Not a pretty geek.

It’s never really a secret that I’m a nerd. I’ve always been one of those people who’s a bit stuck when people ask what my hobbies are, or what I like to do in my free time, because it’s always been....homework? Or at least, procrastinating from doing my homework? Video games never seem like a very socially acceptable answer – nor does reading fantasy literature aimed for children. For these reasons, over the course of my life it’s also become clearer and clearer to me that I’m a geek. Maybe some super geeks wouldn’t consider me a geek, but I think most non-geeky people would – so I guess I’m not enough of a geek to know exactly where I fall on the geek  continuum but I’m enough of one to know I’m on there somewhere. I still consider the night Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows came out as one of the greatest nights of my life (the book obviously). My biggest regret about high school is that my parents did let us have video game consoles (can something you have no control over be a regret?).  I guess my Mum made up for it by making amazing costumes for my siblings and I to attend the Lord of the Rings premieres in – also highlights of my youth. Anyway – fantasy, sci-fi, books, video games, dragons, cosplay – I love it all. But something I really don’t like is this new fad in “hot geeks”. Sorry, not “hot geeks” but “hot geeks” who are, as far as I can tell, assumed to be girls. 

I’ve read a few blogs on this (because what else would I do with my time?) but most of them have focused on the need to specify that that a geek is a girl (the identity of “girl geek” rather than “hot geek” ) and on the fact that even just being a girl who participates in “male activities” is seen as something which has to be identified and which is something of a novelty (hence the need to call her a “girl geek” rather than a “geek”).  I also think though that this emerging (well, emerged I guess) focus on the hotness of the girl plays a huge role in making this whole being a girl who likes boy things  ok because, while it’s supposed to be an even bigger novelty, it also makes it alright because this girl isn’t really transgressing boundary roles -she’s retaining her femininity by being “hot” and hence, sexually available to men. I do (mostly) agree that it shouldn’t matter if a geek is a boy or a girl, although I do think that, due to the centrality of gender to identities, and the lack of “feminine” subject positions in geek culture (male protagonists in many novels, films, games etc), there does need to be an opening up of this space for a variety of gendered subject positions – because right now “geek” does tend to imply “man” and that’s problematic. BUT instead of getting into all that nitty gritty stuff, in this particular entry, I’m going to focus on the “hot” part – because that’s the part that gets my back up these days, and I’ll just warn you now, this is less critical feminist analysis and more ranty, personal bitterness at being distinguished as “hot” or “not hot” in yet another aspect of my life. 

So, it’s not that I think being hot and also a geek is a bad thing, or impossible, or makes you less of a geek or not authentic or anything. I mean, there is a (I tell myself small) part of me that is jealous that some girls get to be both, but ultimately, I think being a geek should just be about being a geek. It is tricky though, because I did spend a lot of my younger years telling myself that it’s ok I’m not pretty because I’m smart and if I had to chose one, I would chose to be smart...but then came the realization that some girls are both, which is TOTALLY FINE! (says the feminist in me. The 12 year old girl in me still doesn’t think it’s fair). And it is fine, obviously – jokes and insecurities aside I am NOT about beauty-shaming. It is a horrible, and hopefully outdated stereotype to think that a girl can only be one or the other, or that you have to chose, or that being pretty makes you less of a nerd, or stupider or even not a feminist or anything at all. But when, as a pre-teen, I had this revolutionary “girls can be both” epiphany, it wasn’t really about realizing that a girl could be both pretty and smart, but that she should be both pretty and smart – that being smart wasn’t an excuse to let yourself go, and that being smart wasn’t nearly enough (enough for what? Still not sure).  I mean, why else would I somehow find myself years later arguing with an otherwise rational human being that it didn’t fucking matter if Margaret Atwood looked ugly in the author photo on the back of her latest award winning, mind blowing, piece of feminist eco-criticism  - she’s Margaret Fucking Atwood for Christ’s sake! I mean, if anyone’s immune to this kind of evaluation from teenage boys, shouldn’t it be her? (and yes, I’m pretty sure that IS her middle name). Anyway, it wasn’t exactly thrilling to have to come to terms with the sad fact that how I look will always be central to the way people perceive/accept/act towards me, especially as a homely, nerdy, awkward girl at a new school. And I say especially, but I mean, I’m sure it’s hard for everyone (though I do think it’s more of an issue for women – feel free to take me to town on that). That’s not to say it’s impossible to go through life as a not-pretty girl  - but it can be tough knowing your looks will always be up for judgement, commentary, and ridicule and it’s something I sometimes don’t care about, but often do care about. 

Anyway, the thing I hate the most about this “hot geek” thing is that instead of just making the point that geeky girls CAN be attractive, it’s seems to be establishing yet another area in my life (and other women’s lives) in which the way I look (or don’t look) is central to my identity. It’s not that I want a continuation of the belief that geeky girls (or boys) are overweight, glasses wearing, pimply, socially awkward pariahs in sweatpants who will never get laid, (despite my ability to relate to that particular version) it’s that I don’t want it to fucking matter. Being a geek is supposed to be about not caring that you like stupid shit that everyone else thinks is super lame  - and for a youngish girl who doesn’t really fit in (aka me in high school and early undergrad) it can also be one of those wonderful ways of saying “fuck you” to society – like my sad attempt at a hipster phase, or how I might have become emo if I’d been born juuuuust a little later. I’ve always seen it as one of those identities that’s available to people who are struggling, but who know that they don’t want to be (omg I can’t believe I’m saying this) mainstream (GASP!).  And yes, for me at least (and I suspect for others) part of that is telling the mainstream (???) “You don’t want me? Well who gives a shit, because I never wanted to be part of you anyway”.  And part of that, for me, was saying, I don’t care if I’m not “pretty” – I’m a nerd; I’m a geek, and I don’t want to conform to your stupid ideals anyway. Now, I realize this may not be what society hears, but I always found saying it made me feel better about the ways I wasn’t succeeding at being pretty, or popular, or sexy or whatever. And I think that starts to fall apart when being a “geeky girl” gets tied to being hot – like in this very outdated article (the first thing to come up on google when you search “hot geek”.

