I was watching my brother play legend of zela on the wii, and I thought the Faron forest especially the Southern part looked absolutely beautiful. I wonder, is there any place on earth that still looks like that? Untouched, unraped? Soon, the rest of the Bornean forest will be gone. Its thick beautiful wild jungles will be lost forever, for what? For a measly few hundred thousand dollars that once you spend will be gone in a second. MNCs and the super extreme billionaires are standing on the corpses of our nature. Sure, they give and support charity, but the amount that has made them wealthy is not equivalent to what they have done to the environment, I am sure at some level they understand and know what they are doing to the earth. I think us 'small' people are able to change the world, we don't need to play by their rules, we are the majority, don't let yourself be bought.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
the white standard of beauty
So I was tralalaing with my two weeks previous extreme food poisoning, the assault at the parking lot, don't worry my husband and I immediately called the police, then now I'm dealing with a flu I caught from my colleague (well using classmate didn't seem appropriate at this university level...), which in turn spread to my kids and my kid's nanny and my siblings. Aside from all these things I had a good rest and I could read blogs! Yayy!
So I want you people to check out this
http://www.racialicious.com/2007/02/21/real-women-of-color-have-curves/
http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/04/impose-their-beauty-standards-on-others.html
http://parablemania.ektopos.com/archives/2005/05/interracial_cou.html
Before I begin I have to say that blogging has become a new forefront for appropriate academic research especially through articles and human experiences, some I might add reflect a reality not showcased enough within academic research even.
Let me explain one thing before I continue, I have a sister who is 7 years younger than me, this year she's turning 18 and I'm turning 24. Ever since we were children I was always overweight and my sister, even for my mother was alarmingly thin. Honestly, both of us eat about the same amount, we don't eat much, but I think she eats more than me but I this is because she's growing or her metabolism is faster. We both have the same genetic information, we are after all sisters. We have the same body typeface (nice use of the word haa?) A thicker skin on our back (if there was more it would look like a hump :)), we're the same height, my breasts are bigger than hers, twice bigger, I'm a D and she's a B, we both do not possess curvy bottoms, some malay women actually do possess this, my daughter has this but from my mothers side we dont have this, so it would seem buttockless. There is a tendency to worship fairer skinned malay girls, with chinese eyes but more often than not Malay men do not often date chinese women, they prefer Malay girls with Chinese features or extremely fair skin, knowing that the Chinese in Brunei especially local Chinese hail from the Southern part of China they're more tanned than the Malays in Brunei (the Malay category in Brunei is different from Malaysian Malays and Indonesian Malays, Bruneian Malays have a tendency to be lightskinned). Now the remaining question is this, because of the emulation of thin girls, from Chinese light skin worship, thin girls are considered beautiful, but because of things like female stetophygia or as Malays call it, jubur tunggi, or bottom that looks like a duck's bottom, how will the other Malays who are darker skinned (which is also equally common), with female stetophygia, are bigger in body fare in this society? I would also like to point out that some Malay men do have a thing for bigger women though, and yes I think big men and big women are the world over so that does not matter, but are we represented well?
I made this research a while ago, there is a lesser tendency for black women and asian men to be represented in Western media as being sexually attractive. I aint talking about those half white half black ladies who look a lot like white to me like Mariah Carey, may I add Beyonce, and Halle Berry who has a white parent, I'm talking about real dark-skinned women, and real Asian men, not your run of the mill may I say it cos I'm quarter Chinese? 'chingchong' chinaman, but Asian men who are bereft of glasses, with tall statures, they exist you know, I wonder if you've seen them! oh yeah before I go on, I wonder where Indians are in the picture, you know as models in the international arena? They're the right size, the 'right looks', where are they? Honestly, there is a standard for beauty and that standard is white. White women do not realize this, even in feminist discourses, they are at the top of the food chain, while the rest of us are at the bottom of the barrel, barely scraping, we do not need men to justify our existence and we do not need men to justify our sexuality, it should not be them who decide whether or not we are beautiful.
