society

beating a drum

Last week, on The Daily Show, Samantha Bee did a segment on Male Inequality. I laughed. I did. I know, highly insensitive and inappropriate of me.

It reminded me of the men’s movements in the early 90s. Remember Robert Bly? Beating on drums? Heading out into the woods to get back to the basics of being a man?

Fast forward nearly twenty years. Dodge, oh Dodge. You produce a BEAUTIFUL Charger and you have to make it a machine that is indicative of a certain kind of MAN.

Samantha Bee, what would you say to these men? I’m guessing it would be quite similar to what these women say.

–

Disclaimer
I don’t think ALL men are like this. I DO think that the media tries to define people of all types and we the public often follow their lead without thinking about it too seriously. Shame on us.

–

Addendum
And during the 2010 Winter Olympics, Audi comes out with an “I’ve been told…” ad that addresses this.

copyRIP!

Sound Unseen screened rip! a remix manifesto, a film by Brett Gaylor, last night in a small, intimate theater recently established (this was the premiere showing) in Minneapolis, filled almost to capacity.

View the film at http://www.ripremix.com/. Pay what you think it is worth (and it is worth the money, I promise), then can rip it, do a mashup, or simply watch it. Just don’t sell it.

Figuring prominently in the film are Lawrence Lessig (@lessig on Twitter), Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, Cory Doctorow (@doctorow on Twitter), science fiction novelist and blogger, and GirlTalk (aka Gregg Gillis), mashup artist, who not only give us information about remixing and mashups, but give us background and historical references to copyright laws. Each of them also shows how complex this subject is, from Lessig commenting on the illegality of segments of the video, to Doctorow discussing the Dickens / Twain copyright issues of the 19th century, to GirlTalk’s previous career in a field steeped in intellectual property issues (biomedical engineering).

The movie is informative and entertaining. The music is amazing, the sound bites are funny, and Gaylor discusses the reasons behind his advocacy of a remix manifesto. What he doesn’t do is discuss in depth the middle of the road between complete copyright control and no copyright control and what the differences are. There is a sense of US versus THEM to this film, but in the end the lines of US and THEM are definitely blurred.

At the end of the screening, the audience was given the chance to talk to the filmmaker over Skype. The conversation was lively and interesting.

In other news in the copyright fight, BoingBoing reported today the USA, Canada, and the EU attempted to kill a treaty to protect blind people’s access to written material. Doctorow writes

At issue is a treaty to protect the rights of blind people and people with other disabilities that affect reading (people with dyslexia, people who are paralyzed or lack arms or hands for turning pages), introduced by Brazil, Ecuador and Paraguay. This should be a slam dunk: who wouldn’t want a harmonized system of copyright exceptions that ensure that it’s possible for disabled people to get access to the written word?

Doctorow amends the piece and says there is victory (for now):

Victory! — the treaty proposal survived this meeting and will be back on the agenda at the next one. We’ve got a couple months to lobby our governments and make sure that the next time they show up, they don’t embarrass us by opposing this.

See the the final conclusions of the SCCR Eighteenth Session at Knowledge Ecology Notes.

And finally, the Chronicle of Higher Education, news was posted about different copyright law curricula being offered in higher education. The author, Marc Beja, discusses the Recording Industry Association of America’s (RIAA) curriculum for teaching copyright law, and the response of the Electronic Frontier Foundation in releasing their own curriculum. He writes,

The foundation’s program, “Teaching Copyright,” includes a Web site and five 60-minute lessons that the foundation hopes will give students what it calls “the real story” about their rights when it comes to downloading movies, music, and other media from the Internet.

Interesting that Brazil figures predominantly in both the rip/remix issues and the copyright issues. While Lessig was in Brazil talking about Creative Commons, he said

I come from the land where we talk about being free. I come from a land where we are lost. You are our brother in this debate, and you must remind us of what we have lost.

Brazil, again, has reminded us. Now it is up to us to listen.

magic


After I wrote my post on faeries, a friend sent me a link to the comic strip PartiallyClips. In this particular strip, the characters are talking about magic, and how magic would be a useless discipline, like humanities or communications–although I argue that communications is in the “humanities.” Later in the week, PhD posted a strip about budget cuts and how the first to go were the humanities characters. I started thinking about two things: first, the idea of magic within the humanities, and secondly, the idea that humanities are an expendable discipline because no one quite understands them.

Magic scares people. It isn’t easy to explain, and it is often wielded by those on the outer edges of society. In much the same way, the humanities scare people. The humanities are about people. We extract information about people, analyze it, and reproduce it in different forms. This is scary for some. It is disruptive and worrisome. But it’s also the way humans are.

