December 2008 Archives

So this is Christmas

| | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)
Hmm. I read back over the last post, about the police not really caring about women being at risk while they pretended to investigate the murder of Rachel Nickell in 1992. I think I pretty much covered the points I wanted to make; abuse, violence and murder of women because they are women is thought of as so ordinary that the police didn't seem too bothered about catching the real killer and the media's reporting of the sentencing of her killer was focused on him and the man who was falsely accused.

*****

Christmas has come and gone again, this time with no attempts at breaking bones, so that's an improvement. My beloved husband gave me a purple iPod nano and a bunch of Hello Kitty stuff. His present from me is due to arrive about the 31st, and I'm convinced that Amazon took forever to despatch it (I ordered on the 12th, they emailed to say they'd sent it quite late on the 23rd) because I went for free delivery, and everyone in the world who paid extra for delivery, up 'til about the 22nd had their order processed and despatched first. Paranoid? Moi? The rest of his gift, and my brother's, is in the country but I have to pay £15 customs before I can get my mitts on it. 

My hair has changed colour again.

Soon, I'll hopefully be regaling you with tales of adventures in making notebooks and bags. There are plans afoot and wheels beginning to turn in my head (slowly, the hamster's a bit out of practise) but there might be something in it. Stay tuned for more thrilling details...
Someone, a man named Robert Napper, has finally been convicted for the murder of Rachel Nickell in 1992.

I'm disgusted by the behavious of the Metropolitan Police in the handling of this, and related, cases. It serves to underline exactly how unimportant women's lives are to this constabulary, a body who are supposed to protect the citizens under its jurisdiction. 

Due to other things in my real life just now, I can't take the time needed to really get into this in any depth; here's the main Guardian story. Also, some links to other parts of this story, if you are seeking more.

My main concerns in this:
  • Napper's childhood. I don't disagree that it was clearly traumatic, and he is very damaged because of that. But I'm not convinced that that in some way mitigates his crimes; far too many children grow up in environments that are similar and manage to not rape or murder anyone. I fear that certain elements of the media will focus on this, and describe him as 'depraved', 'a monster', 'inhuman'; the usual language used to descibe rapists, especially as he raped and murder a 4 year old girl. This othering of rapists serves to reinforce the myth that rapists aren't ordinary people and that they're all monsters.
  • the focus on the apology to Stagg. Yes, life has not been easy for him for the last 16 years and he fully deserves an apology. However, had the police done thier jobs a bit better, and properly, Ms. Nickell would not have necessarily died. That an apology to a wrongly-accused man takes precedence over the brutal murder of a woman doesn't sit comfortably with me.
  • the lack of concern of the Met over the danger to women presented by Napper. He could've been stopped at several points, but wasn't. 
I could likely write quite an essay about all this; but I simply don't have time. Maybe tomorrow!

Five Things

| | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
I've never actually been tagged before! Jud tagged this one.

What were you doing five years ago?
1. I had just seen Eddie Izzard's Sexie show, so was probably still giggling about suggestive spelling.
2. Trying to get my life back on track after breaking off contact with Iain. Never before or since have I felt so fragile and uncertain.
3. Dealing with the death of Fred, my hamster. He'd made it past 2, which is quite impressive.
4. Working lots, as Christmas is always the busiest time in retail.
5. Christmas shopping, probably.

What are five things on your list for today?
1. Tidy the bedroom
2. Sort out Ken's birthday present
3. Tidy the desks
4. Vaccuming
5. Coffee with Mum this evening

What are five snacks that I enjoy?
1. Breadsticks
2. Twiglets
3. Vanilla custard doughnuts
4. root vegetable crisps
5. pretty much anything that Hershey make in the Reece's range

What are five things that you'd do if you were a billionaire?
1. buy a house here and a nice apartment in Manhattan
2. take in stray cats
3. donate lots of money to Rape Crisis and Women's Aid
4. find a way to support women in Congo and Darfur, possibly by setting up a charitable foundation
5. download an awful lot of music from iTunes

What are five jobs that you've had?
1. Trainee Manager
2. Supervisor
3. Optical Assistant (a shitty, boring-to-weeping job that involved too many ears)
4. Bar Person
5. Care Assistant

Who are five people that you want to tag?
1. Pilkfin
2. Aquarius
3. Ken
4. any lurkers that I'm unaware of
5. anyone who feels like it themselves (if you and lurkers could drop a link in comments, that'd be great)

Meme-a-licious!

| | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
Today's manic memery madness, about media and pop culture, comes to you courtesy of SnowdropExplodes.

Movies:

What are your three favorite movies of all time?
Metropolis (Fritz Lang's, not the anime one)
Like Water For Chocolate
So I Married An Axe Murderer ("We have piper doon, I repeat, we have a piper doon.")

