Letter to the Editor

Oh hey peeps, it's been a while!

Anyway, thought I'd drop by and link you to the letter to the editor I just sent in for a class assignment. It's for a course on Women's Sexualities, and we had to find an article in Canadian print media that made us angry. The assignment is due tomorrow and I've been trying to find an article that makes me angry for, like, a week now...turns out I do not get angry very easily.

Then, today, I was checking the various newspapers' websites, as I have done daily for the past week, when I came across this article: http://www.thestar.com/living/article/1063983--how-to-have-a-long-happy-marriage-without-medication

Below is the letter I wrote in response. I'll let y'all know if The Star publishes it! (P.S. Read the article first, then my letter!)

Marriage and Sexuality are not one-size-fits-all

Re: “How to have a long, happy marriage – without the medication” by Nancy J. White

I would like to take issue with the article written by Nancy J. White, published on October 3 on the Toronto Star website, featuring an interview with Iris Krasnow about her new book. This book, The Secret Lives of Wives, sounds like a fresh, insightful perspective on 21st-century wives, which is, regrettably, more than I can say for the tone of the interviewer’s questions. There were several instances in the relatively short excerpt of the interview in which I detected a decidedly judgmental air in these questions.

It was completely unnecessary for Ms White to end a question with “that doesn’t sound like a happy marriage” or include other judgments like “that sounds very 1950ish” – such comments certainly did not add anything positive to the interview, except that I found myself admiring Ms Krasnow for the diplomacy of her responses and the skilful avoidance of Ms White’s leading questions.

Neither women’s sexuality nor marriage has ever been one-size-fits-all, even when Ms Krasnow’s octagenarians first wed, and feminists have worked tirelessly to bring this deceptively simple fact into the open. Ms Krasnow, for her part, attests to this by presenting a number of anecdotes from happily married wives of varying ages, who have discovered a variety of strategies to make their marriages work for them and their partners. This is reflected in Ms Krasnow’s wish to “give people the freedom to rewrite the rules of their own marriage and not feel propelled to adhere to a gold standard marriage, which does not exist.” I acknowledge that some of the featured wives’ lifestyles may be seen by some as unconventional, but, as Krasnow stated in response to one of Ms White’s questions, “I’m not judging her marriage,” and I sincerely wish that we would all extend the same courtesy for, in all actuality, who are we to judge?

SUCH a Good Day

For real. I definitely haven't been this overwhelmingly happy in some time.

Here are a few things that made my day:

• It's my week off work, and it hit me as I was heading to the streetcar stop in this gorgeous summer weather: "Oh yeah, this is what summer feels like!" Having time to see friends and go downtown and enjoy what Toronto has to offer. After having been in a microcosm of more-than-full-time work for 5 weeks, this afternoon felt like I was finally emerging from my seclusion and whole-heartedly taking in my surroundings.
• [This, in relation to being home for my week off:] seeing my cats and receiving a surprise e-mail from another close friend, who is usually somewhat reticent with her feelings yet said, plainly, that she misses me.
• I began reading Bossypants on the streetcar on my way downtown, and it's fabulous.
• I met a friend for dinner downtown, and we went to one of my favourite restaurants. We headed up to the rooftop patio and were seated immediately.
• The restaurant was playing Adele's latest CD, 21. I *love* Adele.
• The food was awesome, as always.
• We then went to the TSO's late-night performance of Mahler's 5th symphony, and it was absolutely INCREDIBLE. (Potentially the fact that it was kind of late at night and I haven't got much sleep this past week so am slightly sleep deprived, or because I listened to the majority of the symphony with my eyes closed and just let the music wash over me contributed to this feeling, but still.) The "Adagietto" movement especially (see below) was just stunning, and it literally nearly moved me to tears. I have never, ever experienced a piece of music like it.
• As I discovered when I got home, the girl with whom I've been chatting on okc also prefers that movement.
• ...and, on a slightly shallower note, I felt pretty good about what I was wearing/how I looked today.

I would stay up to continue basking in the day's amazingness, but the sleep deprivation is catching up with me. Also, lest you be annoyed with all this gushing, a gripe to balance it: I'm pretty sure I'm developing an ear infection. So.

Unsolicited advice: Subtle over-protectiveness

I think I may have just figured out the key to my dad's over-protectiveness: unsolicited advice. He's been doing it for years (which is interesting, because he also tries to give it up for Lent every year!), but the most recent occurrence happened just a few minutes ago. He dropped by my room upon coming home from work to say hi, and, seeing my tax refund cheque on my dresser, he expressed surprise that I hadn't cashed it yet. I mentioned that I was waiting on a rent cheque from one of the roomies and that I wanted to cash everything all at once. Makes sense, no?

But then he asked me which month this rent was for, and I said March, totally nonplussed. Then at dinner 20min or so later, he brought up something about how, in his own experience, it's always tricky business lending money to friends, and how I should never let it go that long before collecting the money because I ran the risk of losing it altogether.