It is said that Socrates claimed that “the unexamined life is not worth living” (I say this speculatively, because there is some question about Socrates’ actual existence). We have been examining ourselves since the beginning of time. Is this why it is so ridiculed and feared? Have those in the hard sciences decided that we know everything there is to know about ourselves, whether it is philosophical, artistic, or linguistic? Is it possible to know everything? And if we look at it from a hard science perspective, understanding that we  are still trying to understand the full capacity of our brains, isn’t the argument furthered that there is always something to learn about the human condition?

If there was a magic discipline, it probably would be the humanities. The humanities bring us the literature, art, dance, music, thoughts, and so much more that allow us to dream about the impossible. Do you think we could have gone to the moon if we hadn’t ever dreamed about what existed up there first? Would we have cared?

Maybe I’m biased — ok, I am. I love working in a field that looks at how humans use language, how it develops identity, and how all of it changes dramatically over time. I love understanding how images and text work in conjunction to create something more powerful than if the two stood on their own. I love it. It is magic. And it’s also science. And it’s also human.

I wouldn’t have it any other way.

to the letter


I teach a Technical and Professional Writing course for juniors and seniors in disciplines across the curriculum. We discuss and practice writing in many different forms: correspondence, instructional, data analysis, and others. In the process of this course, I use email entirely for correspondence outside of the classroom. I expect return emails to be done in a formalized manner: salutation, body, and a proper closing. It is tiresome to get emails that are just attachments, or that don’t contain the name of who is writing me (this is especially bothersome early in the semester when I don’t know the names and email addresses of the students yet). My students are great about it and give me wonderful emails (my instructions were to be conversational in approach because we are spending an entire semester together and this allows me to get to know the students better).

It seems, however, that not all students are receptive to this type of writing. In fact, Historiann‘s experience was downright awful. The exchange that really amuses me is

Thank you for responding, but at the same time it is not your duty to counsel others on how to conduct themselves via email. I was never rude or inappropriate in any manner. I’ve had many professors and others I’m not well acquainted with who email me in the same fashion. There are many customs and practices and no single one is correct. You are the first person I’ve had an email exchange with that feels the need to reprimand me about email etiquette.

I’m a 33 year old man who doesn’t need to be told how to conduct myself. I do just fine. Hopefully, in the future you will be more relaxed with not only students, but any person who may be interested in talking to you about history. You will find that you shut out a lot of people in life by conducting yourself in this manner.

While it is true that there are many customs, there are also appropriate guidelines that we should follow when approaching someone to ask for assistance and whom we don’t know. In addition, perhaps it is important to remember that formality is a condition of a relationship. I write to plenty of friends and family without a proper salutation (I almost always close with my first initial — lowercase d), but I’m also very cognizant of my audience. When I write to a new professor, I always greet them with Dr. or Professor so-and-so. It is not until we’ve developed a relationship do I even ask how they would prefer to be addressed — even in email.

I believe my students deserve the same respect. I email them with a salutation, body, and a closing with my full first name — unless it is an ongoing conversation, and then I will often do without the salutation (and realize they may as well).

If I were to write an email to my husband’s pillow (if I had a husband and he had a pillow like this), on the other hand, I doubt it would get any respect from me. It may just get the trash.

a shared culture

This video is a brilliant portrayal of the ideology of creative commons. I believe in the creative commons movement, and to that end, all of my photographs are marked under a creative commons license.

That being said, I think that people often take advantage of creative commons licenses. People don’t read them, corporations ignore the restrictions based on certain licenses (mine, for instance, is attribution, no derivatives, no commercial use) and freely use works that are clearly not meant for their use (which really bothers me because they are making money off of someone else’s work, but not giving back to the artist to make sure that more works can be developed).

Now, if someone asks me for permission to use my photographs in a mashup or to do things with it, all I ask for is a copy of their created work. I will usually give permission to other artists and to not-for-profits. I like sharing my work. It’s not what I do for a living, and I want others to enjoy it.

Is it idealistic to hope that others will ask permission? Or that a shared commerce is a better commerce? If someone makes a living off of their work, that’s one thing. I can understand full copyright restrictions and recommend that their works be registered with the Library of Congress (or their country’s equivalent) to protect their full rights. But if one isn’t a full-time artist, making a living from the sales of her works, what is the harm in sharing them freely?

Is it a scary proposition to share like that? Are we so commercially oriented that sharing makes us feel like we’re missing out on something or that we’re being taken?

Personally, I hate money. It’s a necessary evil, but I hate it. I wish we could barter for goods. I’ll edit your resume if you buy me a few meals. I’ll create your website for groceries. Each person gets what they need out of an exchange, and it’s a nice way to live.

telling

Yesterday I wrote about a woman being branded by a group of people for calling CPS to protect children.

