2 months ago
Gabby and Tash after a sleepover at my place and tea time.
I’ve pretty much had the best weekend in a long time. Even with work interspersed, yes. Danced to cumbia, had a sleepover, met new friends who act like old friends, late afternoon tea time and the best conversations. My friends are hysterically funny and I like it like that. Talking to Cat on the phone is therapeutic. I love her! Also, Mad Men premiere tonight as though I had to mention it. Only TV I really watch and I miss the entertainment.
But enough about that, I just feel I have great folks in my life. I don’t show enough love to them but maybe winter felt like time to myself and now I’m ready to have at least a little fun. Ready for some traveling too. I miss being on the road.
I also want to say, because I don’t say it nearly enough, that I have great women in my life. Strong, beautiful, smart women who have been through a whole lot and yet still have glorious smiles on their faces. I’m grateful for how all the women friends in my life are completely different from each other and different from me yet we are still perfect for one another. So happy for this weekend and all that is to come.
P.S. it means even more to me to be taking pictures again. This isn’t a super fancy picture but it means a lot to me. And maybe I’m ready to step into doing portraits.
2 months ago
to ponder.
kndr:
at work today, while feeling like a rat in a cage sitting in my cubicle… my co worker (some of them are actually cool) sent me this article: “The new domesticity: Fun, empowering or a step back for American women?”
a good read, i think. left me with many questions…
is radical feminist ideology possible in the private sphere? how can this “new domesticity” be interpreted as an eco-feminist movement? i.e., women gaining empowerment through connection with a so called feminine ~mother earth~ (is eco-feminism really just essentialist bullshit?) (i’m leaning towards yes…) why when men engage in DIY culture is it seen as being radically anti-capitalist rather than “domestic”? what does it mean to really embrace “women’s work”? should we?although, most of the indie domestic lifestyle bloggers are white, straight, middle class women… does the politics change when women of color bloggers engage? (most certainly, i’m sure…) while white feminists we’re fighting to get out of the house for their space in the public sphere…we (woc) already hand our hands in both. as the mother-worker & working mother. is there any black feminist theorizin’ about reclaiming domesticity? (or would it even be reclaiming? since it’s something we never really had…) ok, now i’m just blabbering.
but yeah, that’s what i thought about at work today to keep from banging my head on the desk from boredom.
You shared a lot of great thoughts on an already good article. I wish they had gone over some of those things especially about women of color (which always seems to missing from the conversation).
I think another great point is the divide from the South and the North. I always remember having a garden out back and doing yard work. Now it seems special or “hip” to have an herb garden and washing your collards in the sink after you just picked them. It always just was. Visiting Chicago nearly every summer growing up there wasn’t really that. I wonder if the new domesticity is a way of not feeling so…urban. I don’t know, feeling at home in a big city can be difficult but if you’re doing all this homey stuff maybe living in a small apartment with thin walls doesn’t feel so bad. And when you’re a woman living alone in that apartment, women independent from husbands, roommates and children, well, that’s to be considered too.
And besides the white woman part, what if you’re not a college-educated woman? Most of the women running DIY blogs held the usual after-college careers, professional designers and such. Then they have steered into the direction of homemaking. Was it not what they were expecting so they retreated home? Or is it easy to make money off of a trend that is “natural” (as the article suggests)?
The article is good but its 3 pages seem to be missing something still. Yes, the hipster aspect. Yes, the DIY aspect. Yes, the economic aspect. Knitting is nice, cooking and baking is nice, gardening is nice. But what are the real factors in all of this and how do they relate to ALL women, not just white feminists.
via kndr
10 months ago
Denver via Instagram. The fest was so good. I feel enlightened! Even if I did get sick :(
10 months ago
Kimbra - Settle Down
Nothing else is important. I want to know who Kimbra is and I want her album. NOW.
(Source: youtube.com)
11 months ago
a performance by Patina Miller singing Random Black Girl. It’s about how new musicals all just so happen to include a soulful, sassy, big-voiced, big-bottomed black girl in the ensemble…
I hate being sick but at least I’m catching up on all the fun internet stuff I hardly have time for anymore. And blogging like a nerd. That’s good for illness.