Who are your three favorite movie characters of all time?
Amilié
Dr. Evil (before we knew him as Dougie)
The cleaner bot in Wall-E

What are three movies you can watch repeatedly and not get sick of?
Metropolis (I've never seen the one with the Queen soundtack, could be interesting)
Singles
This Is Spinal Tap

What types of movies do you most enjoy?
Comedy, Sci-Fi, Kids animation

What movie character did you most idolize as a child?
The only one that comes to mind is Dr. Gillian Taylor.

Three movies you like but your friends hated?
Party Monster
Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back
can't think of a third

Who are three of your favorite actors?
Patrick Stewart
Mike Myers
Johnny Depp

Who are three of your favorite actresses?
Charlize Theron
Meryl Streep
Frances McDormand

What are your three favorite “cheesy” movies?
Er...?


Three movie characters you are most often compared to?
No characters, but I was told I looked like Anne Hathaway, once.


Television

What are your three favorite TV shows?
Air Crash Investigation
Fraiser
Star Trek: The Next Generation

Who are three of your favorite TV Characters?
Niles Crane
Worf
Phoebe Buffay

What shows do you NOT Miss?
I miss 'em all what with not having a telly!

What three television characters are your most often compared to?
Phoebe Buffay. That's the only one.

All time guilty pleasure TV shows?
Friends


Books:

Who are your three favorite authors?
Elizabeth Wurtzel
Terry Pratchett
and I'm struggling to think of a third...

What are your three favorite books?
Like Water For Chocolate
Shopgirl
Good Omens
(also; Moondust, Happiness™ and Speciality Topics In Calamity Physics)

Who are three of your favorite fictional characters?
Tiffany Aching
Mirabelle
Agnes Nitt

Favorite Guilty Pleasure Author?
Marian Keyes

Favorite Fiction Genres?
Er...?

Favorite Non Fiction Genres?
Sociology, Feminism, History


Music:

Three Favorite Bands?
Smashing Pumpkins
L7
Le Tigre

Three favorite songs?
Jane Says... - Jane's Addiction
Set The Ray To Jerry - Smashing Pumpkins
Turn My Way - New Order

Favorite types of music?
Alternative, Rock, Electronic

Musicians You Almost Always Like?
Smashing Pumpkins, Le Tigre, Leonard Cohen, L7, Manic Street Preachers, Blur, Radiohead, VAST, Sia, Ladytron, Rage Against The Machine, Andy Williams, Frank Sinatra, Nina Simone, Garbage, The Cure, Fiona Apple, Depeche Mode... I think I'll stop there for now!

Guilty Pleasure Band?
The Bloodhound Gang

Recommend One Movie, One TV Show, One Book & One Musical Artist/ band to your friends:
Some Like It Hot, Fraiser, No Logo, Ladyhawke

Hehehehehehehe......

| | TrackBacks (0)
Apparently the X Factor finished last night. Even if I had a television, I can assure you that I wouldn't watch such mindless pap. 




Leonard Cohen - Hallelujah

And a cover that I can get on board with. For me, I still holds true to the spirit of the song.



Jeff Buckley

The only good thing I can say about the X Factor using this song is that it will help to boost the Leonard Cohen pension fund. And it might introduce him to people who have otherwise not come across his work. Having seen Leonard Cohen perform the song himself, this past summer, I have no desire to hear the mass marketing hijacking of this song, so if you're desperate, look it up on YouTube yourself!
Haven't been feeling festive. I don't have a tree, have so far received one card and haven't been out much. I'm hoping that Ken will be here before Christmas, but there's been quite a bad ice storm where he is just now, so it's a bit uncertain of when exactly he'll be back. Bah.

Anyway, I'm not going to get all grumpy, not now at least, anyway. Catching up on Shakesville on the reader, I followed a link to this Christmas story, written by Shakesville contributer Teh Portly Dyke. Not only did I have a good laugh (it's the way she tells it), I have also been inspired... 

Random stragglers

| | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
While yomping across the interwebs for light research purposes for the last post, I came upon a quoted article from 2003. Unfortunately, I can't find the original article. Melanie Philips of the Daily Male, attempting to redefine rape to her taste in 2003 [via Random Observations]...

(I'll just block quote the whole shebang, I can't quite figure out which bits to quote as the whole thing is 100% distilled rape apologism)
The devil here is in the definition. To most people, rape means sexual penetration against the victim's consent, which implies of necessity an act of violence or the threat of violence... the definition of "forced against your will" is highly subjective. It can so easily translate into "if you didn't want to", which can become meaningless. Although the study claims the word 'forced' implies an assault, it does nothing of the kind... A woman might feel forced to have sex against her will, for example, if her lover tells her that otherwise he will leave here for another woman. Or she might be an unwilling participant because he is drunk, or hasn't had a bath for a week, or she doesn't love him.

The crucial point is that in such circumstances she is participating in sex even though she could choose not to do so. She is therefore not the victim of violence. By any fair-minded or common-sense definition, this is not rape...

[B]elieve it or not, the 'raped' women in the survey themselves don't think what has happened to them is rape. The study actually admits that, of the women who the researchers said had been raped, fewer than two thirds themselves described what had happened to them as rape. And fewer than three quarters of those who the researchers said had experienced sexual victimisation thought of this as a crime...