So I want you people to check out this
http://www.racialicious.com/2007/02/21/real-women-of-color-have-curves/
http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/04/impose-their-beauty-standards-on-others.html
http://parablemania.ektopos.com/archives/2005/05/interracial_cou.html
Before I begin I have to say that blogging has become a new forefront for appropriate academic research especially through articles and human experiences, some I might add reflect a reality not showcased enough within academic research even.
Let me explain one thing before I continue, I have a sister who is 7 years younger than me, this year she's turning 18 and I'm turning 24. Ever since we were children I was always overweight and my sister, even for my mother was alarmingly thin. Honestly, both of us eat about the same amount, we don't eat much, but I think she eats more than me but I this is because she's growing or her metabolism is faster. We both have the same genetic information, we are after all sisters. We have the same body typeface (nice use of the word haa?) A thicker skin on our back (if there was more it would look like a hump :)), we're the same height, my breasts are bigger than hers, twice bigger, I'm a D and she's a B, we both do not possess curvy bottoms, some malay women actually do possess this, my daughter has this but from my mothers side we dont have this, so it would seem buttockless. There is a tendency to worship fairer skinned malay girls, with chinese eyes but more often than not Malay men do not often date chinese women, they prefer Malay girls with Chinese features or extremely fair skin, knowing that the Chinese in Brunei especially local Chinese hail from the Southern part of China they're more tanned than the Malays in Brunei (the Malay category in Brunei is different from Malaysian Malays and Indonesian Malays, Bruneian Malays have a tendency to be lightskinned). Now the remaining question is this, because of the emulation of thin girls, from Chinese light skin worship, thin girls are considered beautiful, but because of things like female stetophygia or as Malays call it, jubur tunggi, or bottom that looks like a duck's bottom, how will the other Malays who are darker skinned (which is also equally common), with female stetophygia, are bigger in body fare in this society? I would also like to point out that some Malay men do have a thing for bigger women though, and yes I think big men and big women are the world over so that does not matter, but are we represented well?
I made this research a while ago, there is a lesser tendency for black women and asian men to be represented in Western media as being sexually attractive. I aint talking about those half white half black ladies who look a lot like white to me like Mariah Carey, may I add Beyonce, and Halle Berry who has a white parent, I'm talking about real dark-skinned women, and real Asian men, not your run of the mill may I say it cos I'm quarter Chinese? 'chingchong' chinaman, but Asian men who are bereft of glasses, with tall statures, they exist you know, I wonder if you've seen them! oh yeah before I go on, I wonder where Indians are in the picture, you know as models in the international arena? They're the right size, the 'right looks', where are they? Honestly, there is a standard for beauty and that standard is white. White women do not realize this, even in feminist discourses, they are at the top of the food chain, while the rest of us are at the bottom of the barrel, barely scraping, we do not need men to justify our existence and we do not need men to justify our sexuality, it should not be them who decide whether or not we are beautiful.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
The theory of religion - Freud's Totems and Taboo
Despite the fact that I suspect a lot of people find my columns boring or difficult (I have to add, I find Michel Foucault difficult, I find the language of philosophers tedious, I understand), nevertheless I need to talk about something, I scribbled fast and furiously just as my lecturer was talking. I could not help at that moment to present my criticisms against Sigmund Freud's Totems and Taboo. To begin with, he's a humanist evolutionist, I have nothing against humanism nor evolutionism per se, but it becomes problematic when you label an Australian Aborigine then during the late 19th century as being a backward peoples. First and foremost is the injunction of labelling aboriginal or pre-literate societies/communities and placing them on the evolutionary scale. What basis do you have of placing communities as part of the evolutionary process then proclaiming that Westernized science is at the end of that scale? This is just the same problem as those idiots who say that they don't live on trees in Borneo, sure no community on this island live on trees, people do squid fish using technology either simple or complex, I have never heard of an 'Orang Ulu' [sic] of ever living on a tree. This is just the comparison of placing man, a homo sapien sapien man with that of an ape or a monkey, not that apes or monkeys do not deserve any respect either. But the problem here alongside this group of Borneans who say they do not live on trees is the fact that there exists this 'looking down' this 'condescending' of other communities and cultures. There is no justification for placing communities within the evolutionary scale, culture cannot be explained through science. Leave culture to trained social anthropologists and sociologists, let not so-called scientists who are not even trained properly with even proper terminology let alone biased ideas of ethnocentrism be giving comments and leaving after their dead, their theories to be 'scientific' and the 'truth'. Haven't you people learned? Science, is changeable, its malleable, everyday new facts are unearthed to replace older ones, they do not stay static. It is continuously challenged and tested.