http://www.manolith.com/2009/10/12/12-hottest-geek-girls/

 If you don’t want to read it, or are distracted by the eye candy, it sets out three qualifiers for girls to claim the identity “geek girl”:

                

 “There are criteria that must be met to make a proper geek girl; she must be geeky, she must be a techie, and she must be hot” 

Bolding, btw, is from the original. Now, leaving apart the fact that I think (hope) I can still be a geek without being a techie, is the question of whether or not I can be a “geek girl” if I’m not hot. They haven’t even bothered to specify that this criteria for a “hot geek girl” just a “proper” one. Does this mean that if I’m not hot I’m not a geek? Or just not a “geek girl”?  Can I still be a boy geek? Or a gender neutral geek? If the presumed gender of the identity “geek” is male,  what special label do I claim if I’m a geek who identifies as a woman, but who also doesn’t consider myself “hot”?

Anyway, I’m not an angsty teenager anymore (I think), and while I no longer wear dark emo lipstick or skirts over jeans (just the HEIGHT of alternative fashion), I do still claim the geek identity, because as much as part of that identity was a rejection of the mainstream, it’s also just because I love geeky things. I don’t really know that I had a choice in this, given that I was brought up by self confessed trekkies, and my sister used to make me watch the 1970s animated version of the Hobbit or Star Wars when we were little, even though the former gave me nightmares and I just wanted to watch Anne of Green Gables (incidentally a movie about a girl who is smart, but not pretty). One of my favourite memories of my Dad is when he dressed up as a mage for my medieval themed 9^th birthday party during some convoluted fantasy treasure hunt game through the house (my childhood was so fucking awesome).  And despite the no video games thing (more for the violence I think, and maybe because it would keep us away from homework) we still played a ton fantasy computer games – every single Kings Quest ever made and – my all time favourite - Inherit the Earth (I still get the ferret village song stuck in my head from time to time. Shit – there it is). And, I mean, there were times I wanted to be cool – where I wanted to fit in; but I never wanted to give up my geeky ways to do it. There was this time when my Mum told me maybe if I made real friends, I wouldn’t have to spend so much time in “fantasy worlds” (she meant Middle Earth – fantasy world of the moment). At the time I cried and yelled at her for making me move again because THAT was the reason I didn’t have friends, but in retrospect...part of the reason I didn’t have friends is because I would rather have been in Middle Earth. Or at Hogwarts. Hell, I’d still rather be there – why the hell does anyone think I moved to England? (btw, not as many wizards as I thought, but there are a lot of short people...).  Huge life regret for me is the night I let my high school friends convince me to go see a shitty movie (wedding crashers possibly? *Shudder*) instead of going to the midnight release of Half Blood Prince at Chapters. It’s one of the few moments I gave in because I wanted to have friends, and be cool...but then I left the theatre and saw this guy walking down Princess Street holding his copy of HBP and my heart just sank and I realised that I didn’t actually want friends that badly – at least not friends who would rather watch shitty movies than read awesome books. I would way rather have dressed up and gone to a fucking bookstore at midnight, with my family, wearing a cape, and spend the early hours of the morning reading a book. I just wish I’d known that at the time, but I guess at least I know it now.

This has gone from feminist rant to reliving of my childhood, but I guess that’s why it’s a blog no one but my sister will read as opposed to an essay I’ll get marked on. Anyway, my point is that I love fantasy, and dressing up, and living alternate lives through costumes and RPG because I just do – the rejection of the mainstream that came with it was wonderful, but I guess I’m also trying to argue that I am a legitimate geek – always that darn question of authenticity.  And while it was and is an escape from real life, and from not fitting it – for me at least – it IS real life. I guess I can see why people think geeks are sad lonely people – but it’s not that I engage in these kinds of things because I CAN’T have other things – it because I WANT them more than I want the other things. And I have never, ever, regretted wearing a Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings costume and letting it be known that I fucking love this shit – at least not in the long term. And the only time I really regretted spending hours on a video game is when 12 hours of staring at a screen fucked my eyes and made it look like I was high for the next two days – actually, I don’t regret that at all. I love the costumes, and I love the games, and I love the books more than I love anything– but I also love that they did give me a means by which to tell society, and to tell myself I guess, that I reject the role it’s laid out for me as a woman, and that it helped me find/discover/create an alternative to that role – one that I could relate to, and occupy whole-heartedly, and love. 