Anyways, this video is so funny and SO true. Maybe this is why I hate Glee or why I wasn’t crazy about many musicals we did during my 4 years at an arts magnet high school. You don’t see many of us up there unless we’re being sassy, fat and loud. This is also something that drives me crazy about Adele. I have mixed feeling about her, but she is incredible live and her ballads are pretty strong. But why are we surprised that she sings well? And why aren’t we influenced by her to listen to soul musicians who have been around longer? Why is she OK to put on the radio? Because of her skin? I never hear Erykah Badu, Janelle Monáe or Res on the radio. And I definitely never hear black girls who are in rooted in any other music besides pop on the radio. This is not just an Adele issue; this could be said of Amy Winehouse, Justin Timberlake, or Duffy. They should sing Soul & R&B if they want to, but we should have the choice not to sing it if we don’t want to. And what the heck happened to Fefe Dobson?!
I grew up listening to everything from pop to country to R&B to jazz. And some kids would make me feel like I wasn’t “black enough” just because I owned a Blink-182 album or because I really loved Loretta Lynn. Well, I’m sorry I don’t own every rap album ever and yes, The O, Brother Where Art Thou soundtrack is one of my absolute favorites. On the site listed above, a commenter put that a girl gave a performance on American Idol and sang a country song. The judges said she did good but she should have sang an R&B song instead. Why? There’s something wrong with this thinking. I love seeing my sisters in Punk bands. I love seeing us sing folk music. Soul means many things and it’s not just R&B.
Maybe this is why I think the Afro-Punk Festival is such a positive thing and I hope it brings out many people of many shades to experience it. Even though I may not go, I’m excited about it. It’s time to open people’s eyes and let them see we all aren’t Beyonce or some random black girl singing sass in a musical.
But you know, with Fela doing so well on Broadway, The Color Purple being so awesome when I saw it in NYC a couple of years ago, here’s to the hope that there will be a lot more awesome musicals with us in it and the hope that the Random Black Girl can be any Black Girl she chooses to be.
(Source: thesmithian)
via thesmithian
1 year ago
On May 15, 2011, Psychology Today contributor, Satoshi Kanazawa posted an article entitled “Why Are Black Women Less Physically Attractive Than Other Women?”. We demand that the Psychology Today editorial board publicly account for how and why this racist and sexist article was allowed to be published on the Psychology Today website, and take transparent steps to prevent this from happening in the future. Kanazawa’s article is nothing more than a vile regurgitation of racist and sexist beliefs about black women disguised as “objective” and “scientific” research findings, and contributes to a historical legacy of using distorted “science” as a tool to justify violent ideas about and treatment of black women. Kanazawa has a history of writing biased and error-ridden articles that attempt to justify racist beliefs. Other scientists have discredited his research and his legitimacy as a social scientist has been called into question. That Psychology Today publishes Kanazawa’s often problematic articles casts serious doubt about the trustworthiness of their publications as well as the rigor of their editorial process. Psychology Today is not just a magazine and website, but it’s also a site that people access resources for mental health services for their well being. Publishing damaging and crude articles such as Kanazawa’s demonstrates a profound disrespect for anyone who turns to Psychology Today for these resources. Though Psychology Today has removed the article from their website without explanation, the editors have not acknowledged or taken responsibility for publishing the article, discussed the editorial standards they require from their contributors and whether this article satisfied those standards, or explained why Kanazawa remains as a contributor, despite being discredited by other social scientists. Psychology Today editors have a journalistic and ethical duty to be both transparent about how this article was published and accountable for this failure in public trust.
Because of the damage that this kind of misinformation creates for both the public and Psychology Today, we demand the following:
1) a public statement from Psychology Today editors demonstrating accountability for the article itself and the editorial conditions that allowed this article to be published on your website.
2) the removal of Satoshi Kanazawa as a contributor to your website, magazine, and any other Psychology Today publications based on his history of discredited research and repeatedly submitting racially biased articles to Psychology Today, including this most recent disturbing article that your editors chose to abruptly scrub from your website.
3) and the development of more thoughtful and sophisticated strategies for identifying how racism, sexism, homophobia/transphobia, and other oppressions and biases shape any so-called “objective” scientific inquiries, methodologies, and findings that your contributors examine in your publications. These strategies should be communicated to the public in an effort to be more transparent about how you are disrupting bias in your reporting.