The other thing you psychologists must explain to me is the idea of the 'Primordial father', one cannot ignore the idea that Freud's original analaysis of the mind is definitely sexist in agenda. Why do I have penis envy? Sure I am hostile to my mother at times but I am also as equally as hostile to my father at times, I do not envy the penis! You think that I envy the penis, but the truth remains hidden, womanhood is a conception created within one's own community and society, there exist other conceptions of womanhood of different societies who treat sexuality differently. If that is so how is it conceivable to place them within that evolutionary scale? Of 'blablabla at the beginning...backward tribes worship the Mother Goddess..', then according to evolutionists..'where then they ascribe anthropomorphic images of the Primordial Father, the Mother Goddess becomes obsolete and only practiced by backward peoples...' then and now, 'religion becomes obsolete as man will no longer aspire to need a God/Goddess/Deity/Whatever, and will come to depend on themselves for spiritual fulfilment..'.
The explanations of why people need God and religion vary, some say because of hard times that need explaining, some say because of the original ancestor worship, others like Freud say it is a necessary tool to keep the chaos within ourselves in an ordered fashion. I do not agree nor disagree with any of these propositions, what becomes disagreeable however, is the sexist agenda that is apparent in Freud's conception of womenhood. It is as if women are but passive players in this world built by men, when in reality this is far from the truth. Religious history such as that by the time of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w, are patterned with lives of women and men who help shape religion, religion was not the work by one agent, Muhammad, but rather multiple agents such as Aisyah and the 'Affair of the Necklace', Khadijah, the prophet's first wife played an important role in the conception of Islam, in a conjectural analysis of religion as played out by patriarchal ideas, like the one displayed by Sigmund Freud assumes that women do not play a role at all. We are but passive observers to be passed on from man to man, how does he know this?
What I wish to see in the realm of the trained intelligentsia, instead of feminists bickering with one another, is their powerful deconstruction of all this patriarchal agenda that is oh so apparent and being used as 'normal academia'. Deconstruction was the hallmark of feminism, where is it now? It should pervade not only Women and Gender studies but rather the whole picture of academia.
The other thing you psychologists must explain to me is the idea of the 'Primordial father', one cannot ignore the idea that Freud's original analaysis of the mind is definitely sexist in agenda. Why do I have penis envy? Sure I am hostile to my mother at times but I am also as equally as hostile to my father at times, I do not envy the penis! You think that I envy the penis, but the truth remains hidden, womanhood is a conception created within one's own community and society, there exist other conceptions of womanhood of different societies who treat sexuality differently. If that is so how is it conceivable to place them within that evolutionary scale? Of 'blablabla at the beginning...backward tribes worship the Mother Goddess..', then according to evolutionists..'where then they ascribe anthropomorphic images of the Primordial Father, the Mother Goddess becomes obsolete and only practiced by backward peoples...' then and now, 'religion becomes obsolete as man will no longer aspire to need a God/Goddess/Deity/Whatever, and will come to depend on themselves for spiritual fulfilment..'.
The explanations of why people need God and religion vary, some say because of hard times that need explaining, some say because of the original ancestor worship, others like Freud say it is a necessary tool to keep the chaos within ourselves in an ordered fashion. I do not agree nor disagree with any of these propositions, what becomes disagreeable however, is the sexist agenda that is apparent in Freud's conception of womenhood. It is as if women are but passive players in this world built by men, when in reality this is far from the truth. Religious history such as that by the time of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w, are patterned with lives of women and men who help shape religion, religion was not the work by one agent, Muhammad, but rather multiple agents such as Aisyah and the 'Affair of the Necklace', Khadijah, the prophet's first wife played an important role in the conception of Islam, in a conjectural analysis of religion as played out by patriarchal ideas, like the one displayed by Sigmund Freud assumes that women do not play a role at all. We are but passive observers to be passed on from man to man, how does he know this?