I’m not making a fuss about it because I think being a geek is a radically feminist move that I’ve so amazingly discovered and that THAT’s the only legitimate claim to a female geek identity – it’s just because I think that a lot of girls and women turn to geek culture as a place where they can be themselves without constantly having to perform the role of “pretty girl” and because I hate that it seems that that’s something that’s being chipped away.  This whole big deal that’s been made about “hot geeks” feels like it’s tainting the feeling of liberation that I felt when I embraced that identity. Not that there have never been problems – video games have, until recently, almost always had male protagonists, and female superheros are usually presented as sexual fantasies rather than complex characters (I had well rounded in there, but changed it) and many, many other things. But I wish that I could feel that when I talk to other people about this stuff it’s because we both like it, and not because I’m participating in some new strategy of getting a man –which is something that  a lot of the other blogs/commentaries have talked about.  Making being a girl geek about being ‘hot’ implicitly makes it about being attractive to men.  And I mean, it’s not like I’ve never hit on guys by surprising them with video game knowledge or anything like that. But I did it because they came to the store I worked in with an EB games bag, so I’d bring it up because it’s something I already liked and isn’t that the kind of thing people are supposed to start conversations over? Mutual interests? But by hypersexualizing geeky girls, I feel like it positions me not as a “geek”- not as part of a subculture along with people that share my interests - but as something else which is available for the “real geeks” – the boy geeks – to enjoy.  And suddenly, cosplay is less about playing dress up and pretending to be your favourite character, and more about showing off your body and basically becoming the sexualized, comic book, sex fantasies that, in many ways have historically alienated women from geek culture in the first place.  And the geeky costume is really just something that makes a hot girl EVEN HOTTER as opposed...I dunno...more interesting? And I shouldn’t care, and if it was just about introducing an additional identity for women to partake in, I guess maybe I wouldn’t – but (again, blog, not essay) I can’t help but take it as a personal blow that geekiness is one more area of my life in which I’m now expected to be hot, and to be a sexual object for men instead of someone who is partaking in this culture for her own reasons. And that of course relates to my own experience of feeling like I’ve lived most of my life unable to live up to however many beauty ideals, and of thinking that I found a subculture, community, and identity where those ideals didn’t apply, and suddenly realising that it apparently does matter if you look like this:

Instead of this:

So, yeah, maybe that’s just me and my bitterness and insecurity. But like I said, the more formal feminist analyses are out there, and I this blog is more about me bitching about things that piss me off, so whatever

A while ago I read this really great blog about sexy cosplay costumes, with specific reference to the “Slave Leia costume”; I can’t find it anymore (because I’m not one of those geeks whose good at the internet I guess?) but I can sum it up: Basically  argues against the notion that the huge trend in cosplay participants wearing the “slave Leia” costume is “empowering” women, and specifically empowering women geeks; it does NOT argue that these costumes are inherently “bad” in and of themselves, but just that if people want to wear them, they should do it for other reasons because the empowering thing doesn’t fly – and I really agree with that. I mean, I like Princess Leia, problematic as her character is (especially the fact that such a ‘strong’ female character gets put with the dominating, uber-masculine Han Solo instead the whiny, less macho Luke Skywalker (who, whatever Lucas said, I don’t think was originally going to be her brother – I’m sorry, but they friggin make out – if he knew all along then...well....hm) because, unfeminine as she may be, at least if she’s with someone even more ‘masculine’ than her gender roles are maintained. Sorry, side note ).  Ok, as much as a like Princess Leia, if I wanted to dress up like her and pretend to be her, I’d dress up in one of her outfits where she’s...I dunno...sending secret messages or yelling at soldiers, or doing pretty much anything besides being a sexual slave to a giant slug – that’s just not exactly the moment when I want to be her. And I mean, if that is the moment you want to be her, then great, I guess, but is that really what so many hot, young women want? Just to be a sex slave to a slug? Trying not to sound judgemental here...I mean, I’m all for exploring your sexuality through geeky role play. My problem isn’t that it happens, it’s because it happens with so much hype, and with so much defense that this is such a wonderful radical move for empowering women and for giving them a place to take part in cosplay,  even though they are empowering themselves by dressing as a supposedly strong, female “politician” (well, Princess) at the moment when she is being intentionally degraded by Jabba the Hut (as well as by George Lucas). Again, it makes me question the way geeky girls are positioned within geek culture as objects rather than participants. I don’t want for that to be what being a girl geek necessarily means. I don’t want that to be the assumption, or the expectation, for me or for other girls. I want to be able to talk about Elder Scrolls, or Assasins Creed with boys without them picturing this:

Geek and Gamer Girls 

(if you watched that..well..sorry. Also, it's described as a "parody"..of what? am I missing something? is this ironic?)

Or I guess, if I’m giving boys SOME credit, I want to talk about it without me thinking that that’s what they’re picturing? 

I just wish claiming a space for female geeks, or opening up gendered positions within geek culture could involve more clothes? Playing video games for me, incidentally, does usually involve clothes because a) I’m usually in my mother’s basement and it’s cold down there, and b) Playing video games for me is about...playing video games. Not holding a controller strategically over my crotch or breasts. If I’m not in pyjamas or my everyday clothes, it’s because my friend and I have put on our Harry Potter costumes to play the duelling club on Half Blood Prince for Wii (not a great game, but the duelling option is pretty awesome) (also, Harry Potter costumes in picture a, not b!).  This isn’t to say that playing video games naked isn’t a legitimate pastime or being a hyper-sexual geek isn’t a valid subject position. I just worry that it’s the only one, or the dominant one, being made available to geeky girls and that sucks.

If you think I’m reading too much into this, well...maybe you’re right. I know that there is still a place for a non-hot geek girl in this world -especially when so much geek culture involves not going out into society. And there are some really great women geek bloggers who are proving that (that there's a space for us, not the whole not going into society thing). And I guess I’m happy that the stereotype about geekiness being a guy thing is being broken down – I just wish it wasn’t being done through the justification that we can still be hot while being geeks; I wish that hotness  and sexual availability wasn’t yet again being used to prove that geeky girls can retain their femininity; I wish that retaining that femininity wasn’t so important; and I guess I just wish that this part of my own identity- this thing that is so sacred to me, and which brings me so much joy, could be more easily kept separate from my anxieties around my looks – anxieties which I do take responsibility for, and which I continue to struggle with as a “feminist”, but which I think our culture makes genuinely difficult for women to ever really overcome; and I wish there were more spaces/identities for young (and old!) women that were free from the pressures of being attractive, and I wish that this particular subculture hadn’t made one’s level of sexual attractiveness central; that one’s identity as a geek didn’t need to be qualified by words like “hot” or “girl”. 

