Thursday, February 7, 2008

Senator Clinton

While perusing my regular morning blogs today, in an attempt to more productively procrastinate, I ran across this guest blogger at Bad Astronomy.

Coincidentally, I had, just last week, decided to force myself to stop calling Senator Clinton "Hillary" in conversation. Just as Mrs. BA writes, I decided that this was just a manifestation of disrespect and the inherent misogyny of our electoral politics, and of our world in general, i.e. women in positions of power (though there really aren't any) can be spoken of using only their first names, while men must be called by their last name, their title, or some dudely nickname, like "Dubya," or "Brownie," or "Governator."

Some commenters on BA's blog have said that Senator Clinton, herself, promotes this Hillary-ing by using her first name as her brand. This is true. Her website, her promotional materials, and her campaign are all about "Hillary in '08," etc. I suppose this is her perogative. It is HER campaign after all.

I still choose to try not to do so, and I find it a sad comment on our society that she finds it acceptable, even desirable. It simply illustrates that Senator Clinton is no less subject to the demands of patriarchy than any of us are. I hope to find out if she will support or encourage change when she is elected by demanding some fucking respect.

Memories of Ignorant Youth, Part I

When I was a freshman in college, a friend of my roommate's brother told me,"You look like you could suck the chrome off a trailer-hitch."

I thought this was a compliment.

Some days, I truly fear for my daughter.


First of all, I just hate it that some pharma has stolen the name of one of my favorite 80's bands for their birth control product.

Second of all, I saw an ad recently stating that Yaz, in addition to preventing pregnancy, of which prevention I am determinedly in support, also treats mood swings, irritability, headaches, anxiety, bloating, and food cravings.

Bloating, I'll admit, is annoying, but that's the limit of it. If I can't fit into my regular size pants, I go for something more stretchy or loose, like sweatpants. Now, I wouldn't want to encourage women to wear anything uncomfortable, because I, myself, refuse to do so, but why is it okay for men to wear their pants just below their jello-like, hanging, protuberant bellies, which CAN'T be comfortable for them, since just holding all that up must leave a belt-mark 1/2" deep in their backs, but we women, who might even have an excuse besides too much beer or "good cookin'", are frowned on for doing the same?

I assume the "headaches" may have been those of the male scientists who were tired of living and/or interacting with women with mood swings, irritability, or anxiety. Because, goodness gracious, women shouldn't be moody, irritable, or anxious! Especially when they are about to fucking BLEED and possibly cramp for several days. Especially when they are required to carry the full burden of birth control to begin with. Especially when, in today's jesUSbUShland, if said birth control fails, it is becoming more and more likely that a pregnant woman's uterus will become the property of the state. Nothing anxiety-inducing or irritability-causing there, huh???

And why are food cravings a bad thing? In my not at all humble opinion, the only problem with food cravings are when said food is unavailable.