What I wish to see in the realm of the trained intelligentsia, instead of feminists bickering with one another, is their powerful deconstruction of all this patriarchal agenda that is oh so apparent and being used as 'normal academia'. Deconstruction was the hallmark of feminism, where is it now? It should pervade not only Women and Gender studies but rather the whole picture of academia.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
The Arrivals - A review
As a training sociologist/anthropologist, it is not my job to value religion or philosophy, that is the work of the theologian and the work of the philosopher, most of the time my job is to see how changes in the world (that is constantly changing anyway) affect people. In this instance, the work done by these two guys, noreagaa and achernahr had produced a few series that although on one side is actually highly heavy with conspiracy theory, on the other hand was, thankfully, and fortunately very much in line with what I believe in. I have been talking about these issues for a long long time now, the double standard that is and has always been very apparent in regard to trade relationships, treaties and protocols have been one-sided. In guise they appear to benefit all, but this is not the case, they only benefit those within the system that champion one side of the argument. I have always talked about this, development is not a crime, but a development that is handled in a way where only ONE type of development is allowed is not freedom. The freedom that they talk of is THEIR freedom and not freedom of the rest of the world. The series depicted by noreagaa and achernahr are appealing because they are looking for a way to set the world of chaos in to right, they are opening minds in which scholars will have difficulty in trying to open up and try. They talk of materialism as being the bane of desire,excessive materialism IS the bane of existence, they are the poison in which distorts the reality in which we live in. Scholars and trained intelligentsia have long tried to expose these discrepancies, Sahlins wrote Stone Age Economics, there exists societies outside of globalization. This is the truth, activists have been talking about this and protesting, we do NOT NEED their money, as Zimbabwe has shown. If need be, and the times dire, we can make our own money, set up our own system, systems are not necessary patented, they exist to help society not control or oppress it. What I am proud of the producers is their ability to show that Islam is not the only light, in fact Islam has long been infiltrated (see part 39 on the 12 Imams, watch it first don't judge it yet), whatever that we are practicing today, our blatant disregard for the environment, our abuse of women and the violent images that are being depicted about Muslims in general have to some extent stereotyped us, influenced us, we have become mad by our own hands. We have lost our way, definitely, even writers like Reza Aslan has talked of this, Islam has a multitude of problems, it has become sectarian and we have built as Aslan puts it, 'churches of Islam'. It is not united, it is divided, each one claiming to have a 'better', 'purer' Islam than the other. We concentrate on the small issues, ignoring 'faith' or 'love', 'familyhood', 'unity'. We should not learn to become ethnocentric, we should stand just as the Jews Against Israel, we are a small voice of Islam against terrorism, Islam against Violence. But do they hear us? Do they put us on the media? Do they listen? They do NOT, the rest of us has become ignorant. I am not a fan of conspiracy theories myself, but as a feminist, and to quote the most popular, we are being 'bombarded' by the images in the media of what a WOMAN SHOULD BE, of WHAT MEN SHOULD BE, and WHAT LIFE SHOULD BE. There is no right and wrong, what is right and is wrong is subjective to the culture affected, what the West considers bestial, and inappropriate, is not the same with what the East considers. Overcontrolling parents, overcontrol because they love, anyone can walk out of their situation, if they choose so, if they are old enough, if they could. But some of them do not want to, why? Because they love their family too. Universal rights and laws do not help, they become the gray areas in which many things become so bad for the 'greater good'. One lecturer once said to us, the problems that the world is having is because they think that it is 'for your own good'. It sounds exactly as Bush points it out, 'for your own good'. 'Good' is subjective, they change from time to time and from place to place. It is time we should accept all forms of life, all walks of it, from the deepest jungle, we should be humble with whatever they could teach us. From the highest mountains, where they have secluded themselves from the rest of the world. Manifestations of beauty should not be accepted at face value, question everything you see and hear, question yourself. And as Kent Brockman says in season 18 episode 22, 'Buy Nothing, Hug Your Children and Love the One You're With.'