The ideological bias that is clearly driving this research is underlined by a crucial omission. The study says that most sexual violence is committed by partners. But -- highly significantly -- it omits to make a distinction between partners and spouses. It therefore does not tell us whether women suffer as much sexual assault from husbands as from boyfriends or cohabitants.

Yet all the available research suggests that the risk of sexual violence is negligible within marriage, and is hugely increased among cohabitants or more casual sexual partners. Marriage is actually the best physical protection against sexual violence.

Shorter Melanie Philips: If there's not actual violence or outright threat of violence, it's not rape. If women are resistant to calling their experience rape, it's not rape. (It's sex that you did not chose to participate in.) If you're married to your partner, it's not violence. (Seriously, did Ms. Philips sleep through 1991?) In fact, it's only rape when I say it is.

-----

Via Shakesville: Overcompensating - Internet Comix

"Rape is not what George Lucas did to your childhood. Rape is not what happens when a sports team beats another sports team by a wide margin. Rape is not what happens when your electric bill is higher this month than it was last month. Rape is when a person violates another person in the most despicable, degrading way imaginable and among the myriad of terrible things humans can do to one another, rape is among the worst. I think the casual misappropriation of the concept of rape extending all the way to its widespread comical usage is disgusting even by Internet standards. Off my chest."
Amen to that.
"Sex makes beasts of men and leaves women at risk" from the Irish Independent.

The whole article is based on the premise that men are "not merely profoundly different from women; they are also profoundly worse." The (male) author states that this is a contradiction of the central feminist belief; that men and women are equal in all things.  And just in case we haven't quite got a handle on what he's getting at, he says that comparing men and women is like comparing gazelles to crocodiles. No prizes for guessing which gender he sees as gazelle-like, all doe-eyed and skinny limbs, fragile and skittish and which gender he sees as predatory and cold-blooded. Puts a whole new cast on that (fake!) crocodile skin bag I once had, that's for sure... 

So, men are driven by "sexual and violent desires" that no woman can dream of. Except that women have intense sexual desires, women are capable of violence, and then there's the women who have lived through these male desires, either voluntarily or by force. And then, he talks about the gang-rape that occured in London that was recently reported*. This case was quite unusual in that the names of some of the attackers were released to the press; their ages would usually mean that they could not be publicly disclosed. But what does sexual desire have to do with the gang-rape of a 14 year old girl? Um, nothing. It was, from beginning to end of her ordeal, about power. The power that these boys believed themselves to have, especially over girls and women. 

Tangenting, I find it curious that the author described the various assaults as "oral and otherwise [...] so monstorous..." Why the emphasis on the oral rape? Because he sees anything other than vaginal penetration (consentual or otherwise) as deviant? Because he wishes to allude to anal rape without being blunt? The "otherwise" could really only refer to vaginal or anal rape, and I think it's fair to say that most people automatically think of vaginal penetration when 'rape' is used as a standalone term. His framing of it comes over as needlessly prurient. Also; "monstorous"? I really don't think othering the attackers will help to solve the problems surrounding gendered violence. Didn't you just say that "men are driven by sexual and violent desires of which women cannot even dream"? Are you arguing that men are pretty much all capable of this kind of behaviour (which is what I got from the first paragraphs) or that men who do these things are evil monsters?

And then it gets better.

He reels off the countries of decent ("immigrant stock", as if they were cattle) and describes them as lacking strong father figures. Here and I thought that women-led households were meant to make boys go gay? Growing up in a women-led household breeds rapists? Funny, my rapist lived with both his parents, in the very traditional partriarchal model. His father went out to work, mother stayed home and hoovered a lot. But let's not muddy the story at hand with facts of sexual violence. Especially when the author is getting to his main point; those damned, dirty immigrants, coming to these unsullied, law-abiding isles with their animalistic, deviant ways. Seriously, read it for yourself, the blant racism is eyebrow-singing. 

He asserts that
"Around one in 15 of all rapes in London -- about a hundred a year -- are by gangs of three or more; but other girls are so scared of the community power of their assailants that they do not report the rapes."
'Other' girls? Meaning, other than the girl in Hackney? I can't currently find an appropriate link, but she didn't exactly report it to the police. Officers happened to be on the scene when her step-father found out what had happened and went (understandably) apeshit, which attracted their attention. Would she have reported it to the police otherwise? I can't say. But given the fear of the gang that she describes, I'm thinking probably not. Also, the low reporting rate is true for all 'kinds' of rape, whether it's one attacker or 10. Fear of reprisal is amongst the common reasons why rape is under-reported. Not being believed is another common one. Because people (who make up the police forces, the courts, the juries) persist in believing that rape is when a stranger leaps out of the bushes, foaming at the mouth, and throws a woman to the ground and carries out a violent attack. Because to admit that anyone can be raped by someone known to them means that, well, anyone can be raped by someone known to them. Changing your patterns of behaviour (dressing, socialising, going out at night-time, etc...) is no protection against rape. Anyway, I'm digressing once again.