Now, as far as advice goes, I suppose that little tidbit - be careful of lending money to friends - holds some value. But the thing is, its delivery was unnecessary because I don't see the late rent as being a problem. I know I will get the money, and I'm not afraid to ask for it. Yes, it is midway through April and this rent was due March 1, but I've chosen to be lenient about the dates because of various circumstances of which my father is unaware.

You see, what he did was think, "Hm, in my experience, if the cheque is THAT late then that's a problem in my books." In my books. From my casual response - "oh, March..." - he should have known that it's not a problem in my books. And if it's not a problem, then I'm not looking for a solution! You see?

If there had been some sort of problem, like if a friend had owed me a sum of money and had been unwilling to pay it back, then that would be a problem and I may have come to my parents for advice. And then my dad's "be careful lending money to friends" lesson would have been both appropriate and valuable.

This reminds me of Tom Bodette's quote,“The difference between school and life? In school, you're taught a lesson and then given a test. In life, you're given a test that teaches you a lesson.” My dad, like school, taught the lesson without any guarantee of a test [actual money-lending problem] even happening; I would have been taught the lesson on my own had the test occurred IRL.

Don't get me wrong, my dad has a lot of valuable things to say and wisdom to share, but because of his poor timing he ends up coming across as preachy. I think one of the main things that bothers me about his unsolicited advice is that, often, he is preaching to the choir because I wouldn't make the mistake he's preaching about...which makes me feel like he's not giving me enough credit.

On ANTM and Narrative Bias

I've been watching Cycle 16 of America's Next Top Model (studying? what studying?) and was reminded the other day of narrative perspective and bias (which is something that came up a lot in my Children's Lit course). The main thing to know about this is that the narrator of the story pretty much controls its direction. He/she controls how much information the reader is privy to, and basically manipulates the reader's attention.

Narrative bias applies, in a big way, to ANTM. I noticed last cycle that the girls I was rooting for ended up making it quite far in the competition. I wanted them to win because I could tell they were good people, and good models, and thought they deserved to win. It was clear from their interviews and interactions with the other girls that they were Nice People who deserved to win more than the bitchy girls.

I can feel myself slipping into this same pattern of cheering for the nice girls (this cycle, Jaclyn and Hannah) and wishing the bitchy girl (Alexandria) would be kicked out already. I asked myself why Alexandria was being kept on the show, week after week, when it's so clear that she doesn't get along with the other girls and is annoying and mean and doesn't deserve to win. And then, in episode 16.05 Alexandria mentioned something about how she's suffered "every kind of abuse imaginable." And then it hit me: Oh. She is a multi-dimensional Person who is far more complex than "the Bitchy Girl." The other contestants had a similar realization when they peeked in Alexandria's diary, expecting to discover a cruel diatribe against every girl, and instead found entries wondering why the other girls don't like her.

Now, Alexandria may be bitchy IRL, but I believe ANTM has been portraying her unfairly - as a uni-dimensional bitch. When she probably is not. And I understand why they do it: to make for more entertaining television. (Do I give a fuck about modelling? Please. I watch ANTM for the drama!) I just need to remember to take it all with a grain of salt, because the people behind ANTM are manipulating the footage in order to create drama. Their portrayal of the girls is not necessarily how they are IRL.

That Time I Went To See A Movie All By Myself

I went to see a movie tonight, solo, for the first time evah. It turned out to be no big deal. I sat in the back and laughed to myself at the funny parts and ate popcorn for dinner and headed home. In case you're wondering, the movie I saw was Barney's Version. It was pretty good, though nothing spectacular. It was a very spur-of-the-moment decision - really, I was looking to see something sad, and the description (a retrospective of Barney's life) sounded sad enough. (It wasn't, though. I barely teared up!)

I'd been at the local library (after forcing myself to get out of the apartment for a change of scenery), writing in my journal for a good two hours as I tried to figure out some things that have been bugging me in my life - mostly, my Future (summer / courses for next year / what to do after grad). Normally it helps to get everything down on paper, because it gives me perspective, but I think that, this evening, the writing was actually making it worse.

I just wanted to take a break from my life; to escape my mind. Hopping on a plane somewhere was appealing but wholly impractical, so I settled for a temporary vacation. I decided to either get rip-roaringly drunk or to go see a movie. I debated in my mind about whether I should text Rebelle to see if she would join me, because I assumed she would say no. I did end up texting her, and she did end up saying no (was tired & had a headache). I didn't know who else to ask, so I decided that I would just do it alone. Since I didn't feel like getting drunk all by myself (and also I'd left my ID at the apartment), I decided to see a movie. I checked the movie listings and saw that Barney's Version was starting in 6 minutes. Luckily, I was 4 minutes from the theatre so I speed-walked there, bought some popcorn for "dinner," and watched the movie.

