Face It

People often talk about the concept of "resting bitch face."

Everyone I know who says they have it, or who are said to have it, generally does not look "bitchy" to me. They just look like women who aren't smiling. There are all sorts of sites all over the internet dedicated to explaining this phenomena, the sexism in it, and everything else, so I'll leave that to you to go find.

In the meantime, I refer you back to The Girl Scout Laws. When I was a kid and walked 20 miles uphill go get to troop meetings.... ok, that was before my time. In my day, 20 of us would pile into my troop leader's van), I had to swear every week that I would do my best to be cheerful ALL THE FUCKING TIME. Give us a freaking break!

What about folks like me? I have "resting looks like she is miserable or is about to start drooling because her mouth hangs open all on its own" face. I need a shorter name for it. I thought of "My face not in motion," but that still seems too long.

Wait!  I've got it!  It is my "not thinking about or aware of you right now so call it whatever the fuck you want" face. Most commonly found when I'm reading on the train, working at my desk, and possibly when I'm using the toilet, but that is done when I am alone so no one can see me.  Even when there are mirrors right across, from the toilet, I Have to look away. I can't look someone (even myself) in the eye!  Taking a dump is a private moment. It would be weird to know someone was watching me - even if it was only me.  I hate when toilets are positioned to face mirrors!

This clip art is terrifying - the toilet might be watching?

So if I shit in the woods and no one sees, does anyone care what my face looks like while I do it?

The Sounds of Christmas

http://www.bettycrocker.com/videos/videolibrary/desserts/holiday-blossom-cookies

One of my least favorite things about the holidays is listening to very slim women eat all the sweets around the office while they bitch and moan about how very fat they are getting because people bring in sweets, and hear about how disgusting they'll look when they have to wear their size four fat pants because they can't fit in their normal clothes.

I particularly like when they go on about how they're going to ruin holiday pictures because nobody wants to see a fatty holding a plate of food. It's gross, and if they eat a second cookie they'll never get a date again because everybody knows that nobody likes cellulite. It's fun to hear them explain that they're turning into disgusting cows because people bring food into the office and vendors send food to the office.

The food is free. It is not required eating. And if nobody likes to see a disgusting fatty with a plate of food, why exactly do they tell me there is free food around the corner or offer to bring me and my 250 pound ass a plate?

*nibbles a cinnamon rugelach with glee*

*feels sorry for women who worry that their partners won't touch their ugly fat asses if they gain five pounds and have to wear spanks to fit into their holiday dresses*

*shudders at the idea of wearing spanks*

My arms aren't long enough for me to take a photo of myself eating cookies, so I tried to google for photos of fat women eating cookies. I wish I hadn't. The photos were either NSFW sexy pictures of half naked fat women, horribly cruel memes, or photos of thin women oogling cookies while eating lettuce.

Paying for "human giving"

I'm tired of the idea that people (i.e., women) should do good things for the sake of doing good. The idea that you can't put a dollar amount on the desire to help is a load of horse manure. Social workers, teachers, nurses, and other fields that have been female-dominated are all said to be staffed by people who care. People whose concern for the well being of others trumps their need for monetary gain. Nurturers, direct service professionals, nursing home aides. These are viewed as people who are giving out of the goodness of their hearts, money be damned! 

The worst part?

It's true. So many of these individuals in these professions are seen as altruistic if they stoically go through their day, exhausted after working with yet another traumatized individual, helping yet another person deal with physical pain, chasing yet another group of kids around. After all, they are doing it for the good of mankind. 

People talk about the good people in these professions do - they help people learn and grow, they make real changes in the world on an individual level - until the person points out that they can't afford to feed their family, that their own kids don't get enough time with them because they're too busy with other people's children, that they are exhausted and ready to quit.

"Oh no! Don't quit! You're doing real good in the world!"

Ok, then how about compensating them for the value of what they do, prove that we respect what they do and that what they do matters?

Nope. We can't do that because then people will just do it for the money!