Rapists can be any man you care to choose from the hodge-podge of ethnicity, class backgrounds and social status. The one unifying feature is that they are ordinary men, not monsters. They don't often have mental illnesses, either.

And to compound the blatant racism, the author of the article then goes on to say that if the skin colours of the victims and the attackers were reversed, the issue would be awash with cries of racism. Never mind that there could be factors at work that mean people of colour might be even less likely to report... 

The crux of this man's efforts can be more or less summed up in this paragraph:
"So, here we find a refutation of just about every liberal piety accumulated since the 1960s. As in: Immigrants are generally law-abiding. Muslims invariably have higher family values. Fathers are irrelevant and unnecessary. Mothers are adequate moral guardians for teenage boys. Et cetera, et cetera."
And, of course, it's all the secular librul feminazis fault that women are raped. Because, obviously, the cure for all society's ill is the "patriarchal family". That's right, when divorce was illegal, and it was shameful to have babies out of wedlock, and abortion didn't happen legally, men didn't rape! The world was a happy place, because male violence was socialised out of them by their fathers! Everyone petted ickle bunnies and picked flowers and wrote poems about the dawn and the moonlight! No-one ever died at the hands of anyone else! I want to know which planet Kevin Myers is from, because that world seems ideal. Though I'd rather have a kitty than a bunny, but that's personal preference.

To finish this morass of far-right-wing drivel, the author goes back to his opening statements. Remember? Men are driven by desires, sexual and violent, that women can't even being to contemplate, so Martian are men. Except, he's contradicting himself again (emphasis mine)
"For there is a carnal beast inside so many men which only the rarest of women manage to equal. To be sure, women can be evil and scheming and malicious. But they are seldom violent or sexually predatory, as are so many men. So it requires an ideological dementia of quite communistic proportions for feminists to have declared "equality" between the sexes, even as they simultaneously complained bitterly about male behaviour."
And as well as contradicting himself, he's just getting it wrong. Feminists haven't declared equality, in quotation marks or otherwise. We still haven't achieved equal pay, we still live in a degree of fear of sexual violence (I wish I was joking, but while recovering from getting my IUS fitted, I recall thinking "Hey, at least if I'm raped now, I don't need to worry about getting pregnant.") What's equal about that, exactly?

Men don't have to rape. Nor do they have to visit women who are working (through their own volition or because they are being forced) as prostitutes. Lots of men managed not to. Lots of men respect women enough to not rape them. And if these men can do that, why can't more

Why can't all men do that? 

Why do I feel like Mr. Myers is pointing at the wrong things to blame, with heavy doses of throwing hands in the air and claiming that nothing can be done about it anyway? Men can stop rape, just not the way he's suggesting. It doesn't take socialisation from a patriarchal father (that would have doubtful success, for a start), it takes the concious desicion of each and every man to not rape, or indeed, commit any act of sexual violence. I know it isn't quite so easy as that; there's a lot of vested interest in saying that boys will be boys and just leaving it at that, but that's what stopping rape boils down to. It can be done. We all have to want to do it. And if Dr. Who can base a whole (rather vomit-inducing) season finale on the whole world thinking a certain thing...


Also in the news this week; stuff about the Top Shelf Report into 'lads' mags' (led by Claire Curtis-Thomas MP, who interestingly, also campaigned for the legal abortion limit to be reduced to 14 weeks) gave more fuel to the fire about whether these periodicals are harmless fun or representative of the normalization of pornography and the notion that women are little more than sex objects. If you've read my blog to any degree, you probably have an idea of how I feel about these publications, and I feel they contribute in some way to the culture in which adolescent boys feel that they have the impunity to assault girls and women in whatever way they desire; the links between this news story and the one I discussed in greater depth are stronger than many people will allow themselves to see, in my opinion.

-----

*at time of writing, the linked page contains an interview conducted with the girl who was attacked that was broadcast on the Today program this morning. I can't say if the audio content will still be available at a later date, but some of it is transcribed in other articles from other sources. Anyway, I implore all readers to take the 15 minutes needed to listen to it, if it's available to you.

Randomly, I came across this while looking for numbers and statistics; Campagin To End Rape's statistics for reported rapes versus conviction, and the percentages of all cases that made it through each step. I'm not absolutely certain on the legal meanings of each classification, but the table makes for depressing reading.

At an intersection

| | TrackBacks (0)

Snapshot of Feminist Life

| | TrackBacks (0)
Not long after waking, I found myself pondering the anti-abortion / pro-choice debate. (If you can call it a debate; pro-choicers are trying, the anti-abortion camp has it's fingers in its ears and is singing 'LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE PRE-BORN BAAAAAAAABIEEEEEEEES???????')