Today, I’m going to write about the way a female candidate is treated by a certain male journalist.

But first, confirm this for me. We are in the year 2007, right? And people keep saying we’ve reached the threshold of equality, right? I mean, I keep hearing younger people saying that we have complete equality between the sexes.

But…the disparity between us is still huge. Take, for instance, the election for President of the United States.

MediaMatters reports that on the Chris Matthews Show, this took place:

Asked by Time managing editor Richard Stengel, “What are you suggesting by asking does this diminish her as a commander in chief by being surrounded by women?,” Matthews replied: “No, the idea that it — well, let me just get historic. We’ve never had a woman commander in chief.”

Right…historic. Because everything should be based on what has happened in the past. As if going with the status quo — John Wayne and General Patton — has been so great for us.

What really gets me, though, is that people are actually discussing the fact that Clinton has other women surrounding her. That’s a bad thing? And then discussing their hair color. WTF?!?

“It makes a case with a certain demographic, and I noticed the picture on the front of The Washington Post the other day showed her with all these women and her crew, and did you notice, there was only one blonde out of about 15 women, so it sort of — I thought that was very telling.”

Women with needs, Matthews says. Yeah…because, really, we’re either needy, maladjusted women or supposed to be beautiful, barefoot, and in the kitchen waitin’ for our man. We’re not supposed to be ambitious, intelligent, or fraternizing with other ambitious, intelligent women. Cardinal sins, those are.

Be a good girl. Shut your mouth. Don’t try to work outside the box.

fighting the good fight

People are riled up at flickr. It seems that when flickr rolled out its newest upgrade (giving many users the ability to view their pages in seven new languages), it also disallowed German, Korean, and Singaporean users to view anything beyond the “safe” classification. (You can read more about the entire topic at Wired, CNet, and the flickr forums.)

Some users got angry (there is an entire group dedicated to creating interesting protest images like the one to the right by sil vietty non ridere troppo) — and rightly so. They are adults who wish to use the site as adults and not be treated as children. In addition, no one alerted the users that these changes were going into effect. They simply happened.

What bothers me, though, is the mob mentality. People jumped on the bandwagon before knowing what was occurring. Some people jumped in to use this as another vehicle for their ongoing grievances with flickr (and, subsequently, Yahoo!).

I hate the mob mentality. It’s almost as bad as the alleged censorship (and I won’t mince words about what constitutes censorship and what doesn’t – we all define it differently for ourselves). I’ve been watching this happen again and again in online communities for the past 20 years. Some johnny-come-latelies even push the issues further and further, carrying the arguments on after they need to be let go so that some good can come from the entire topic (and I’m not just speaking about the flickr issue here — it happens in many, many different “injustice explosions” on the Internets). People get so emotionally involved that they forget to think and rush headlong into things.

Sure, some will write passionate, intelligent treatises on the injustices. But many others simply jump on the bandwagon because everyone else is and it seems like the right thing to do. I’ve watched too many times, though, when a few days, weeks, or months later, those same people are speaking up against another injustice that is the exact opposite of the one they previously opposed.

I advocate for thinking. And listening. And being patient. I also advocate for speaking up when you think that you should. But I think that so many do not think about speaking and just spout off what comes to their mind first…and that’s usually in anger.

As I’m often told in the workplace, choose your battles. You can’t fight them all and you shouldn’t try. When you do, you begin to look like someone with a grudge and not someone who is justified in your outrage.

barriers


A month or so ago, I watched a few documentaries on the Sundance Channel about the issue of immigration over the U.S.-Mexico border. I watched these shortly after having returned from northern Mexico, the very area where immigrants arrive in the United States after walking for miles and days over the harsh desert.

The first documentary I watched was Crossing Arizona. This production tried to look at the issue from both sides but I always felt like the makers were trying to make a very specific point about the issue that leaned a bit more toward those who are fighting immigrants. They didn’t talk as much to the people who were trying to come across the border, to them as they did cross over, or understanding what would incite someone to risk his/her life to go to a country that both wants them and hates them. They are entering a very racist, elitist, judgmental society that will treat them badly. And yet, they come by the 1000s.

Why?

The documentary didn’t discuss that at all. Instead, we heard plenty from the so-called Minuteman Project. We heard all about their rights and their feelings about this issue (which, obviously, are very negative toward the immigrants). We heard from a Native American man (Tohono O’odham nation) who puts out water, shares what food he has in his truck, and fights against tribal customs to assist the crossers. While the description of the film says that farmers are interviewed, there was very little of that.

Really, though, the voices of the immigrants themselves were hardly existent at all. I’m not sure if that was intentional but it reminded me of how much disrespect is given to them. We speak of the immigrants, the illegal aliens, the migrant workers. We don’t speak about them as people but as groups (and I’m guilty of this as well). Sure, they did follow 3 men but they didn’t give them a big voice in the film. The “guardians of the border” had much bigger voices.

