FA and DV

Cross-Posted
There is a pervasive way of thinking in our culture today that seeks to undermine our fight for empowerment, and keep women in the shadows. Women are being attacked at every opportunity by messages designed to make them feel bad about themselves, in hopes that these women will then buy what the messenger is selling. At the Media Awareness Network, this problem is defined quite clearly.

Why are standards of beauty being imposed on women, the majority of whom are naturally larger and more mature than any of the models? The roots, some analysts say, are economic. By presenting an ideal difficult to achieve and maintain, the cosmetic and diet product industries are assured of growth and profits. And it’s no accident that youth is increasingly promoted, along with thinness, as an essential criterion of beauty. If not all women need to lose weight, for sure they’re all aging, says the Quebec Action Network for Women’s Health in its 2001 report Changements sociaux en faveur de la diversité des images corporelles.

It is important to remember that while this kind of shaming is a popular tactic across the gender spectrum, it is most often directed towards women.

The American research group Anorexia Nervosa & Related Eating Disorders, Inc. says that one out of every four college-aged women uses unhealthy methods of weight control—including fasting, skipping meals, excessive exercise, laxative abuse, and self-induced vomiting. Researchers report that women’s magazines have ten and one-half times more ads and articles promoting weight loss than men’s magazines do, and over three-quarters of the covers of women’s magazines include at least one message about how to change a woman’s bodily appearance—by diet, exercise or cosmetic surgery.

Television and movies reinforce the importance of a thin body as a measure of a woman’s worth. Canadian researcher Gregory Fouts reports that over three-quarters of the female characters in TV situation comedies are underweight, and only one in twenty are above average in size. Heavier actresses tend to receive negative comments from male characters about their bodies ("How about wearing a sack?"), and 80 per cent of these negative comments are followed by canned audience laughter.

So the message that is largely received by both women and girls from magazines, television, and film is that not only is something inherently wrong with their body, but that these "flaws" also constitute a personal moral failing which renders them deserving of any humiliation that comes their way.


In and of itself, there is nothing linguistically harmful about the word "fat". It is a generic descriptor much like tall, short, blonde, brunette, etc. The reason that "fat" is such a loaded term is that our culture has framed fatness as practically a crime against humanity, especially if the owner of the fat is female. We're taught from a very early age that fat is not a simple descriptive term, because fat is culturally synonymous with lazy, unpleasant, smelly, unloveable, etc. This correlation is made not only by many thin people, but often by fat people who firmly believe they deserve the disrespect being thrown at them.

Sandra Kiume on Psych Central wrote a letter to the editor detailing an event she'd witness where a man on the street demanded a woman he knew follow him and called her fat along with a few other insults. Kiume's response deftly illustrates why body image is a subject central to the fight against domestic violence.

First, she wasn’t fat. But all mean kids and abusers know that the easiest way to hurt a young woman’s self-esteem is to attack her body image, especially with that cruel three-letter “f” word. It’s verbal abuse in our thin-obsessed culture. The other two words he called her are just more obviously abusive.

Verbal abuse is just as damaging as physical or sexual violence–the American Psychological Association classifies all three as wartime torture methods. In their daily wars women come to view themselves as worthless and powerless and internalize the loathing. They may develop serious medical problems like depression, anorexia/bulimia, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, substance abuse and more, all while afraid to leave the abuser. A woman is ten times more likely to be murdered by her abuser in the six months after she leaves him. Those threats are dead serious, and they’re a means of control that answer the common and naïve question, “Why doesn’t she just leave him?”(Emphasis Added)

Fortunately, there is a movement that those of us in the fight against domestic violence can look to, to promote women's ability to feel comfortable and worthy in their own skin. Providing information about the inaccuracy of the obesity crisis and other weight-related scientific findings, shining a light on medical abuse, debunking of stereotypes about fat people, and creating a safe community for women to celebrate their bodies are just a few of the things the Fat Acceptance movement has to offer.
More specifically, Kate Harding in The Fantasy of Being Thin, thoroughly discusses the power of the myth that having a stereotypically perfect body is somehow attached to your ability to be a good or worthy person and the fact that many times the hardest part of accepting your body is that it means accepting and appreciating all aspects of yourself.

