‘Saving the World’s Women’ and takes up the global condition and problems faced by women of the world, such as sex trafficking, abuse, microfinance, and lack of access to health/medical care and education. Since this was part of my area of focus in school, I was giddy and excited about it hitting the news stands. Yet, as I flipped through and read the various articles, I kept thinking the same thing: Why does this collection seem to only be highlighting disempowerment and oppression of women of the Third World? Why is there absolutely no mention of the issues faced by women in the Global North? By no means do I intend to discount the horrors that women of the Global South face, or imply that the issues of women in developed nations are higher in importance and relevance. In fact, I’m elated that the edition has provided such exposure and attention to these travesties. My problem with it is this: by ignoring the conditions and struggles for equality, justice and basic human rights faced by women in developed countries, the message is that women in places such as the US and Europe have already achieved equality and do not face many of the problems, violence, and discrimination that our sisters in Africa and Asia do. The problem is presented as something “over there” rather than a truly global phenomenon; one simultaneously occurring in our own backyards. 

Instead the role of women of the Global North is presented, and can be summed up, in Lisa Belkin’s article “The Power of the Purse”. The article discusses how women are increasingly using their economic power to help sisters in need. Wonderful. What about the Americans working in the field? Those dedicating their lives to non-profit work and long hours through heartwork and sacrifice? What about the women working in shelters or tirelessly on legislative and policy reform to make the donated money more effective in aid?

The theme of the edition is on the global condition and staunch human rights disparities that exist for women, yet the content and focus of the articles does not seem to adequately reflect the variety and multitude of conditions through its limited scope of Africa and Southeast Asia. What about the sex trafficking and sex tourism that goes on in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Bloc? What of women in Latin America? In the Caribbean? What about the compounding effects of environmental destruction and scarcity of water? Why doesn’t it discuss the modes of oppression the First World through economic exploitation or women of the Third? Why aren’t any of the articles written by women from the places discussed? Instead of presenting a wide view of the various conditions and proposed solutions, the articles focus disappointingly only on economic and capitalist short-term solutions: microfinance and microlending. The articles, while well intentioned and well written, failed to adequately address the underlying social structures that provide the framework to these issues.

On a whole, I’m happy that the NYT Magazine took the chance and did this publication, but I’m highly disappointed in the content and execution. I suppose I got my hopes up a bit too high when I heard about it, and thought that perhaps things would be presented in a radical and revolutionary way. I understand that in order to fully cover all the issues I’ve mentioned would take volumes and much more space than the NYT Magazine could provide. However, what limited space that was available could have explored or touched on so much more. Instead, what was presented was but a sliver of the tip of the iceberg.

npr

Saturday morning I was listening to NPR on the walk to retrieve my car from downtown and there was a segment on about natives of Kodiak Alaska and their lack of knowledge/record of their own heritage. The journalists went on to explain how there was a private collection of the tribes’ masks in France and the owner was loaning (not returning) the collection to the people to learn from and put on display in a local museum. This was seen as a wonderful thing and a great miracle that the artifacts were preserved. 

I started thinking: How did these masks end up as a collector’s item rather than part of the local knowledge? Should the French collector be morally obligated to return the masks to their rightful holders? Who exactly should own these pieces? Should they be part of the local commons, owned by the people? Because of globalization and the homogenization of place and people, are things being lost and appropriated to ‘lovely’ home furnishings? What exactly is the ‘right’ thing to do here?

I also had issue with how NPR presented this. Essentially they were saying, that thanks to the French collector, these artifacts were saved and not lost or damaged or buried in some ditch by the native peoples. Sending the message, at least to me, that clearly these people were incapable of preserving their own traditions. Only the white Western elite could do such preservation. 