Why?

I watched another documentary about this topic, as well. Wetback follows the migrants across the Rio Grande. This film gives voice to the people moving across the border, understanding why they make the journey. It delves into the reasons for taking this chance, for making this journey

Maybe this is due to the differences in the ethnicity of the filmakers (although I can’t be particularly sure of ethnicity because there is little about Dan DeVivo, editor of Crossing Arizona). Maybe this is due to who gave them access.

What I’d like to see, though, is a film that actually discusses the real issues of this situation from all sides. I’d also like to hear from the U.N. on this and how the Mexican government (really) feels about it, as well.

We need the migrant workers. Our society doesn’t work without them. But they need a voice and they need to be given more respect. They do an amazing job and we all benefit from their work.

They should, too.

precarious


photo by me

I stumbled across a few web sites recently that have the purpose of outing women that don’t fit the ideal female profile. One is a commercial site and one is a private site.

The private site, fat girlfriends is about one man’s issues with his wife’s weight. The person who wrote it admits that he encouraged her to eat and be comfortable. But then she bypassed his threshold and now he isn’t as fond of her. He outs her in public (and, nicely enough, conceals her face but shows her body in all of its glory – in bikinis, no less).

It all seems like he is really worried about this. However, the deeper into the site you go, the more it seems to ridicule women who have gained weight. BUT…he doesn’t talk about himself or if he has gained weight during the time. And he doesn’t show images of himself.

Then again, maybe it’s okay for a man to gain weight but not for his girlfriend/wife to do so.

Overcoming questionable hook-ups is something we should all be concerned about. I mean, it’s devastating, isn’t it, to have “dirty feelings caused by questionable hook-ups.” Wouldn’t it be nice to be able to just scrub away those dirty feelings?

Axe Snake Peel has a site geared toward encouraging men to do just this. They go so far as to define questionable hook-ups, to entice men into a secret society (ala Masons) and to shed the shame.

While there is some humor in the whole idea of a secret society, it’s not a very funny premise. It is implying that men can just scrub women away – if they don’t fit an ideal expectation.

I’m sure there are plenty of web sites out there that do this – either to women or men. These are just two that I came across recently and found distasteful. It’s not okay to ridicule either gender.

And definitely not okay to do it to make money.

barriers


photo by me

I haven’t really talked about my trip to Mexico. I think, in a lot of ways, I’m still processing it and thinking about it. I think, too, that it bothered me too much and I just can’t express what it was about it that bothered me.

But I’ll give it a try.

The trip itself was beautiful. The drive down took us into an amazing sunset that glowed red over the desert mountains. The saguaro, organ pipe, and ocotillos actually gleamed in the sunset.

My brother’s house is cozy and comfortable. It’s about 200 yards from the tidal bay (Choya Bay). The roads are all sand. His neighbors are a mix of American vacationers, American ex-pats, and Mexicans.

Everyone we met was generous and kind. There wasn’t a sour face or an unkind word. Even the street vendors were incredibly kind in their hawking (even to the point of complimenting the kids over and over).

The food was delicious (but I do tend to be partial to Mexican food).

The colors were wonderful.

But…

In my brother’s neighborhood, I mentioned that there are a lot of American vacationers. They have come in and bought up houses at very low prices and have now raised the property values so high that it is not possible for the locals to buy in to the neighborhoods any longer.

And while some may say that’s not bad, as someone who lives in an area that is being bought up by more wealthy people, I can say it is a huge struggle to exist. It’s almost impossible to buy homes, food, clothing, etc. It’s too expensive.

That’s not what bothered me the most though.

I have a big disdain for people who go into foreign countries and treat them like their playground or their dump.

Choya Bay is beautiful. It is a tidal bay that ebbs and flows with tides. There are points during the day when you can walk across the entire expanse of it (quite a few miles). People go out clamming and kids can be seen roaming, looking for the perfect shells.

But there are also people who treat it like the land doesn’t matter. They drive across the Bay (which is illegal). They use it as a driving range, littering it with their golf balls. They stumble out drunk, leaving broken glass bottles and sharp aluminum cans on the floor of the Bay. It makes it dangerous to play in the sand. It makes it look like a dumping ground.

By and far, these people are Americans. And it embarrassed me to be an American because of the way they treated the land.

That’s not to say that the nationals don’t dump things. They do. The roads are littered with trash that people just throw down.

But if you’re going into another country, it is important to treat it as well as your own home, if not better.

Would we want people driving through our tidal bays? Throwing trash in our backyards?

We wouldn’t. And we shouldn’t be doing it either.