Anti-abortionists constantly position the argument as pro-life (pro-fetal-life, anyway; no regard is given to the woman or girl's life and how it might be affected or ended by being forced to continue to carry a child that, for whatever reason, they do not wish to have) and pro-abortion. It's all or nothing for them. To hear them tell it, at their worst, all pro-choicers would have every pregnant woman frogmarched to the nearest medical facility and forcibly terminate every pregnancy.  (Won't someone think of all the unborn babies in the abortion holocaust*???

Which is stupid, because where would we get future patriarchy smashers otherwise?

Also, haven't any of them read Freakonomics? I mean, it's a book written by a straight white man, so it must be feted and worshipped, even if he was just telling us things we already knew, interspersed with chapters that told us just exactly how wonderful this man is. One chapter was pretty much a parse of a paper that Levitt co-authored: The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime. If you can't be bothered to click through; because most abortions in the US are sought by women who are demographically less advantaged (lower income, fewer educational opportunities, poorer working conditions) that means that the current generation has fewer teenage criminals. This handily overlooks the privileged that commit crimes (possibly of a different variety, and much more likely to be dismissed by the community) but when has society ever seen more, like what is there, than we want to see? Anyway, the illustrious Levit said that abortion reduces crime rates, so it must be true. 

The cognitive dissonance, it hurts.



*there's something flinchingly offensive about likening the number of safe and legal abortions since 1967 (or 1973 in the US) to the number of people killed by the Nazis in the Second World War. The real, actual Holocaust? Millions and millions and millions of people outright murdered or worked to death or left to starve or die of disease, just because of their religious beliefs? Millions of people killed for their ethnicity? Because they were gay? Had a disability? Tell me; how does any number of ended pregnancies even begin to compare to any of that? I would really, really like to know, though I suspect it might just be the anti-abortion wingnuts minimising the very real horror of the death camps and the labour camps, the death vans, the train journeys to the camps... to try to make their point seem more valid. 

Way to shoot yourself in the foot, huh?

Recommended Reading

| | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)
"The Crime Against Women That No One Understands" from Self magazine. Cosmo can take its 'grey rape', shine it up real nice, turn it sideways and shove it somewhere the sun doesn't shine.

There are no shades of grey in rape and sexual assault. There is only consent.
The things women have to do to not get pregnant... I'm the proud owner of a shiny new Mirena IUS. I did a little reasearch last night, to see if I could get an idea of what to expect. The doctor will check the position of the uterus; fine. Right up until the actual insertion, it was very similar to a smear test, though the cold water was new. And I've been used to plastic speculums (speculi? speculae?) so a metal one was... Different. 

The insertion though? I've never known pain like it, and I've had periods where I though I was literally turning inside-out. I can't even begin to put words to it. And there seems to be two stages, insertion and positioning or something. The internet did not tell me about that. It said that it "can be a little painful". I've had unanaesthetitized teeth drilled, which was less painful. But that's OK; the doctor did a good job and it's in. 

What the internet also didn't tell me about is that there's a reaction, which is quite common (unless the nurses were just being nice), to something passing the cervix that involves the blood pressure dropping. Which happened to me. I didn't quite pass out, but my hearing and vision were going; I apparently looked very, very pale, and then I threw up. Twice. 

I'm much recovered now, though the pain at having a 32mmx32mm T-shaped piece of plastic in my uterus is not unlike a really bad cramp, so I'm going to go and curl up in a ball with my hot water bottle and whimper a little, I think.
So, I like music. This blog started with a greater focus on music I like than feminism. I will always like music, it has given me the strength to keep going more times than I can remember. I take comfort in it, I find it uplifting, it's everything I want it to be. It's like cutting, but without the inherent problems like escalation.

Thing is, I like music for boys. 

Apart from riot grrrl, which I kind of missed because I never knew it was out there (I read Melody Maker, the NME, even Q if I was feeling flush, and the focus there was in British bands, almost exclusively male) music with guitars in is generally made by men, apparently for men. The internet didn't exist in my world until I was 18, really, so finding new music was much more limited than it is now. Fucking hell, Apple are looking at what I like and suggesting things I've never heard of. And things I have; I must remember to download Echobelly's 'Great Things' at some point. Obviously, there were bands with women in even then. Elastica, for example; Sleeper (though I didn't like them, having never been a fan of jangly guitars); Lush (I wanted to be Miki after seeing footage of their performance at T in the Park. Dyed red hair, green sequinned dress and Doc Martins and a guitar. It was love, which I still haven't forgotten); Belly, L7 (who I have consistently loved since I saw them do Pretend We're Dead on Top Of The Pops in 1992) and Hole from the US... Thing is, any press attention they garnered never seemed to be about the music. It was on the periphery. Justine from Elastica was involved with Damon Albarn of Blur (one of my favourites at 15) at the time, Louise from Sleeper apparently slept with everyone in the band as a sort of interview or something, L7 dropped their trousers on The Word on Channel 4, Courtney Love was married to some guy in some band that a few people liked. Women as serious musicians were very few and very far between in music. 