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Everything on TV
Link is here ---> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20090125/ten-art-mogul-saatchi-joins-tv-search-fo-a56114e.html
While its all and great to find talent through television shows but it seems because its a fast paced world everything becomes a quickie. And now art has become a quickie too. I wonder if its all and good...but then again there's always others who could beat it out I suppose and make it. Well gone are the days of Gauguin and their long long periods of living in exotic places for inspiration
While its all and great to find talent through television shows but it seems because its a fast paced world everything becomes a quickie. And now art has become a quickie too. I wonder if its all and good...but then again there's always others who could beat it out I suppose and make it. Well gone are the days of Gauguin and their long long periods of living in exotic places for inspiration
Thursday, January 22, 2009
The wrong premise for prostitution
While I am all for freedom of sexuality, I have to say that the pros of promoting prostitution begins with awful premises. ---> http://www.sexwork.com/coalition/15reasons.html
1) Sure, but what about sexual gratification OF women? This is a very double standard statement, the author claims that he is not attracted with women his own age and he dislikes overweight women, the problem lies with him as a person. Why should women strive for 'sexual attractivity'? The other problem is that sexual preference varies from culture to culture, from individual to individual. The problem is obvious, he leans on what is construed as within his own society as sexually attractive ignoring the fact that women are human beings too who also need sexual gratification.
2) Why is the bible dragged into this?! HAHAHAHA So you need religious confirmation to justify your actions? Why quote religion? Seriously, there is no need for religious confirmation to justify one's actions unless it is a religion clearly painted by the patriarch.
3) Prostitution does not make the world safer for women. In fact, rapists and incest rapists also visit prostitutes, this does nothing to abate their sexual satisfaction. Sex and rape cannot be equated, they are two different phenomenon manifesting through action. It does not make it healthy for men either, many get STDs, what he doesn't realize is that there is a large number of human trafficking that is going on in this world. Women and children are FORCED into prostitution and many do not do so by their own will.
4) Not necessarily, as a training anthropologist/sociologist, I have never heard of a prostitute actually sexually satisfied with a customer/client.
5) It is a profession that should be respected, but with different premises. A premise that should recognize that they are human beings too and are no different than your wives, daughters, sisters, mothers and friends.
6) Marriage is sometimes an institution which is equal to prostitution, only in the longer run.
7) It could be and it could not be at the same time. They also get abused. What should be is to make laws like the EU where sexworkers do not get criminalized but clients and customers should get criminalized. The demand is ALWAYS there, it does not take a triad leader to quickly realize that. You should look into and also research human trafficking that have cost hundreds and thousands of women and children who are sold into prostitution. Prostitution for the love of feminism is rare.
8) You cannot equate all men into your category. Just because they have not learned to know it elsewhere does not mean that they should continue to behave so. You're misusing sociology and juxtaposing it into a situation that is so abberated that it becomes a fallacy.
9) Refer to point 7
10) Yes it does provide a better alternative to starving and stealing but you're just allowing women and seeing them as sex objects that have no brains to get out there and make it on their own without any connection to servicing men. This just means that there is a serious lack of institutions that provide for the welfare of women that they have to resort to prostitution.
11) Okay, you're right there. But why this obsession with sex?
12) Fun, construed in a very limited way. As if people cannot have fun doing other things?
13) Hmm, good for your mental health not the mental health of the prostitute herself. Imagine being in a situation where the most intimate of their lives is forced to be on display on command, to be paid. How do you feel inside? Maybe prostitutes need to charge extra for therapy.
14) Prostitution does not cure problems, please return to point 7
15) Sex work can be empowering, for FAT women, for THIN women, for OLD women, and yet on point one you say you want slim women between their 20s-30s. What does that say? My dear, you don't want to push that point because that point would be the day where women as old as your mother, your wife, as fat as your family members will become prostitutes.
I would be happy to give you references on human trafficking, on sexual abuse on prostitutes on AIDS, and anything else that provide actual at least stable and reliable data. Not flippant excuses on the internet.
1) Sure, but what about sexual gratification OF women? This is a very double standard statement, the author claims that he is not attracted with women his own age and he dislikes overweight women, the problem lies with him as a person. Why should women strive for 'sexual attractivity'? The other problem is that sexual preference varies from culture to culture, from individual to individual. The problem is obvious, he leans on what is construed as within his own society as sexually attractive ignoring the fact that women are human beings too who also need sexual gratification.