Anyway. Rant of the moment.   Off to do some real work.

One year Anniversary (almost).

Dear Blog.

 Sooooo....this is awkward. Definitely haven't been here in a while. I am chalk full of excuses why I have neglected this blog and I'm sure they are all very convincing but I have a feeling this is already going to be a long post so you'll just have to take my word for it.

I guess I will say that I have been incredibly busy - or I was for at least a portion of my absence. I've been writing essays, and a research proposal, applying to phds, etc etc. During this time I felt far too busy to sit down and organize the thoughts that were going on in my head , or to try to describe all my visits and trips and hilariously witty gendered criticisms of popular sitcoms. Then I got not so busy and just didn't feel like I had a whole lot to write about. Anyway...highlights reel? These are things I planned on writing entries about and didn't. Warning, not at all in order.Also, the nitty gritty feelings stuff is at after the updates if you just want to skip to that. Or skip it. I'll never know. 

- Saw the Doctor Who Exhibit in London and loved every geeky minute of it. Also, watched Season four of Doctor Who and made insightful observations about the season's preoccupation with reproductive technologies and their ability to both emancipate women, and yet somehow also reduce their centrality to the show.

- Visited home and stepped outside the bubble of people who care deeply about gender-ness. It was eye opening, and kind of sucked. Sometimes I was a reasonable person and met criticism with rational arguments and a sincere desire to open people's minds. Other times I stormed out of the room and cried and gave up on ever changing anything ever. Like so many things, it's a learning process.

- Saw Cirque du Soleil (also in London), right after finishing a paper on eco-criticism and postcolonialism and it blew my mind. The show was amazing - people's bodies are just, incredible. While watching in awe of their amazingness, I also thought a lot about representations of nature, and race, and culture,  science, and evolution proving that I can think very critically about entertainment while also really, really enjoying it.

- Visited York dungeons and had fun. Visited the supposed inspiration for Diagon Alley and had fun. Visited the filming location of Diagon Alley and had fun.

- Visited markets in London and ate samples and decided that  if one day I suddenly develop an urge to get married, should probably be to a cheese seller man (I know there's a proper British word but with the accent and stuff  I know I won't spell it right). Anyway, for some reason they are all super good looking and chatty, and give you cheese. What more could a girl want? Note to Space Pod - I believe this is the answer to the "sexy like cheese" mystery.

- Visited Edinburgh and ate/drank coffee/read a portion of Quidditch Through the Ages at the very cafe where J.K. Rowling sat and wrote the first three Harry Potter books, thereby changing my life forever in the most wonderful ways. Pilgrimage complete.

Eh, I'm tired and can't think of anymore. But there has been a lot more... but its also just been me plodding along, living my life, watching entire series of television shows back to back. Like I said I think the main reason I don't blog anymore is that I don't always feel like I really have anything exciting to say - or if I do, I put it in an essay and get graded on it. Along with this feeling of having mediocre thoughts, there have been times (many times) when I feel like even though my course is amazing and I'm learning amazing things and being with amazing people, I still want something more - to be accomplishing something more, or maybe experiencing something more. It's been tough being away from home, and my network, and my family and the community of Guelph, and even, if I'm honest, the community of Accra. I feel like last year, I dealt with a lot of boredom due to constrained circumstances, and I struggled with culture shock and isolation, but for some reason it all felt much more worthwhile. Now, one year on, I'm still trying to figure out what exactly I took away from that experience, in addition to what I'm supposed to take away from this one. Still trying to figure out? Maybe I'm only just starting to ask again. I leave it, and come back, and leave it, and come back. On Monday I'm leaving with a friend for a two and a half week trip to Spain and Portugal. I'm really, really excited. But planning has also brought up these weird parallels of traveling within Ghana, on our tight little budget, with the rules about "living simply" and in solidarity. It's just so, so easy now to decide...well....it would be nice to just pay that little bit more for a nicer hostel, or to go to a certain town  even though its super expensive, or fly instead of take the train. And it makes me uncomfortable, but not uncomfortable enough to actually change the way I'm planning on traveling. Basically the story of my life. I do things everyday that I thought I wouldn't after coming home and making so many commitments to be a more responsible global citizen. I buy wants that aren't needs, I embrace my debt instead of trying to live within my means, and I make excuses all the time - except those times I don't even bother because I really don't have to. Example - just got an amazon order of the Hunger Games Trilogy. Way, way back last April while I was making my goals for this year I decided I wanted to buy at least 1/2 my books second hand because it's less production, less waste etc. But because of our fucked up economic system, it was cheaper to buy them new. So I did. And now I'm staring at them and I'm thinking a) I can't wait to read you and b) why, why, why did I do that just to save a couple of pounds. Commitment to global living fail.