I gave up reading the music press after a few years. Melody Maker vanished, the NME vanished up its own arse, as has Q. Some time during the year past, Q had a feature on the 50 best women in music. They completely undermined it by starting the feature with a full page photo of Cat Power in a pose that displayed the gusset of her knickers. They may be talented, goes the dog-whistle, but if you can't fuck them, there's no point.

The adverts in music magazines leave little doubt to the intended audience. Cars, alcohol (and not Lambrini Girls Want To Have Fun! - a drummer in a 'band' who uses Bud bottles instead of sticks and says that everything comes second to the music, including girlfriends; Jack Daniel's - the drink of 'proper' rock stars since Jim Morrison downed a whole bottle) male grooming products. The placement of these magazines in any shop leaves no doubt as to the intended audience. If I want to browse music magazines of any sort, including Classic FM's publication, I have to run the gauntlet of Nuts, Loaded, Zoo, GQ, all the male-oriented magazines that feature women pressing breasts on the cover, or suggestively hooking a finger into the elastic of an already-miniscule thong. Flicking through the RSS feed for Largehearted Boy, I came across a link to a blog by a band called Ladyhawk who are understandably fed up with being confused for Ladyhawke. The story they tell is quite funny, but the let-down is that they describe Ladyhawke's music as being "mostly for girls". The implication I get from that is that their music isn't. Despite the silly people in their story being male, Ladyhawke is (mostly) for girls. Their email is even 'ladyhawkdudes'... The music's quite good, too, but I've been totally turned off by being told it's not for me, based on my chromosomes.

Presumably, music for girls is pop music. Leona Lewis, Avril Lavigne, Britney Spears, The Pussycat Dolls, Katy Perry, Take That (and innumerable other boy bands), Girls Aloud... And they all sing about love. And pretty much only love. And getting it. Keeping it. Stealing other people's boyfriends. How much better a girlfriend you would be compared to the current girlfriend. 

See, that's the thing I hate, hate, hate about current pop music. So many songs seem to be teaching girls that other girls are the enemy. Girlfriend by Ms. Latrine, for example. Don't Cha, byt the Pussycat Dolls. These aren't the only ones, obviously, but they're the ones that have sent up home in my head and are making me eye that screwdriver with intent. 

Then there's the songs that seem to glorify relationships that are inequal. Baby One More Time describes (to me, there may be other interpretations) a girl who has been dumped by an arsehole, with little explanation ("how was I supposed to know?"), who has scarpered pretty quick ("and now you're out of sight"). She wants him back, and is willing to become whatever he wants to appease him ("show me how you want it to be"). Other songs from Ms. Spears' ouvre have a similarly submissive feel; I'm A Slave 4 U, anyone? Quite at odds with Boys ("when a girl is with one, she is in control")

The overall theme seems to be: compete with other girls/women for the attention of men, which is the ultimate prize to be fought over, like the bouquet at a wedding. Once you have it, mould yourself to whatever the man wishes you to be, at all costs. If he leaves you (because it's unthinkable to leave him), you've obviously done something wrong. You didn't do enough to keep him happy. You'll never feel love for anyone else ever again! The possibility that he wasn't right for you? Impossible! Because, ultimately, women only take on form and personality when they refract through the lens of the male gaze. 

And that is what 'girl's music' is all about, really.
1. The last time you logged onto your Myspace/Facebook/whatever, was there a new friend request?
Not that I can recall, but I was there to delete the profiles, so wasn't paying attention.
 
2. When's the last time you got a completely new haircut?
Nearly two weeks ago. I got bored and found my hairdressing scissors. The look on Ken's face when he saw how much I took off... He helped me tidy it up once I'd done the bulk of it.

3. Do you wear coloured contacts?
Nope, though I have toyed with getting sapphire blue ones in the past.

4. Do you know any redhead guys?
Not very well, but yes. It's quite common in Scotland, I guess.

5. Would you name your child after you?
No. It feels strange to say my own name. And I'd rather my child had a separate identity from mine.

6. How many vowels are there in the title of the song you're listening to now?
4. 3 A's and 1 E. I'm listening to Acapella by Negativland.

7. How many Sharons do you know?
None, at the moment.

8. Does your cell phone camera have macro?
Given that all I associate with 'macro' right now is nothing to do with my phone, I'm assuming not.

9. Are there any food/drinks within your reach now?
I have half a toffee and pecan cookie in my hand and some of a hazelnut chocolate orange on the desk. They're very sweet. There's also some sugar-free mints and two flavours of Ice Breakers, one of which is Vomitously Vile (no, that's what it's called. Really. Really. Ah, ok, they're raspberry.) and a Mega Double Lolly that's too big to eat on one's lonesome.

10. Do you ever wonder who made the very first surveys-only blog?
Absolutley, categorically, no. Of all the things to wonder, why would I wonder about that?

11. Do you post surveys anywhere else besides here?
Nope.

12. Did you get your hair colour from your mom or from your dad?
Must be my Dad, but he's been grey my entire life. More white now, now that I think about it...