But exhortations like that don’t take into account magical thinking about thinness, which I suspect — and the quote above suggests — is really quite common. Because, you see, the Fantasy of Being Thin is not just about becoming small enough to be perceived as more acceptable. It is about becoming an entirely different person – one with far more courage, confidence, and luck than the fat you has. It’s not just, “When I’m thin, I’ll look good in a bathing suit”; it’s “When I’m thin, I will be the kind of person who struts down the beach in a bikini, making men weep.” See also:

When I’m thin, I’ll have no trouble finding a partner/reinvigorating my marriage.
When I’m thin, I’ll have the job I’ve always wanted.
When I’m thin, I won’t be depressed anymore.
When I’m thin, I’ll be an adventurous world traveler instead of being freaked out by any country where I don’t speak the language and/or the plumbing is questionable.
When I’m thin, I’ll become really outdoorsy.
When I’m thin, I’ll be more extroverted and charismatic, and thus have more friends than I know what to do with.
Et cetera, et cetera. Those are examples from my personal Fantasy of Being Thin, but I’m sure you’ve got your own

....The thin person inside me finally got out — it just turned out she was actually a fat person. A reasonably attractive, semi-outgoing fat person who has an open mind and an active imagination but also happens to really like routine and familiarity and quiet time alone.

Embracing our bodies for what they do for us rather than punishing them into submission is a long process, but the benefits are well worth it. For a powerful introduction to celebrating yourself and living in the now, check out Joy Nash's Fat Rant Video below.

Problem Solving

Deidra at Black and Missing but not Forgotten has posted an article by Lindsay Goldwert which addresses the racial disparity present in the media coverage of pregnant women killed by their partners or former partners in the United States. Goldwert begins her article with the astute observation that cases like that of Lacy Peterson have put a "white face" on this type of violence when in fact that face most often belongs to a woman of color.

According to the CDC, black women have a maternal homicide risk about seven times that of white women. Black women ages 25-29 are about 11 times more likely as white women in that age group to be murdered while pregnant or in the year after childbirth.

Goldwert proceeds to tell the stories of several young black women who were murdered by their partners while pregnant. She also points out the relationship between pregnancy and abuse and the ways in which not only societal mores, but actual public policy have contributed to this problem.

The Bush administration's welfare reform policies spent $300 million on programs to encourage marriage among low-income couples. These programs have indirectly impacted violence in the black community, says Kigvamasud'Vasht. "That money would have been better spent on education for these women so that they could support themselves without their abusive partner."

Kigvamasud'Vasht (quoted above) is the co-director of Communities Against Rape and Abuse in Seattle who also points out the societal reasons women do not report abusive behavior including fear and mistrust of law enforcement, faulty procedures for dealing with domestic disputes that often lead to the arrest of the victim, and the fear of losing their children. Apart from it just being inaccurate, the larger problem with the lack of coverage of women of color is that it frames domestic violence as simply a middle-class white issue. The CDC statistics and the fact that at WRC approximately 96% of our clientele is African-American reveals that to be false.

The fact is that limited resources is one of the main reasons women stay in violent relationships (along with the fact that leaving is the most dangerous time)and unfortunately, due to a long history of oppression, race and economic status are inextricably linked in this country. If we don't look at the problem from a realistic perspective then we can't hope to fix it, and women will just keep dying.

Part 2: Take it Seriously

Recently Wayout TV, a Damon Wayans project, put out this video on YouTube. It features a young man who, after hearing his girlfriend is pregnant, calls on Abortion Man to fix his problem. This "super hero" then proceeds to find the young man's girlfriend and repeatedly punch, kick, and stomp on her until what we are meant to believe is a bloody fetus flies across the screen.

In short, it is horrifying.

Violence against women is not funny. This video is especially egregious given the fact that women are at greater risk of violence during pregnancy than at any other time in their life. It is important to note as well given the perceived ages of the two people in the video that pregnant women between 15 and 19 are at a higher risk for homicide than any other group.

Producing this kind of "entertainment" is not edgy, or cool, or funny. It's irresponsible at best. Making light of violence against women gives tacit approval to abusers and would-be abusers, and tells the rest of society that this type of violence is really no big deal.