Then I started analyzing my own apartment and décor. Did I own anything that was culturally appropriated from a community or identity that I do not belong to? What about all the things I brought back from India? I tried to only buy things that were handicrafts and made specifically for consumption purposes… but what sort of message was I sending wearing or displaying such items back in the US? Were these things signifiers of wealth and ability (Look at me I went to India…)? How should I feel about this, I mean clearly my consumption in India in 2008 is vastly different than 18th century Native American masks… but still related.

----

Back to work... I wish I could incorporate the above thoughts and ideas into my final project, but alas, I feel its too late in the game.  Also, so many types of things I'm being forced to include.  So much of this writing process feels so unnatural and awkward it is probably one of the reasons I'm so miserable with it.  I'm just disappointed that something I was looking forward to doing/creating for a year and a half has been one of my largest dreads for the past few months.  Square pegs simply do not fit in round holes without a lot of sanding and shaving.  Perfect metaphor for this paper.  I've sanded it down to where I barely recognize it as my own creation.  Rather it was something that was custom ordered, returned several times and continually rejected.  I hate it.  It doesn't make any sense outside the context of my instructor's class, nor is it an accurate reflection of my academic interests.  Great job Women's Studies.  Way to suck out my soul.

All will be done, for better, for worse, in two days.  Maybe I'll feel somewhat human again.

tiny fists of fury

Sunday mornings I have a highly predictable routine. I get up. Shower... or not. Stop by the Main St. Publix & pick up my Sunday edition of the NYT. I then spend the next few hours at 2nd Street sipping coffee, that I sometimes neglect to pay for, and enjoy the company of wonderful people.

While today lacked Mr. Clark, who I usually shoot the shit with, I had a wonderful time. A happy accident of running into Faryn and catching up with her. 

NYT left me without much rage or strong feelings of any sort. But the Satellite... oh the Satellite fueled some fury. 

Review of Jenny Lewis' new CD, Acid Tongue, made me snarl through gritted teeth: "WHAT THE FUCK?!" Now I'm not really a Jenny Lewis fan. I like some of her stuff, and back in the day loved Rilo Kiley. Not so much now, I've grown out of it so to speak. But I would never wish this upon ANY artist.

Below is the first line of the review:

"I was primed to take pleasure in this album; I enjoyed Jenny Lewis' last CD, I really am fond of Rilo Kiley, and to be honest, big breasts turn me on a lot."

Excuse me J. Maggio, but what the hell do big breasts have to do with her CD? What do they have to do with Lewis' music? Is there some correlation to the quality of music by a female artist and her breast size? Can we make similar judgements about penis size and quality of music by male artists? Has anyone made such a claim about a male artists? 'So and so has a tiny penis therefore his music is very thoughtful' or 'He's got quite the package, totally making up for his lack of musical talent.' NO self respecting journalist or writer would even think about publishing such a statement. The shear fact that J. Maggio had the audacity to MENTION Lewis' breasts when talking about her music was enough to set me off. 

So, naturally I had to read more:

"But this is a horrible CD only somewhat redeemed by the presence of Elvis Costello - who must also like big boobies, too - on its best track, "Carpetbaggers." Gone are the insightful lyrics of previous Jenny Lewis output, only to be replaced with hackneyed and banal lines like "our love is thicker than angel wings" and "nobody believes a liar." Wow! Like Sarah Palin, even Lewis' "hotness" cannot redeem the complete lack of substance. Some songs - like the horrifying "The Next Messiah" - even sound like they are based around the first riff the guitarist played at practice. Even Lewis' voice takes a nice timbre in the Dusty Springfield tradition, the lyrics are so hideous, and the melody so bland that one cannot help but press "skip" on the iPod. The title track and the Elvis Costello duo are about the only two songs of value on this ghastly CD. I think I will stick with Lewis' older work, and looking at pictures of her best "features" - ironically knowing that I'm not sexist at all." - J. Maggio


No Maggio... you're just Gainesville's tool of the month.

press pause

The past two days I've sat down to write about India, and I've found myself staring at the computer screen and feeling a sudden emptiness.  In fact this emptiness has been sneaking up on me ever so often for the past week.  I try to read through and edit my journal and find myself closing my eyes, leaning back, and getting lost in my own head.  I'm trying to work on several papers, which I'm truly excited about, but when I go to work on them or read some of the sources I've gathered for inspiration, I mentally retreat.  I guess what's bothering me is that I keep thinking about how nothing appears to have externally changed with myself.  So much has changed internally.  I feel that I need to have a way to show that change.  Somehow this is digging at me and keeping me up at night.  Thoughts and attempts at comprehending my experiences are overwhelming.  Still.