2) Why is the bible dragged into this?! HAHAHAHA So you need religious confirmation to justify your actions? Why quote religion? Seriously, there is no need for religious confirmation to justify one's actions unless it is a religion clearly painted by the patriarch.
3) Prostitution does not make the world safer for women. In fact, rapists and incest rapists also visit prostitutes, this does nothing to abate their sexual satisfaction. Sex and rape cannot be equated, they are two different phenomenon manifesting through action. It does not make it healthy for men either, many get STDs, what he doesn't realize is that there is a large number of human trafficking that is going on in this world. Women and children are FORCED into prostitution and many do not do so by their own will.
4) Not necessarily, as a training anthropologist/sociologist, I have never heard of a prostitute actually sexually satisfied with a customer/client.
5) It is a profession that should be respected, but with different premises. A premise that should recognize that they are human beings too and are no different than your wives, daughters, sisters, mothers and friends.
6) Marriage is sometimes an institution which is equal to prostitution, only in the longer run.
7) It could be and it could not be at the same time. They also get abused. What should be is to make laws like the EU where sexworkers do not get criminalized but clients and customers should get criminalized. The demand is ALWAYS there, it does not take a triad leader to quickly realize that. You should look into and also research human trafficking that have cost hundreds and thousands of women and children who are sold into prostitution. Prostitution for the love of feminism is rare.
8) You cannot equate all men into your category. Just because they have not learned to know it elsewhere does not mean that they should continue to behave so. You're misusing sociology and juxtaposing it into a situation that is so abberated that it becomes a fallacy.
9) Refer to point 7
10) Yes it does provide a better alternative to starving and stealing but you're just allowing women and seeing them as sex objects that have no brains to get out there and make it on their own without any connection to servicing men. This just means that there is a serious lack of institutions that provide for the welfare of women that they have to resort to prostitution.
11) Okay, you're right there. But why this obsession with sex?
12) Fun, construed in a very limited way. As if people cannot have fun doing other things?
13) Hmm, good for your mental health not the mental health of the prostitute herself. Imagine being in a situation where the most intimate of their lives is forced to be on display on command, to be paid. How do you feel inside? Maybe prostitutes need to charge extra for therapy.
14) Prostitution does not cure problems, please return to point 7
15) Sex work can be empowering, for FAT women, for THIN women, for OLD women, and yet on point one you say you want slim women between their 20s-30s. What does that say? My dear, you don't want to push that point because that point would be the day where women as old as your mother, your wife, as fat as your family members will become prostitutes.
I would be happy to give you references on human trafficking, on sexual abuse on prostitutes on AIDS, and anything else that provide actual at least stable and reliable data. Not flippant excuses on the internet.
Monday, January 19, 2009
May I interject?
I am sick and tired of the really bad song lists for making love. I don't normally do this but I think a lot of people will be glad to get rid of that wanderlist list.