Also, please visit this additional important change.org petition demanding that “psychological professional associations to devise a formal statement alerting the public that, given their track record, Psychology Today should not be considered a reliable source of psychological knowledge.” This petition has been endorsed by the following people: Alisa Bierria Aishah Shahidah Simmons James Braxton Peterson, Ph.D. Wil Gafney, Ph.D. Beverly Guy-Sheftall, Ph.D. Yvonne Welbon, Ph.D. R L’Heureux Lewis, Ph.D. Alexis Pauline Gumbs, Ph.D. Mark Anthony Neal, Ph.D. Jennifer Williams, Ph.D. Tamura A. Lomax, Ph.D. Erica R. Edwards, Ph.D. Tishana Trainor Tarana Burke Imani Uzuri Kenyon Farrow Linda Perkins, Ph.D. Llanor Alleyne Yolo Akil Kim Ford Yaba Amgborale Blay, Ph.D. Ruby Sales Brittney Cooper, Ph.D. Susana Morris, Ph.D. Tiona McClodden Amina Wadud, Ph.D. Moya Bailey Sarah Haley, Ph.D. Gwendolyn Zoharah Simmons, Ph.D. Tracy Sharpley-Whiting, Ph.D. Sofia Quintero Osizwe Raena Harwell, Ph.D. Nuala Cabral Alondra Nelson, Ph.D. Asha French Salamishah Tillet, Ph.D. Joan Morgan Crunk Feminist Collective Ava DuVernay Carla Jean-McNeil Jackson, Esq. Christa Bell Marlo Denice David, Ph.D. Valerie Ann Johnson, Ph.D. Carla Stokes, Ph.D.
Please reblog this and sign the petition by clicking the photo or visiting this page.
When this article came out, I actually wasn’t upset. I thought it was absolutely ridiculous especially coming from someone who has written some outlandish articles before. It was something I felt people wouldn’t take seriously and I have the hope that the majority of them didn’t. What did upset me, however, was that Psychology Today deleted the article and shied away from who this man was and what reasoning that such an article should be published. I’m glad it opened up a lot of dialogue about race and sexism but it doesn’t excuse not getting an apology.
UPDATE: Apparently they apologized just yesterday. Link here. I don’t know what other measures will be taken but hopefully future publications, schools, etc will find Kanazawa a complete joke.
via blackfashion
2 years ago
This Is Informative, You Should Watch It of the Day: Feminist Frequency takes a look at how a significant number of blockbuster films we know and love are incapable of passing Dykes to Watch Out For’s Alison Bechdel’s “Bechdel Test,” which requires a film to fulfill all three of the following requirements: #1. The film has to have at least two women in it; #2. Who talk to each other; #3. About something besides a man.
Pretty eye-opening stuff.
[/film.]
Wow, that was interesting and pretty informative. I thought about all the movies that are my favorite films in order to see if they past the test. Some do not but my top favorite films do and they are Imitation of Life (1959 version) and Ghost World. The former had four women in it and featured a lot of situations about race and mother-daughter relationships. The latter was two girls after high school who basically don’t know what to do. Pretty similar to my own experience and why I loved it so much. I liked the comic also. I don’t know if this is telling sign of what I expect to enjoy in movies. But I wonder if even if a movie passes this “test” is it still empowering to women? Like I’m not a Sex and the City fan at all (aside from all the clothes they wear) but there are four women who are best friends and talk about everything from aging to motherhood. I am happy that a movie like that is being made but can’t be sure if it mirrors what my idea of what a womanist is.
Then there are cheesy flicks that I loved like Romy and Michelle’s High School Reunion that might not be looked at as womanist film but I loved it and thought it had a powerful story about just loving who you are and where you are in life. I thought it was sweet. You can throw Clueless in there too and although much raunchier, Mean Girls I suppose. I also want to point out if there is one woman and one girl, does that count? I loved the relationship between Miss Honey and Matilda, and Bette Davis’ character in Now, Voyager with her younger co-star. I think that’s important considering how the media likes to pit older women against younger women.
All in all, I found this really impressive and something I would not have otherwise thought about. I enjoy watching movies, so much that I’ve actually been trying to take them apart and review them. I think this is another way of looking at movies and seeing where the movie industry is heading. I would love to one day write a screenplay or even something for the stage. But this has got me wondering, would I write it about more than one woman and would they discuss more than hunky boys? It really makes you rethink everything.
via thedailywhat