13. What's something your best friend can do that you can't?
Drive on the other side of the road. Though I could. Build a theremin. Though I possibly could.... Pee standing up without having to semi-squat oddly to avoid just peeing down legs.

14. Do you know anyone who can play the flute?
Not any more.

15. Describe the nearest poster.
A periodic table of the elements that was part of the Guardian's science for kids series.

16. Did you ever date any of your school's so-called 'bad boys'?
No.

17. Do you get in trouble if you are rude to your parents?
Not really, but I wouldn't be rude in the first place. I respect them too much.

18. Do your parents always break up fights between you and your siblings?
When we fought, yes.

19. Where's the last place you cuddled?
Um. I think it was Saturday morning before Ken and I got up.

20. Are you looking forward to anything within the next 3 days?
Not exactly, no.

21. If you have a laptop, what's the colour of the bag/case you carry it around in?
No laptop. 

22. Could you tell me the square root of 121 without using a calculator?
Isn't it 7?

23. So far, have you used any foul words in this survey?
You're reading it, right? Fuck, what do you think?

24. Do you use foul words more in real life or online?
Online. I think.

25. Do you prefer aviators or oversized sunglasses?
Oversized, also purple and with glittery frames.

26. Is the last mall you went to your favourite mall?
No, as I have no favourite mall. I find them soul-sapping, miserable places devoted to the pursuit of artifice and avarice.

27. How many people do you know own an iPhone?
None. The one that I did had to give it back to o2 as it was theirs all along.

28. Do you know anybody who has the same cell phone as you?
I know someone who has the earlier model, but no. 

29. What's your opinion on leggings?
I like footless tights that stop halfway down the foot. Beyond that... meh.

30. Are you going to/did you watch the newest 007 movie, Quantum of Solace?
Nope.

31. Is Daniel Craig your favourite James Bond actor?
Hardly. Sean Connery IS James Bond.

32. How many hoodies do you own?
Three that I can think of.

33. What are three sites you visit daily?
Google reader, mail and... um.

34. Who's your favourite Desperate Housewife?
They all have their qualities and flaws. And I don't watch tv.

35. When you take a cab, do you strike up conversation with the driver?
No, but if the caddie's talkative and not hideously offensive, I'll talk back.

36. Have you ever met a dentist with bad teeth?
Nope.

37. Would you rather be blind in one eye or deaf in one ear?
Er. Pass.

38. What are you planning to wear tomorrow, if you're going out?
No plans, probably jeans and a shirt. And probably my wellies if it snows again.

39. Do you even care about what goes on in the world of politics?
Um, yes. Being a citizen of the world makes me care about politics. I find it hard to understand people who don't. I don't mean watching PM Questions every week, or anything so specific, but politics just means trying to make the world better, as you consider that to be appropriate. Human rights? Politics. The cost of food? Politics. Random people dying in terrorist attacks? Politics.

40. Do you own any Japanese makeup products?
Not that I'm aware of.

41. What's your current default ringtone?
Still Eddie Izzard.

42. When's the last time you surprised someone?
When I chopped off more than half the length of my hair and turned round to show Ken.

43. When's the most inappropriate time your cell phone has rung?
I don't think that's happened.

44. When was your last encounter with a bug?
I had a dead spider stuck to my glove a week or so ago. Ken had to remove it as I freaked out at the other end of my arm.

45. Now that this is over, are you going to do another survey?
No. I need something to do tomorrow in between taking out the bins and cleaning the loo.
1. What time did you get up this morning? 
*cough* about 12:15pm... In my defence, I've been having trouble getting to sleep before 5am.

2. Diamonds or pearls?
Diamonds, but fake are just as good. I likes the sparklies.
 
3. What was the last film you saw at the cinema? 
Igor. Yeah, kids movie, widely derided by (adult) critics. I loved it.

4. What is your favorite TV show?
Not really something I can lay claim to so much, but probably Fraiser. David Hyde Pierce is just fabulous, consistently, from the first episode to the last.

5. What do you usually have for breakfast? 
Coffee. Sometimes toast, occasionally cereal, if there's any left after eating it for dinner.
 
6. What is your middle name?
Danger.

7. What food do you dislike?
Cooked mushrooms. Anything that slimy is just wrong.

8. What is your favorite CD at the moment? 
I've moved into the digital age, sweetie. But I've just discovered July Skies and want the whole of their album Dreaming of Spires.

9. What kind of car do you drive?
None.

10. Favorite sandwich?
Tofu with mustard and spring onions and I've forgtten what else Ken puts on it.

11. What characteristic do you despise?
Bigotry.

12. Favourite item of clothing?
My blue starry dress. Or coloured tights.

13. If you could go anywhere in the world on vacation, where would you go?
New York City.

14. Favourite brand of clothing?
I loathe and despise brands and all they stand for. So most of my clothes come 2nd hand.

15. Where would you retire to?
Either the remotest part of the Highlands I can find, or Manhattan.

16. What was your most recent memorable birthday? 
My last birthday, I suppose. I can remember it and not with the feeling that I was being pushed into things.