1) Let's Get It On - Marvin Gaye
2) If I Have My Way - Chrisette Michele
3) My Cherie Amour - Stevie Wonder
4) Selimut Hati - Dewa
5) Seribu Tahun - Imran Ajmain
6) Lost Without You - Robin Thicke
7) Loving You Is Easy (Cos Your Beautiful) - Minnie Riperton
8) The Sweetest Love - Robin Thicke
9) Menghujam Jantungku - Tompi
10) Don't Sleep Away the Night - Glenn Fredly
11) Crazy For You - Adele
12) Luv - Janet Jackson
13) Feel Like Making Love - Roberta Flack
14) Kangen -Chrisye
15) Kasih Tercipta - Faizal Tahir
16) I'm a Slave 4 U - Britney Spears
17) Buttons - PussyCat Dolls
18) I Heard Love is Blind - Amy Winehouse
19) Something About Us - Daft Punk
20) Why I Love You - B2K
21) Turn Your Lights Down Low - Bob Marley feat. Lauryn Hill
I'm not going to list my whole playlist...but these are good enough for a few rounds
1) Let's Get It On - Marvin Gaye
2) If I Have My Way - Chrisette Michele
3) My Cherie Amour - Stevie Wonder
4) Selimut Hati - Dewa
5) Seribu Tahun - Imran Ajmain
6) Lost Without You - Robin Thicke
7) Loving You Is Easy (Cos Your Beautiful) - Minnie Riperton
8) The Sweetest Love - Robin Thicke
9) Menghujam Jantungku - Tompi
10) Don't Sleep Away the Night - Glenn Fredly
11) Crazy For You - Adele
12) Luv - Janet Jackson
13) Feel Like Making Love - Roberta Flack
14) Kangen -Chrisye
15) Kasih Tercipta - Faizal Tahir
16) I'm a Slave 4 U - Britney Spears
17) Buttons - PussyCat Dolls
18) I Heard Love is Blind - Amy Winehouse
19) Something About Us - Daft Punk
20) Why I Love You - B2K
21) Turn Your Lights Down Low - Bob Marley feat. Lauryn Hill
I'm not going to list my whole playlist...but these are good enough for a few rounds
Sunday, January 18, 2009
The Discourse on the Female Body
---> I'm not sure if you could read Indonesian, if you do well, read on.
There has been some very interesting developments on lesbianism on display especially through the Indonesian film industry. More recently however, a movie done by James Lee a popular children's author equivalent to R.L. Stine, Histeria made it to the top of my list when it showcased (although irrelevant, or relevant to the plot?) a lesbian kiss between two schoolgirls. It could be some perverted fantasy via pornography and pop movies, on the other hand, some 'rebellious' movies such as Berbagi Suami (Sharing Husband), do also display a lesbian relationship between two women who shared a husband. Lesbianism, contrary to the male fantasy via pornography, almost always at least shows what is interesting for men, not women, although in most cases I have been told that lesbian pornography garners more female viewers than male viewers. I have this itching feeling that it could possibly be because it showcases two women who embody the perfection that male sexuality craves (really?). It is youthful, well-breasted, no droopies here (which in reality is actually impossible without a talented plastic surgeon), and 'attractive' with long beautiful hair (wow, it is kind of rare to find a boyish haired porn star unless you count Bella something, I don't remember her name, it has something to do with nightshade?). To find a lesbian relationship, a mutually loving and exclusive lesbian relationship with all the trappings of actual realistic femalehood in pornography is almost impossible. Where then do we find such existence? Only through 'breakthrough' filming which showcases the different.
On the other hand, we have realistic depictions of womanhood but still with the regular dreams of marriage, love, bla3. Now I want to talk about the ever popular My Lovely Sam Soon, a Korean television series. Sam Soon, a woman whose above marriageable age, almost 'expired' (puhlease, how does it get this way?), mannish, funny, not exactly pretty for men, gets the man of her dreams. She got her way allright but she had to go through the rites necessary that labels her as the female body. A body that can be controlled on, a body that belongs to society itself. I'm not saying that the male body is not controlled by society, in probability even more so there exists a rigid existence for manhood (women can wear pants and skirts, men can never wear skirts/or a skort without being labelled as a sissy/fag/queer). In fact, I could suppose that men are repressed beings that exert control over others because they have no control over themselves.
The female body is constantly controlled, not by men, nay! It is continuously controlled by women, or gay men. They set the bar as to what is attractive and what is not. Gay men do have that control over womanhood and this is through their extensive involvement with haute couture.
There has been some very interesting developments on lesbianism on display especially through the Indonesian film industry. More recently however, a movie done by James Lee a popular children's author equivalent to R.L. Stine, Histeria made it to the top of my list when it showcased (although irrelevant, or relevant to the plot?) a lesbian kiss between two schoolgirls. It could be some perverted fantasy via pornography and pop movies, on the other hand, some 'rebellious' movies such as Berbagi Suami (Sharing Husband), do also display a lesbian relationship between two women who shared a husband. Lesbianism, contrary to the male fantasy via pornography, almost always at least shows what is interesting for men, not women, although in most cases I have been told that lesbian pornography garners more female viewers than male viewers. I have this itching feeling that it could possibly be because it showcases two women who embody the perfection that male sexuality craves (really?). It is youthful, well-breasted, no droopies here (which in reality is actually impossible without a talented plastic surgeon), and 'attractive' with long beautiful hair (wow, it is kind of rare to find a boyish haired porn star unless you count Bella something, I don't remember her name, it has something to do with nightshade?). To find a lesbian relationship, a mutually loving and exclusive lesbian relationship with all the trappings of actual realistic femalehood in pornography is almost impossible. Where then do we find such existence? Only through 'breakthrough' filming which showcases the different.