I do feel better now, even though absolutely nothing has changed...except, I can again pretend that everything is fine. (Read: repress. If I learned one thing from Personality Psych, it's that I am a repressor.)

...I don't really know why I am posting this, because I had all these thoughtful, actually interesting topics I've been meaning to blog about for weeks...but, I've learned, when "inspiration" strikes, it's best to go with it. So here I am.

Born This Way?

I have "Born This Way" stuck in my head. Probably because I listened to it on repeat about 6 times today while I was...doing something online. I can't even remember what.

So here I was, heading to the shower, humming "Baby, I was born this waa-a-a-ay" when I paused to think, 'Was I born this way, though?'

People like to obsess about causation. A lot. And it totally makes sense - we want to understand the world we live in. I get that.

But, in this day and age, technology allows us to get increasingly closer to Answering Life's Great Questions, including - probably most relevantly, to me - is sexual orientation a choice? Or is it something you are born with?

Nothing's been proven. And really, I don't want it to be. I'm scared of what consequences the outcome would have.

I really just wish people would leave it alone. The fact of the matter is that queers do exist. Instead of spending resources in order to determine causation (read: assess blame), why not put them towards the improvement of these people's lives.

Personally, I'd prefer the outcome to be "nature" as opposed to "nurture" (because then people would not be blamed) BUT my horror about the idea that "stamping out the gay gene" could become a reality grossly outweighs my desire for a conclusive answer. 100,000%

Normalization

I volunteer at a place that provides a listening ear for LGBTQ youth, and the other day I was thinking about how a lot of the issues these youth are concerned about can be grouped into two categories.

1. People who are scared of coming out because their peers/family/religion, etc. might not be supportive of them (to put it lightly, as some of them face ostracism or being kicked out);

2. People who are concerned that what they're doing (e.g. cross-dressing, having sex with men and liking it, etc.) is wrong. In a way, these folks are easier to deal with, because all they really need to be told is that it's NORMAL.

Conclusions I've made from this: there needs to be alot more public awareness about sexuality. I'm reminded of the debate regarding the now-scrapped sex ed curriculum proposed by Premier Dalton McGuinty. To all the naysayers who effectively killed this proposal: I am sorry if you think the proposed knowledge would corrupt your child. I understand that you have the child's best interests at heart. BUT here's the thing: you can't stop people from being gay, liking cross-dressing, or being a bottom. It's who they are, and if they don't realize that it's totally normal and fine to feel that way, well, that can mess someone up. I've found that one of the biggest steps of the coming out process is coming out to oneself, and if you cant accept yourself for who you are, well, a lot of pretty horrible feelings can be dredged up. I've been there. So tell me, is THAT in my best interests?

Catholic Schools: A Rude Awakening

The Halton Catholic District School Board (HCDSB) recently banned Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs) because they go against Catholic ideology. In an article in Xtra!, the board’s chairperson justified this ban by adding, “We don’t have Nazi groups either.” I’m sorry – DID SHE JUST COMPARE QUEERS TO NAZIS???

However, it is not that sentence in particular with which I take issue but rather the idea behind it. Frankly, I am disappointed in the Catholic school board. In the interest of full disclosure, I will say that I attended Catholic school from K-12, though not in the Halton district, and, while I was raised Catholic, I don’t consider myself to be one. Growing up, I always knew that the Catholic Church was not a fan of queers (the whole marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman thing, ya know?), but none of their stances had really ever affected me personally. (Example: Oh, you say I can’t marry a same-sex partner? Well, I live in Canada, so I actually can. Ha!) Like, the Pope would sit there in Vatican City making decrees and I could decide whether or not I wanted to follow them. But when a school board – the place you go every single day to be educated and become a worldly citizen – places an outright ban on GSAs, that’s something that can’t be ignored because the consequences are immediate.

I’ve always held this ideal that in the school system the students’ well-being should be Priority Number One. In a perfect school system, if a gay kid was being bullied and the presence of a GSA could help him out, then the GSA would be there. End of story. A kid’s well-being should take precedent over things like political agendas or belief systems, any day. So when GSAs are banned, in my mind the meaning behind the message is twofold: the less-than-groundbreaking A) Being queer is unacceptable [so what else is new?], and the infinitely-more-unsettling B) Even if you are queer, we won’t help you out.

It’s a rude awakening for someone like myself, who has always defended Catholic schools – even in queer circles where Catholic-bashing functions as an icebreaker (I’m not joking. It’s happened to me at least twice) – because my experience wasn’t like that. The circumstances leading up to me rejecting the Catholic faith were multi-dimensional, but my reevaluation of the Catholic school board is hinging on this singular incident, due to its vast repercussions. I now have to face that voice in my head, quietly insisting, “Maybe they’re right.” A rude awakening indeed. Sign the petition here!