I call bullshit. If social worker jobs paid better, more people would, indeed, go into, stay in, or go back to being social workers. However, people who couldn't handle these professions? They're not going to jump on the bandwagon saying, "OH!!!!  Look!!!  They're making $50k per year, I wanna join them!" These are not glamorous jobs. They are painful, exhausting, and dangerous. Oh, they are also rewarding for people who want to be there, but the reality is that teachers get puked on, social workers get lashed out at, nurses watch people die, direct service professionals get shot.

No, I'd never survive as a teacher. I would have no idea what to do as a social worker when sitting with a five year old child who's been severely traumatized. I'd probably pass out if I had to stick my hands in someone's guts to hold them from falling out.

The only thing that paying people for doing these jobs will fix is the idea that doing good is worthless.

My Smile Belongs to Me

I had a really nice, easy, happy day. I woke up in a good mood, and I felt light and airy for most of the day. Sure, I was at work, so things weren't perfect, but overall, I'd give today an eight. Maybe a nine.

I left work to meet up with a date for an hour, and the trip to Kendall Square was a breeze. Literally. It was chilly walking across the bridge, but that kind of chilly that makes you want to do a Mary Tyler Moore twirl and throw up your hat. Only it's a bridge, so the hat would fall in the river. And you're not Mary Tyler Moore, so you'll also fall in the river. So you don't make the twirl. You just turn the world on with your smile smile and walk along your merry way.

Last In, First Out: Dating Poly and Single

Created by and available at http://tacit.livejournal.com/346761.html. 

If you follow the link to the Tactit's LJ post that contains their Polyamorous Secondary Relationship Card, the first commentor pointed out the part that hits me the most:

"Being a single poly person, even in "non-hierarchical relationships" it isn't uncommon to be treated like this. Even after the other person has sworn they wouldn't treat you like this."

The moment you meet someone in a poly relationship, you know they already have established relationships that will come first. Their reasoning makes perfect sense. They don't believe in hierarchies, or they don't believe they're in a point in their relationship where they'd create hierarchies, but they already know the person they are involved with. They already know that person is important to them. If push comes to shove on time, whether it be time constraints, fears of exposure, convenience, jealousy on the "first" partner's part, discomfort over friends and family knowing the truth, difficulty juggling two or three relationships, whatever, you are the unknown. You will be the piece they give up.

Identity is not an opinion

This is an example of an opinion I disagree with. I can post this without agreeing with it.
This post is not about opinions I disagree with, though.

Another person's identity is not something you get an "opinion" on. Yesterday I was chatting on facebook with an acquaintance* I've known for about 15 years but have rarely spoken with. He made an extremely trans-hating comment, so I asked for clarification. I mean, there's no way I could have heard it correctly. I mean, we met at a Pagan festival where he sold me a $15 Bid pen and gave me a free bottle of mead with it. He must be open minded, right? Yes, I know, overly positive and hopeful statement. Blah. Anyway, at my request for further elucidation, Magpie* reiterated his transphobia and called it "just his opinion." He repeated that statement several times and with smiley face emoticons said he hoped I wouldn't think badly of him for his “opinion."

Online Dating is Fun?

pexels.com

As a 42 year old single, queer, poly, switch, I find myself participating in the world of online dating. I have tried a few different sites. Lesbotronics is great, but they rarely have anybody I match with. I've never met anyone through lesbotronics, and the site was even blocked at a Phoenix coffee shop. Pink Cupid annoyed me. Match.com was filled with monogamous people looking for love, marriage, and a baby carriage. Tinder was gross. So that leaves me using OKCupid most of the time.

I've created a list of things I search for in online dating profiles before deciding if it's someone that I'd like to meet. I am well aware that this list might mean I miss out on some interesting people, but these have ended up as deal breakers often enough that I just skip folks who smoke (for example).

If you're interested in my list, you can see it behind the cut.