One year on, Ghana and everything it taught me just seems so very, very far away and I don't know how to get back to that place where I cared passionately about holding myself responsible. These days, it's just so much easier to blame other people, or "the system", and I feel like much more of a hypocrite than I have in a while - and not just about the consumerism stuff. Holding myself accountable to my commitments to gender  feels like a constant project in hypocrisy. I think it's incredibly unfair that women need to wear make-up to appear professional, yet I wear make up everyday that I leave the house - even if its to the grocery store and I don't really know how to be confident or brave enough to go without it, even though I know that by wearing it I'm participating  in and reinforcing this expectation. I maintain that a woman (or anyone) should be credited for her brains, wit, humour, personality, passion etc more than for her ability to perform ideals of beauty, and yet I feel just as validated (if not more) by a boy calling me pretty than by doing well on a paper (not that institutionalized education is necessarily a mark of success...blah!). I get lonely, and want a boyfriend, companionship, whatever but then avow that I will never get married because I tend to equate it with women making sacrifices for men and state institutionalization of personal relationships (which isn't necessarily true - marriage can be radical, and equal and all the rest of it and anyways, a certificate doesn't really "define" marriage and its more about how you practice marriage then the institution itself. sigh).

And for the record - I do not believe that any of these equals "feminism"; or that if I was able to go without make-up, not care if boys think I'm pretty, or be either a) ok being alone for the rest of my life or b) ok with being married, I would somehow have achieved gender-enlightenment. It's the same annoying thing I came to realize last year when it comes to living simply - you never get there. You never "achieve" it. It's not a paper you hand in then forget about, or a diploma you worked for and now can frame and put on your wall. It a constant struggle and I hate constant struggles - which is why I guess I disengage so often. Or fail to practice what I preach. Or stop blogging and pretend that the amount of money I spend in H&M isn't really important. Feminism, or gender awareness, or whatever, is really friggin hard though, and it's as much about these stupid everyday questions as it is about the value of a masculinities approach to gender and development work, or the representation of women and dogs as companion species in two recent works of postcolonial fiction.

Anyway, in other news, I'm reading a really fantastic book called "The End of Mr Y" which is by my friend Anna's ex boyfriends sister. Her copy is signed, which is kind of cool, but I feel bad because I cracked the spine, and Anna, if you ever read this I'm sorry but I'm going to hope you never do and that you just don't notice. This is why I prefer buying second hand books - I kind of like to destroy them. Not in a destructive way but in a "I carry this book around with me and spill things on it because I drink Tea while reading" kind of way. or a "I can't stop reading this book long enough to put hand lotion on but my hands are really dry so instead I just get hand lotion all over it" kind of way. Or a "I fell asleep reading this book because I was really tired but just couldn't put it down, and then rolled over it and wrinkled the cover way". I remember how destroyed my first copy of Harry Potter was because my whole family read it, and it got left out in the rain, and had so many pages kept in with scotch tape. I also remember getting my copy of "Away" signed by Jane Urquhart, and feeling really embarrassed because it was fully of sticky notes and pencil notes, because I'd written my extended essay on it. She told me it looked well loved, and it really, really was (is). I think the best gift I ever gave anyone was to a boy I was in love with - my beat up copy of the Diviners with all my margin notes and it felt like I gave him a piece of my soul. He really didn't deserve it, but it still felt really amazing.

Anyway, random tangent on my weird book fetish. Also the reasons that while I appreciate the convenience of an e-reader, I will never really love it the way I love my real books. I do miss my bookshelf at home and I can't wait for the day when I have a library - a library filled with second hand books! On that note, I did buy some second hand books the other day, at a real honest to goodness second had book shop. Such a happy place to be.

Ok, I don't know where I'm going anymore. Possibly to add some pictures to facebook. Of all the amazing blog posts I've thought about writing the past few months, this was not what I expected to finally write. Hopefully my next post will be a much more upbeat account of my fantastic trip to Spain and Portugal! Whoohoo!! Also, I should probably take this moment to advertise to my wide readership that I got offered admission to University of Western Ontario's women's studies and feminist research phd program. Scary. Scary to take on a 4 year plan like that. I'm terrified of making that kind of commitment. But it might be nice to leave the nomadic existence of the past two years behind. Even if it is to settle down in London Ontario....

Happy Benito Juarez day to everyone. That means you, Dom.

I am the (global) 1% (and you probably are too).

Wow. I'm bad at this. I meant to do a post every week but things just get away from me. In my defense, school does take up a lot of of my time. Also, it's easier for me to write when I have things that I feel strongly about or am angry about, and these past few weeks I've had...less of that. Which is good. But also confusing. It's just that a lot of the things we've been covering class are super interesting and important, but also really complicated and I don't always know where I stand - or why I stand where I stand....or even if I kind of know where I might stand, I'm wary of writing down a concrete positions and sending it out into the internet where barely anyone will read it until I'm like, I don't know, up for Prime Minister or something and all of a sudden people are calling me super radical, or a bad feminist or whatever (because, in the future, not being enough or the right kind of feminist is going to be THE campaign issue in Canadian politics. prepare yourself).