17. Favourite sport to watch?
Um, rugby, I suppose.

18. Furthest place you are “tagging” this?
Er. Well, I have a friend/reader in Hawaii (Hi Aquarius!) who's closer to the international dateline than here. But that doesn't mean I'm expecting her to do this meme.

19. Person you expect to send it back first?
No-one, really.

20. When is your birthday?
February 16th.

21. Are you a morning person or a night person?
Night. The only parts of the morning I've seen lately have been between midnight and 5am. And I don't like it.

22. What is your shoe size? UK 6, Eur 39, US 8.5

23. Pets? 
None, sadly. I really would love to share my home with a cat.

24. Any new and exciting news you’d like to share with us? 
I'm not dead!

25. What did you want to be when you were little? 
An astronaut and a librarian.

26. How are you today?
Feeling dosconnected.

27. What is your favourite candy?
Peanut Butter Cups. Or Double Lollies.

28. What is your favourite flower?
Sunflower.

29. What is a day on the calendar you are looking forward to?
Nothing's leaping out just now.

30. What’s your full name? 
Ms. Depresso to you.

31. What are you listening to right now?
Magic by Ladyhawke.

32. What was the last thing you ate? 
It would've been last night, I can't remember.

33. Do you wish on stars?
Yes.

34. If you were a crayon, what colour would you be? 
Violet.

35. How is the weather right now? 
Cold but clear.

36. The first person you spoke to on the phone today?
No one so far, but I texted Mum and she replied.

37. Favourite soft drink? 
Irn Bru.

38. Favourite restaurant?
Um, OKO Express or the 13th Note, I guess.

39. Real hair colour? 
Light brown.

40. What was your favourite toy as a child? 
I can't recall.

41. Hugs or kisses? 
Hugs, also kisses from Ken,

42. Chocolate or Vanilla? 
Vanilla.

43. Coffee or tea? 
Coffeeeeeee.

44. Do you want your friends to email you back? 
I guess so, yes.

45. When was the last time you cried?
Monday, in the shower. I had cried so much over the previous few days, I couldn't actually produce any more tears.

46. What is under your bed? 
Hair elastics, a tissue, a couple of books and a sock or two.

47. What did you do last night?
Hung up laundry, emailed Ken.

48. What are you afraid of? 
Failure; losing grip on reality, such as it is.

49. Salty or sweet? 
Sweet, usually.

50. How many keys on your key ring? 
Three.

51. Favorite day of the week?
Meh.

52. If you can choose your talent, what would it be? 
Being able to play any musical instrument on picking it up.

53. Do you make friends easily?
Yes and no.
 
54. How many people will you tag this to?
None. Those that wish to participate are more than welcome.

55. How many will respond?
As many as I've tagged, or more.

Time for a sudden rethink?

| | TrackBacks (0)
Just read this in my reader: Strictly Come Dancing's John Sergeant to release Christmas single. That's not the problem though; my endurance of novelty Christmas singles was set by Mr. Blobby some years ago (see video attached)



The worst, most terrifying part is this: 
Sergeant will face tough competition from the X-Factor winners, whose soppy take on Leonard Cohen's Hallelujah is a favourite for Christmas No 1.
I know he's kind of desperate for cash (hence going round and round and round the world on tour) after his old manager stole his pension money, but I didn't realise it was that bad. Though on reading the wiki, the old manager also helped herself to publishing rights, does that mean that it's her giving permission on that? I dunno. And I would try to find out, but I have a to go and buy a tin-opener.

Fighting back. Again.

| | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)
It appears that no matter how hard I try to destroy myself, part of me is indestructible. In some ways, I wish I wasn't; the enormity of getting through the next few months and what I'm going to have to do to make it feels almost overwhelming. But I've reached the end of this road. I have to take that step off the precipice and trust that I land safely. I've done it before and survived, somehow. This time is quite different, I'm not going to pretend it's not, but I never know if I don't try. As someone very dear told me the other day, I take the risks instead of regretting not doing things. It's what I do.

Oh, and could the world at large take a memo? Referring to suicide as 'something you might regret' seems a bit silly. How does one regret taking one's own life, exactly?

*****

And the thing that spurred me back here? Downloading the following clip from iTunes. If you should wish to get your own free copy, search for the Secret Policeman's Ball '08 in podcasts. And while you're there, you could do worse than download the Mark Thomas interview as well.

The following clip may potentially be triggering to those sensitive to themes of intimate partner violence. But if you can, watch it. I have never seen anything so elegantly to the point.



My respectful crush on Patrick Stewart grows on an hourly basis.

This also needs a trigger warning. Having watched it myself, and listened to what he says, I feel unsettled and a little re-traumatized*.



*It take my mind of Ken leaving, the break that we are taking, the struggle to manage to get through to the next 10 minutes, and is somewhat cathartic, given that I am also struggling to come to terms with exactly what years of historical sexual violence has wrought on me and my life. You takes your silver linings where you can get them.