While many things in my material life are very much the same, same apartment, same car, same bike, same wonderful people, so much is different and I'm having difficulty coming to terms with it all on top of trying to process India.  I don't know what happened, but suddenly a significant number of people I know are either getting married or recently engaged.  When did everyone collectively decided to do this?  I feel happy and excited, but still confused and uncomfortable with the idea.  I'm not ready for this to start.  I can't even consistently date one person for more than a few weeks.  Not that I feel I have to keep up... but I feel confused about my feelings.  Karebear and I are going to a wedding next weekend.  We're dates.  I can't think of a person I'd rather get dressed up and feel beautiful with.  The person who is getting married is this woman, Karebear's old roommate, who I admired and worked with on some feminist projects.  Someone I went to for advice about thoughts and theory questions.  Someone I admired for her spunk, ability to successfully navigate multiple relationships, and determination.  Not that feminists can't get married,  not what I'm meaning to imply at all.  I just wonder how people are going to change even more and negotiate this huge thing into their identity.  A transition from an I to an Us.  Perfectly cool and fine.  But terrifying from a friend perspective.  Will we be able to relate anymore?  What will be different?  How will it be different?  I have married friends... some I knew before they were married, some I didn't.  The ones I did know before their marriage, our relationship has changed.  They talk about children.  They talk about settling down.  They talk about the long term.  I talk about going out.  I talk about not knowing where I'm going to live in 10 months or what I remotely want to do for a career.  I talk about the constant flux and flow that is uncertainty.  Yes I'm young.  But so are they!  I suppose it's that time in the lifeline.  People are choosing to enter that next stage of their lives, and I'm going to have to accept whatever that transition may bring.  Because there is absolutely nothing I can do about any of this, except be happy.  I suppose I'll just be happy.  I'm happy.

I stumbled across this article while grumbling and clicking around on Alternet.org.  While the article begins discussing same-sex marriage in California, I think some of Bright's later points on marriage in general really resonate mine.

notes from a plea to Machen

Today I attended and sat horrified as Bernie Machen justified his arbitrary degree eliminations to the Senate Steering Committee.  Go figure, much like our federal government there is a system of checks and balances put into place to ensure that no one entity (faculty, administration, board of trustees) has power to wield in an abusive fashion.  Bernie said point blank that he had by-passed the system of getting approval from the departments, the colleges, or the senate committee itself.  I listened as person after person told Machen how his decision to cut Philosophy Ph.D.  will deeply damage the reputation of the university as a whole and tarnish the national and international views of the university.  How cutting Ph.D programs in general was an awful idea, especially the ones designated to be eliminated which had been around for 40+ years. They went on to tell about how highly ranked each department he was fucking with was on the national level... these arguments came from all nine present committee members ranging from departments all over the university, except Rick Yost.  Yost acted as Machen's monkey and was outright rude to the audience and other committee members.  Carol Murphy kicked ass and eloquently made her points receiving a round of applause each time she spoke.  She spoke up and asked if these program eliminations could be reconsidered.  Machen sat begrudgingly, clearly not listening or taking what was being said into consideration.  Machen simply repeated that "the money had to come from somewhere".  When asked why specific programs were being not just suspended but eliminated, again the answer was "the money had to come from somewhere".  Machen did welcome evidence for keeping particular faculty and programs to be presented to him.  However, that information couldn't be presented until the next Senate meeting next week, which would be after his meeting with the Board of Trustees to approve the new budget.  Pretty much making it null and void.  It was also brought up why institutes, such as the water institution were getting funding cuts, when a stipulation of their creations was that they would be free standing and not receive any portion of the budget.  What the FUCK!  How could this have happened?  How do you just forget that something was to remain funded by federal grants only!?  And why is this secondary program made up of a coalition of people holding various positions throughout the university being given extra funding when we're slashing Ph.D. programs?!  Outrageous!  