H/T Feministing

Women's bodies are not public property

Two years ago in Oklahoma, Riccardo Ferrante, now 34, followed a 16 year-old girl through a Target. He snuck up behind her and without her knowledge managed to situate his camera in such a way that allowed him to take photos under her skirt.

Last week Oklahoma's Court of Criminal Appeals ruled in a 4-1 decision that this did not constitute a crime. Blogger Lawhawk has posted the "Peeping Tom" statute under which Ferrante was originally charged.

Every person who uses photographic, electronic or video equipment in a clandestine manner for any illegal, illegitimate, prurient, lewd or lascivious purpose with the unlawful and willful intent to view, watch, gaze or look upon any person without the knowledge and consent of such person when the person viewed is in a place where there is a right to a reasonable expectation of privacy, or who publishes or distributes any image obtained from such act, shall, upon conviction, be guilty of a felony.

It was the majority opinion of the Oklahoma Criminal Appeals Court that once this 16 year-old child dared to wear a skirt in public, she forfeited any "reasonable expectation to privacy" concerning what was covered by that skirt. Huffington Post contributor Jessica Wakeman questions this logic, asking:

So, let me get this straight...it's not okay to violate someone in his or her own home, but it is okay to violate that person as soon as he or she sets foot on the sidewalk. Why would the court make such a distinction? To protect all those people who accidentally take photos or videotapes of other people's private parts?

Fortunately, there was one voice of reason sitting on the bench during this case.

The lone dissenting voter on the court, Appeals Judge Gary Lumpkin, wrote, "What this decision does is state to women who desire to wear dresses that there is no expectation of privacy as to what they have covered with their dress. In other words, it is open season for peeping Toms in public places who want to look under a woman's dress."

As shocking and horrible as this case is, it isn't abnormal. It has been "open season" on women in public spaces for quite some time. Allegations that the way a woman dresses could invite sexual assault are alive and well. Allison Stokke and allies are actually having to justify why her picture shouldn't be plastered all over the Internet without her consent. Justifications, we might add, that are falling on deaf ears. The paparazzi and the media consuming public don't think twice about the moral or ethical implications of taking, publishing,or viewing pictures of a private and embarrassing nature.

So Oklahoma didn't trail blaze viewing women's bodies as public domain, they just codified it.

Stalking is still not a viable hobby

Cross-Posted

Following in the footsteps of Wal-Mart and The New York Press, Maxim Magazine has run an ad for a "wire-tapping" device that makes light of, if not outright promotes, stalking.

Photo via Feministing

While publicizing a tool used for spying without noting any ways for victims to disarm or counter the device could only be described as irresponsible, the bottom portion of the page is specifically dedicated to men who want to spy on women, and the last paragraph of the section which encourages men to use GPS to track their "targets" is labeled "Step Up the Stalk."

Step Up the Stalk

Trying to catch her in the act? Get a RealTime GPS with Cellular Assist....At less than three ounces this credit card-sized nugget keeps tabs on your "target" via cell phone signal and 24 satellites.Accessories include a waterproof case, belt clip, and the knowledge that if she catches you before you catch her, you're sleeping alone...again.

Stalking isn't funny. Stalking is a terrifying and serious problem that affects millions of women and men every year. To let the editors at Maxim know that this type of humor is unacceptable, click here.

It's all your fault

Cross-posted

Under the innocuous headline Matchmaker's Dating Dos and Don'ts CNN and Oprah.com have managed to bring together a variety of the most harmful gender stereotypes and promote them as "cute." For this article, Oprah.com interviewed Patti Novak from the A&E show "Confessions of a Matchmaker."

Patti says her years of experience have taught her one thing -- millions of women have missed the mark when it comes to love. "Somewhere along the line, and I'm really not sure [when], we lost our common sense," she says.

Unfortunately, Ms. Novak's definition of "lost our common sense" is that women are gradually abandoning the trend of manipulating men into thinking that women are weak, simple-minded, dependent, or just overall less than human. The most telling example of Ms. Novak's view is the "pickle-jar" scenario she uses to illustrate how women could better help men "feel like" men.