On the other hand, we have realistic depictions of womanhood but still with the regular dreams of marriage, love, bla3. Now I want to talk about the ever popular My Lovely Sam Soon, a Korean television series. Sam Soon, a woman whose above marriageable age, almost 'expired' (puhlease, how does it get this way?), mannish, funny, not exactly pretty for men, gets the man of her dreams. She got her way allright but she had to go through the rites necessary that labels her as the female body. A body that can be controlled on, a body that belongs to society itself. I'm not saying that the male body is not controlled by society, in probability even more so there exists a rigid existence for manhood (women can wear pants and skirts, men can never wear skirts/or a skort without being labelled as a sissy/fag/queer). In fact, I could suppose that men are repressed beings that exert control over others because they have no control over themselves.
The female body is constantly controlled, not by men, nay! It is continuously controlled by women, or gay men. They set the bar as to what is attractive and what is not. Gay men do have that control over womanhood and this is through their extensive involvement with haute couture.
Sure who ever said evolution was the truth?
So check the above link out. I do agree with her on the evolutionary thing but to address anthropologists as being social-biologists are a whole other thing. I don't remember any anthropologist in living history who has not distanced themselves from ranging human behaviour with that of the animal kingdom...in fact its ludicrous! Its the first rule of sociology/anthropology that nurture is stronger than nature, that's why its called anthropology/sociology in the first place. Because there's no such thing as nature, natural does not exist, culture is a man made phenomenon, there is nothing natural about man (which craps the hell out of philosophers who have to start somewhere), who knows what divinity is, there were a couple of social anthropologists who said such and such in and about during the Pacific War and they were influenced by American policy makers and theorists by the way, and they were in China, I doubt that their work could reach America. And I'm kinda sick and tired of people who are actually paleoanthropologists or biological anthropologists getting mixed up with social biologists, its just like saying I'm a Muslim therefore I am a 'T' (sooo can't say it, its sooo NOT P.C.).
Other than that, there are no explanations as to why humanity behaves the way they do, that is what anthropology is trying to show (in all probability her definition of an anthropologist could be so american that I don't get it) with its myriad of cultures, when someone says something, there is always always some society out there which can show otherwise. In fact I have a new theoretical line I'm thinking about and I hope people can look in to it and wonder with me.
Culturally and financially, females are usually at a lower position and rank than males, that is the first point, on a second note, financial power rests on the hand of the patriarch. The question or situation that I would like to posit is this, often, when a husband who has more financial stability than the wife would leave the wife with the money (commodity/land/etc.) and remarry with another woman whereby in turn she would make sure that the commodity be passed on her own offspring (which could be either male or female, most likely male). Isn't it more likely (because dumbass males have a way of explaining everything without the approval of females hehehe) that power among women rests between women themselves? The more nubile females versus the 'less' attractive females. God. Now I remember that discovery episode on attraction saying that older females are not sexually attractive because biologically they are reaching menopause. IN all probability this is because certain societies have shown too much television programs or the earlier bias and prejudice that tilt towards younger women. Stories, popular legends, and the definition of beauty itself varies from place to place. I give up, the answer is soo frickin obvious.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Praise Rabbi Yisroel Weiss
In a world where Jews like Muslims also face extreme pressure of anti-semitism, I am amazed at how much this community is able to face the shame and embarassment that has been lauded upon them. Even I myself shun and disassociate myself with Islamic orthodoxy, I am too, a product of continuous repression of my identity even though I do not support terrorism, I believe in an Islam which is between myself and God, I fight for equality and feminism and yet I, being born a Muslim is blamed for all the wrongdoings of others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)