Ok. But, one tiny little thought I have recently had formulate inside my brain is concerning this whole Occupy Wall Street thing. I am not an expert on this, I will say that from the start. And I do support a lot of what I think the movement is about. The current distribution of wealth is ridiculous, especially in the States and am all for greater equality. I think certain jobs/position/peoples make far too much money and have far too much power combined with far too much incentive to perpetuate this inequality. If you're not convinced about the moral argument for equality, never fear, here are some instrumentalist reasons, developed, studied and presented by someone smarter than me: http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html

Anyway, I think that no just inequality, but the whole economic system is very problematic and very unfair and I do think national government should play a role in ensuring not necessarily complete financial equality,  but more that people's work is valued appropriately and that they're salaries/living standards reflect that. I do think that working hard (or even just averagely) should ensure you have enough (all needs, some wants) and in many places, this is not the case. I also think that the state should ensure that if you are less well off, or unemployed, for whatever reason, that people are not thus unable to have their basic needs/human rights met - because that's what human rights are - things you deserve no matter what. I am a little confused regarding exactly what the occupy movement are hoping will happen, but like I said, I'm not expert. I know what I know from procrastinating on the internet and in doing so I've seen a lot of  "I am the 99%"  - meaning the bottom 99% of the population (economically). Usually these signs/posts/assertions also describe how hard the person has worked/does work, how much they've lost and what they cannot afford. It emphasizes the current situation in America, where the vast majority of wealth is concentrated in the richest 1% of the population. It dispels myths about why poor people or poor (or tries to I guess), and also about what proportion of the population is in fact struggling financially  - that its not a minority issues. Anyway, overall, I like this slogan and I do think that the 99% deserves a lot more. But there is something about it that bothers me.

  In America, yes, maybe you are the 99%. But I can't help think that on a global scale, I am absolutely sure that the vast majority of the people stating they are the 99% are in fact in the 1%. (or at least the 5%)  And just as these "99%" lose because big ceos and bankers or whoever win, the global 99% lose because WE win ( I have no clue where I technically stand within Canada, but I'm pretty sure globally I am the 1%). So. Certain amount of irony there. And while I still support a lot of the goals of the occupy wall street movement, I can't help but think about it on a larger scale.  I still don't know what the solution is (obviously, or I'd be a hero) but I do think its important to remember that our ideas of poverty are very, very relative. It's not to say that people in America should shut up and stop complaining, or that they don't deserve decent lives, or that  most of the richest people in America don't deserve/need all that friggin wealth. It's just to say, maybe let's keep in mind that its not just our national economies which are completely messed up.

On that note..... a few weeks ago, for my Globalization, Gender and Development class we had an optional viewing of a film called China Blue. First off, it was really good, and I really recommend it. It's a documentary which focuses on a small group of teenage girls, and one in particular, manufacturing jeans in China and basically how absolutely unfair the terms of their employment are. And not just because of one evil ceo or factory owner, but because of the way the global garment economy is structured. Anyway, it was informative, and moving, but also left me with the same sense of despair I sometimes felt in Ghana. I know the exploitation is there, and I know I should be doing something to stop it, or at the very least to not participate in it but I don't know how and I don't know that I will (or that other people who watch the movie and shake their heads will). Our class discussion afterwards was actually really  frustrating; for many reasons - i was being totally devils advocate at every turn, spreading hopelessness and despair and pointing out the flaws in any kind of solution - which I'm sure was not entirely helpful. Mostly though, I was pissed off by the argument that, while, it is possible to buy "fair trade" garments, and jeans, it's too expensive. "we can't afford it". I feel that way all the time. But realistically, how much does  fair trade pair of jeans cost? More than my regular jeans, yes. But how much did all my jeans put together cost? I only have 4 pairs here in England, but I have plenty more sitting in a box in Canada - clearly its' not important that I have that many since I won't be wearing them for a year. So, really, is it that I can't afford the fair trade jeans, or that I can't afford to buy 10 pairs of them? I really, really credit One World and my experience in Ghana with emphasizing to me that "need" and "want" are not the same, and that we can afford a lot more than we're willing to acknowledge; often because "cheaper" usually just means "more". I feel like a huge hypocrite because of course I only own old navy jeans ( I had  a staff discount and first dibs when they went on sale).  But maybe it's one more thing I can add to my list of "things I will no longer justify buying unless they are fair trade". Which brings that list up to  - jeans and coffee. Ready for my sainthood. But....when pretty much everything we buy is tied up in unfair supply/production chains sometimes its a little less overwhelming to start small.....

The film also brought up the issue that, even though the employment is super, super shitty, if the factory loses an order it's the workers at the lowest level that pay; either through even worse conditions (to save the factory money) or through less money. Which is the problem with boycotts/the entire global economic system. I am going to stress that the answer is not to buy infinite number of jeans because we're SUPPORTING the workers and providing jobs! Because buying more will mostly just add profit to the retail company, or at the most, the factory owner. That's the problem. The balance between those who reap the rewards and those who pay the price is completely and utterly effed.

So, yeah. Like I said. Feelings of despair.

Well.....that might be all for today I think. Less gendery than last time...not that the gender issues aren't totally in there - in both the importance of jeans to middle class first worlders like myself and in their importance to the teenage girls who make them. But perhaps that will be for another day.

Other recommendations; I'm reading Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell and I'm only a third of the way throught but it is blowing my mind. It's distracting me from all my other school work (though, I am reading it for school, so I feel kind of justified). Inheritance of  Loss by Kiran Desai is also fantastic; I'm writing my postcolonial representations essay on that one. I also have a presentation on "Dirty Pretty Things" this week, which is a kind of problematic, but good film and brings up a lot of issues around how immigrants are treated; while still being entertaining. Lagaan was also really entertaining - my first "Bollywood" film. I enjoyed it, but it also really pissed me off. It was the heart-warming story of an (fictional) Indian cricket team formed around 1900 (I think...) during British Imperial rule. Basically an evil British dude decides if the Indian team doesn't beat the British team they have to pay triple taxes (VERY realistic portrayal of colonial relaitonships). Anyway, despite initial tensions the whole village does basically come together to learn this game, claim it as their own etc while simultaneously breaking down religious/caste barriers. Everyone gets to participate! Oh, except the women. When the one main Indian female characters is decides, "I want to play" its' like this huge joke. As opposed to when the man from the untouchable caste wants to play; then its all inspirational speeches about equality and brothership and everyone's unique contribution (the woman's unique contribution I guess being to bring the snacks, cheer and sing romantic duets with the protagonist). Anyway, I won't give away the ending, but there's the little rant of the day.