Allison's take-charge attitude is what Patti calls the pickle jar effect. "We are so successful today, women. We're fabulous. We work hard. We make good money. We parent. Sometimes what happens when we spend a lot of time alone, we forget to let them open the damn pickle jar," Patti says.
Patti says that if he's not in the room, go ahead and open your own pickle jar. But if he's standing there, Patti says it's just as easy to ask him to open it. "And know that you are the smarter, clever one for doing it," she says. "It's about attitude."

This type of advice, especially when it is distributed through mainstream media, does not reflect positively on men or women. It puts forth the thesis that a woman must be manipulative to be in a relationship and that manipulative behavior is a natural part of being a woman. It also portrays men as insecure and kind of stupid. Blogger Arkades at Shakesville explains this point quite clearly.

I don't think validation based on manipulation is helpful. For one thing, it's a trivial and exceptionally shallow form of validation. It's also easy to see through, at which point it becomes patronizing. Why, it's hard to see how men could possibly survive out in the world at all, so easily and capriciously are our poor egos pumped up and beaten down at every turn!

My advice, to women *and* men: no one rational cares about stuff like who opens the jars. No man should feel slighted if a woman opens her own jar of pickles. Any man who *would* feel slighted by this is clearly not ready for a relationship among equals. Furthermore, a woman *pretending* that she can't do something may indeed be coy, but it isn't cute, it isn't sexy, and it isn't relationship-affirming.

A woman capable of doing something for herself ought *never* feel self-conscious about her abilities, and a man shouldn't take a woman's capability as a sign that his own abilities aren't appreciated.

Carol Lloyd of Salon.com also takes exception to Ms.Novak's version of dating advice stating "What's obvious is that these formulas for harmony between the sexes request that women, no matter their empowerment in the workplace or their personality, should dumb themselves down to placate their lovers. " We would argue that Ms.Novak's line of advice also portrays being in a relationship as more important than being secure in who you are and having people appreciate you for that.

To recap, according to Ms. Novak, the following are impressions women want to avoid giving out if they want to find love.

"[It's like,] 'I love my life. It's great. It's perfect.'"

"I'm content. I'm having fun,'"

We are so successful today, women. We're fabulous. We work hard. We make good money.

With some parts of the mainstream media encouraging women to be manipulative and ashamed of themselves and other parts proclaiming that women are naturally stupid and deceitful, it's not hard to see why violence against women is so prevalent and misunderstood in our society.

Oh, The New York Post

From the publication that brought you Ike "Beats" Tina to Death, comes this charming and poignant "article", Miss-Leading: The truth about gal's serial fibbing.

Now strictly speaking this is not an article, it's a sub par book review. And if the New York Post had characterized it as such, I might not find it worth writing about. However, they are presenting the findings in this book as factual news rather than the results of an extremely small and flawed study.

Deceit, thy name is woman.
Most females lie "more cleverly and successfully than men" about everything from infidelity and facelifts to barhopping and shopping binges, according to a new book.

Susan Shapiro Barash, author of "Little White Lies, Deep Dark Secrets: The Truth About Why Women Lie," claims to have done a study encompassing 500 women nationwide. The NY Post does disclose that Barash obtained the subjects of her study through an ad on Craigslist where she solicited women who wanted to confess fibs they had told in the past. I'll say it again, she put out an ad asking for liars, and is now claiming the fact that liars have lied is scientific proof that women lie more than men. In addition to the flawed method of gathering subjects, The NY Post did not seem to think it was important that there was not a male group involved in the study for comparison purposes.

The mainstream media portrayal of women as inherently stupid, or inherently deceitful is not only offensive, it's dangerous. These stereotypes are often used by batterers in domestic violence situations to justify the on-going abuse, or used as a vehicle to deny to the public that abuse ever took place. It's this type of thinking that leads to women’s disclosures of violence not being taken seriously by clergy, family, law enforcement, etc. If you're doubtful that these portrayals are in line with mainstream attitudes about women, just ask yourself how a piece this offensive and this deeply flawed got through an editorial board and into a newspaper, and remained there with little public protest?