I had to leave 20 minutes early when the floor was opened to faculty members to ask questions and voice their comments.  I wanted to stay and get my two cents in but, undergraduates were not going to be permitted to speak.  I knew Yost wouldn't let it get that far.  I just couldn't sit there any longer as Machen ignored and down right refused to listen to the people his decisions were directly effecting.  A professor from Political Science asked, "Bernie?  Bernie?  Are you even listening?"  To which he responded "I didn't hear the question."  Translation:  I've made my decisions.  I don't care what you or anyone else has to say.  I'm cutting these programs because I want to.  I realized then that the university operates as a microcosm of our nation.  Much like President Bush, President Machen doesn't care about anyone but himself and his own personal interests.  I sat in a bathroom and cried for all the people that would be effected by this goddamnedmotherfuckingpieceofshitexcuseforahumanbeing, and wondered why it seemed only fucktards were in positions of power.  I also wondered how they got there, and how we as a populous have been deluded for so long.

Overall, judging from the discussion I'd say if any program as the potential for being saved the Philosophy Ph.D. and French Ph.D  programs have a pretty good shot.  That said, I think the entire meeting demonstrated the hopeless of the situation and laid out UF's destination to go down the shitter.

Today, it's not so great to be a Florida Gator.  We're watching the "Foundations of the Gator Nation" crumble and burn. 

There is a slight glimer of hope.  The budget posted online is not the finalized one.  There is still a snowballs chance in hell that something could be changed before being submitted to the Board of Trustees next week.

may day! may day! I'm hit!

One month from today, I'll be updating from New Delhi, India. Holy mother of squirrels, this might actually happen... assuming I get things worked out with the International Center accountant and am able to pay my fees. The bi-otch won't call me back. I hate hate hate getting blown off. Pisses me off like no other. I turn into a crazy woman when I think I'm being ignored, like parakeets when you get them wet. Angry little creatures. Plus, what the hell were they thinking trying to make me do all this during finals! JERKS to the nth degree... yeah I just called UF an infinite jerk. I feel its appropriate for so many reasons right now. They've abused our relationship this term. Budget cuts my ass. I wouldn't even be stressing if they had just given me a scholarship or the grant I applied for. I didn't want both, but one or the other would have been peachy. I'm fixin to dump UF like the bad partner it is. grrrrrr.....

I'm a bit tense today. Kinda awesome though that I've managed to remain calm until the last 24 hours of finals... I'm quite impressed with myself. Normally I have some sort of break down during the week leading up. Thank you anxiety medication. You rock my world.

This time tomorrow, I'm done. Sweet baby jesus! I can see the light at the end of the tunnel... and there's a beer with my name on it!

ready.... break!

So I have four and a half hours until my final lab report is due for the semester.  These things just suck the life out of me and make me question if I really want to go into academia.  If all I do is write reports and hang out in a lab, count me out.  So not fun.  Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the processes in the lab because I learn quite well doing the hands on thing, but I hate how every little detail must be perfect.  It'd be one thing if every report had the same layout, but I feel as though I'm learning something new each and every lab.  This is getting old, especially since typically I have two to three different labs a semester.  I'm just frustrated, burnt out, and tired.  Its a waste of my time.  I want this semester to end... which it will as of 5:00.  Come on 5:00.....

Back to the salt mine.... chug chug chug.  I can do it!  I'm the little engine that could!