By the way, all of those recommendations are from my postcolonial representations class, which continues, like all my classes, to be totally awesome.

Bye.

p.s. another Ted talk on  unfair supply chains...dunno if I'm convinced but it's more than I've got: http://www.ted.com/talks/auret_van_heerden_making_global_labor_fair.html

Bonfire Night and Living in a Bubble

Dear blog,

I had a really busy week, and weekend. I had en essay due yesterday (only my second one for this program!) so there was a lot of procrastinating to get done! Seriously though, the weekend was pretty stressful and it felt really good to hand it in yesterday. I've found with these past two assignments I really feel pressured to do well - I mean, I've always felt that pressure but at least with undergraduate, most assignments weren't worth that much; usually I had more than two for a class (and some of these classes have one - THAT will be pressure). But also, in 5 years I took a lot of courses. Even if I did crappy in a whole course, other good marks would be there to swallow it up. Not so anymore! With only 4 classes and a dissertation, getting an average that will let me some day pursue a phd seems a lot harder.

Anyway, Friday night I took a break from stressing to enjoy Bonfire night. Technically (and as I remember from V for Vendetta) it's supposed to be the 5th of November, but for some reason Leeds was celebrating a day early. None of my informants seems to know why. Not a big deal though, and actually it worked out better because then I had Saturday to essay-write. AND it was still great. Walking through an exceptionally muddy park, under fireworks, to look at the biggest bonfire I've ever seen was definitely culturally enriching. I thought "bonfire" and pictured something smaller. This thing was huge, roped off, and had firemen guarding it. Top that off with candy apples and a fifth of a deep fried mars bar and you've got yourself a great night. Now, the deep fried mars bar was less about bonfire night and more about adding more "Britishness" to the experience. As was the the meal of sausage and mash (which SOUNDs British, but to be honest, didn't seem that different than just....sausage and mashed potatoes I would get in Canada.Still tasty ). We also watched Zombie land and talked about victim blaming, but again I don't think people should associate this with the usual bonfire night experience.....


Before I do some class readings I will make one little note about gender though (of course) (also, note written after finishing - its not little). Last Thursday I went to a talk by a woman who works for Oxfam Malawi (who is Malawian as Oxfam tries to hire mostly local staff). She gave a really great presentation on some of the programs they're doing there, what they're project structure looks like, and how they work with local partner organizations. Afterward she took questions, and this too was interesting. One guy was asking a lot of really great questions. It was clear he knew about development and project work and his questions were really insightful (for the most part). At one point he asked if Malawians (?) were able to volunteer in local projects. The Oxfam lady said that yes, but with their partner organizations who work within the communities themselves. She also added that it seems to be mostly women who volunteer and that while on some level this participation is great, she does wonder about the impact this has one women's burden of labour (which, by the way, tends to be huge - especially if women work outside the home as well as taking care of the majority of their household's domestic work). She also noted that that tends to be the same in Britain, and many other countries, where women volunteer at higher rates than men. The guy nodded sagely and commented "maybe its a maternal thing".

To which another girls said "sorry, what was that?" and there was a general murmur of annoyance. And it really made my heart sink. This guy seemed to know his shit, and I bet he did. But that kind of generalization is so friggin dangerous. Assuming that women do the things we do because of our biological impulses hides the social/cultural/economic reasons we do - many of which are linked to historical and ongoing subordination. Now, I have no clue why women volunteer so much more then men - I think it would be a very interesting study. But I know why I volunteer and it sure as heck isn't because I like babies (for the record, I don't like babies. They scare me). So, even on a personal level, that kind of assumption ticks me off. If I were to think about that question on a larger level, I would ask more questions along the lines of  "is it more socially acceptable for women to volunteer?". "Can this be linked to women's "triple burden" of labour, involving domestic, economic, and community work?". "Do women volunteer because their personal experienced of oppression motivate them to change their communities/societies?" (this ones problematic because it assumes all women are oppressed without accounting for class, ethnicity etc. and also begs the question why wouldn't men who are oppressed volunteer more? do they?". "is men's labour seen as more economically valuable and thus concentrated on paid work?" Anyway, hopefully my point is made. There are tons of reasons this could be the case. And even if it is linked to women's role in "care work"; that doesn't mean that its because of innate maternal instincts (maybe that's what this guy meant?). Women's association with care work is also socially constructed; and hopefully in the process of being broken down, at least a little. I wonder if there's a link in places like Canada and Britain, between increased involvement of men in "care work" (child care, teaching, nursing) and volunteer numbers. What are high school volunteer numbers like compared to university students, working adults etc. Does marital status play a role. SO MANY QUESTIONS!!!!!!!! Anyway, lets reflect on this and stop developing some kind of study.....

As I think I've mentioned, I love being part of a program where everyone has some interest in gender and feminism. It's also nice to be able to talk about these things while operating under the assumption that there are certain things we agree on - like, that gender is linked to sex, and to our physical bodies, but it is socially constructed (sex=biological, gender=socially constructed though it isn't so clear cut, really). This seems so obvious that we roll our eyes when people bring it up in class. But instances like this remind me that not everyone thinks that way. Some people, and some development practitioners, are operating under totally different assumptions. At the moment, it makes me want to just stay in my little group and continue talking about gender in theoretical terms that "regular" people don't understand. It's similar to the feeling I got after graduating that maybe I should just study english and not development, so that I never have to actually go out into the real world and deal with people. They tend to make me mad. But. I'm committed to change, even if its tiny and seems hopeful. Damn. I guess I'll have to engage with these people. And its not like they're evil lepers I need to bring myself to talk to. I know I have friends and family and perfectly well intentioned, bright, passionate people who think about gender differently because, well, for starters they're not taking a masters in it. We're not REALLY taught to think about gender as socially constructed on a daily basis. In fact, we're kind of taught the opposite. It was just, a nice fantasy for a while. I think thats part of why I force myself to blog. I feel like I need to start kind of practicing what it might be like to talk to people about gender outside my program. Other times, I just want to rant......

Ok, so, a gender rant. Well, two because I thought of something else. The first is..... this essay I had to write. It was a literature review, so looking at what people have written already on the grand questions....."WHY DO WOMEN MATTER IN DEVELOPMENT?" Ok, fair enough, right? Why should they be included in development projects/ processes from which they've traditionally been excluded....wait what? Why do they MATTER? or why should they be included? It's a different question. I know that its a lit review, and the question was really about the different arguments that have been made but ahhhhhhhhhh!!! Women matter. WE'RE PEOPLE!!!! No one asks Why do men matter in development? (although, considering the way women are being hypertargeted lately its actually a relevant question - I mean in the sense that they DO matter but that  a lot of projects are going the other way and bipassing men in favour of women. not the point). Women matter. Men matter. We're all people, we all deserve to benefit from development. A better question I guess is why gender matters in development; why is it important to look at differences so that's fair enough. But. The essay title just got to me. That shouldn't be up for debate. Especially since my essay was basically about how women have only been thought to matter in development to the point where they can contribute to economic growth. Not you know, because development is about improving people's lives and women are people so, you know, maybe improving their lives should be part of the goal. Those arguments exist, but the world bank etc doesn't pay as much attention to them....

OK LAST POINT!!! (and its lighter) (but still a rant).
I used to really love this show called How I met your Mother. It was so hilarious. The characters were great. The story lines were original, as were the jokes. But that was the first three seasons. Now its just gone on toooooo looonnng and kinda sucks. AND has gotten even more sexist. The last episode was based on the premise "pregnant ladies are nuts/stupid". Like, so stupid they give wine and staplesr to trick or treaters. You, know because hormones? haha, hormones? get it? They make ladies dumb. Just like when we're on our periods and mess up the stock exchange (note, that was an actual hypothesis about what caused the recession. Another explanation is that it was men's hormones and women will actual help it stabilize. Is it just me who finds that a little hard to take?) Anyway, I've known some pregnant people (admittedly not a lot ) and none of them have been noticeably stupider than usual. Emotional maybe, but usually within control. And also - now pay attention because this does tend to be a common mistake - emotional does NOT mean stupid! It sounds crazy, I know but just think on it.

Anyway, this episode made me kind of uncomfortable. Almost as uncomfortable as the episode where Barney (male character) makes a bet with Marshall (male character) where if Barney wins, he gets to see Lily (Marshall's wifes) boobs (she's the pregnant one). Now, Lily does get in on this almost immediately, and it becomes a little less weird (still a dumb bet, but hey, its her body and she does have a right to make bets about it). But at the start....its a bet between two men...about the wife's boobs. Because....he has the right to makes bets about another men seeing her body? Even touching it? (the up the ante where if he wins he gets to touch them).Because he...owns his wife's body? Gets to make decisions about it  without her input? regarding other men seeing it?  I'm sorry, what century is this? Is anyone else seeing a problem here? Or the one before that (possibly after I don't remember) where Marshall and Lily don't want to know the baby's sex so they could be ready to raise it "gender neutral". Which, means using this really, really ugly yellow paint and putting their baby in a burlap sack (that last one is a joke by Barney, but still). In the end, they find out its a boy and breath a sigh of relief that they accidently found out so they can go buy blue paint. Why not have just painted it blue in the first place? or hell, why not pink! Why is a disgustingly bright shade of yellow the only gender neutral colour? Even if you stay away from blue or pink, why not green? or like, off-white? Why vomit yellow? To justify they're need to paint it blue? It seemed rather forced. Also, finding out the gender and everything immediately being all better kind of glosses the issue. I mean, yes its a sitcom, but is the only way to end it just to establish "gender norms are the only reasonable way to go!" Also, considering the episode before that involved inappropriate involvement of Marshall and Lily's best friend Ted in regulating Lily's pregnant body it was a bit strange she spent most of that next episode painting/standing in a room full of fresh paint. Must have been lovely non-toxic paint - well, good for them.

Anyway, I keep watching because I think I'm just in denial that its really gotten that bad (not just the gender stuff, the jokes are crap now too). But, he gets me out of my happy feminist bubble. Maybe I'm taking it "took seriously" but I don't think I am.  These things reflect dominant culture/ideology and they bug me and dammnit I'm going to speak out on a blog that five people read (probably all of whom are related to me)!

Adios for now.

The Saga Begins (2 months ago)

Dear people who read my blog,

I should have done this ages ago, but I didn't. In any case, I'm here now. I've closed the Ghana blog and opened the England one. In addition to any traveling I do, I'm going to possibly use this to write a little bit about the things I'm covering in class, or am reading about, or heard people talking about on the bus (even though I don't really take the bus). It probably won't be as interesting as my last blog, but oh well. For an intro to my life in England, see my Epilogue for the Ghana blog. It's late here and I'm off to bed, but I will be back with updates and rambles, I promise.

Jacqueline