Clarity Trumps Snobbery

Several years ago I was a writing tutor at the writing center of a university. I was horrified to learn that my job was not to help people learn how to avoid grammar errors. The sole purpose of my job was to assist students in learning to communicate clearly; grammar corrections were to be avoided unless there were regular problems distracting from the student clearly communicating.

Gee, what a thing to be proud of.

Consent Tastes Like Entenmann's!

So apparently some people think consent talk ruins the mood. These are obviously folks that I don't get down and funky with. Of course, consent talk can definitely be done with a throaty voice whispering, "May I kiss you?" in your ear, but sometimes it requires a bit more finesse. There might be topics involved that require more of an ability to think clearly and not be distracted, and lets face it, even when consent conversations take place in a non-sexual environment where you aren't touching or talking dirty, consent conversations rock - no whispering or dirty talk required!  

Too Many Rapes to Differentiate

Trigger warning for rape discussion beyond the cut.

Feminism and Hillary

Hillary Rodham Clinton has been fighting sexism for her entire life.  In an interview with Rebecca Traister posted on The New York Magazine's website, Hillary discussed how women's ambition is dangerous:

“I think it’s the competition,” she said. “Like, if you do this, there won’t be room for some of us, and that’s not fair.” I pushed her: Did she mean men’s fears that ambitious women would take up space that used to belong exclusively to them? “One hundred percent,” she said, nodding forcefully.

This need to compete for the right to participate in what is still seen as a male space has led to a variety of life choices and decisions. Yet no matter how hard she works, she gets questions about whether she prefers diamonds to pearls. Lets face it - all the other candidates are wearing pants suits, but hers are the ones being commented on. She's the one choosing to wear pants suits because she's the only one on that stage who has the option to wear a dress. She's choosing to do what she's done for decades - fight for a space in a male dominated arena. She chose her uniform and gear to fit her situation, and why should we expect her to change it now that women are "allowed" to wear skirt suits and dresses in a political arena?

When Hillary's daughter announced her pregnancy, news sources exploded with questions about how (not if, but how) Hillary's run for president would be affected by being a grandmother. Really? Do you know how many men are grandfathers without their ability to run for office being questions?

Then there's the question of her husband. The never ending question of her husband.  "Hillary and Bill are going to create a second Clinton presidency." "Hillary is power hungry and stayed with Bill." As a presidential candidate, she is being defined as Bill Clinton's wife. She is being defined for her relationship with him, reminding us all that a woman is not an individual but is defined by her relationship to her man.

Staying with her husband is bad for Hillary's political career. People bring up her husband as one of the reasons they won't vote for her. They didn't like his politics, and obviously she and him agree on every detail, which isn't true. Anti-Hillary folks point to the mess that occurred when Bill did show up at one of her rallies and got into a screaming match with Bernie supporters and how his involvement. Bill's recommendations were part of why she lost the nomination in 2008.

Lest we forget, Bill Clinton is also a philanderer. He got it on, and he got caught. There are so many people talking about how she stayed because of her hunger for the White House yet they leave out the details of how staying with him is a count against her. They forget that people stick with their cheating spouses for a variety of reasons. A lot of people either cheat or are cheated on, but because it isn't in the White House the general public never finds out. I was astounded at how many of my own friends stepped forward to confidentially let me know that they'd been cheated on and their marriage survived (or they'd done the cheating) or that their divorce that they'd said was because of (insert reason here) was actually related to cheating. Many people keep it quiet when those things happen. They only told me because I was cheated on and had no problem telling people about it.

Staying with her husband could just mean that Hillary and Bill were able to work through the cheating and that she was ok with her husband being sexual with someone who he had power over. Not everyone is ok with that for a variety of reasons (myself included), but it isn't part of my choice to vote or not vote for Hillary as a political person. I disagree with Bill's choice. Hillary's decision to live with his choice is not my concern - even though it isn't a choice I would have made.

The Democratic party today is different than the party that Bill Clinton was part of, and the politics and social issues have changed and grown. Hillary has had to separate herself from his policies, and she has a platform that isn't a Copycat Clinton Regime.* If she was power hungry to follow her husband's coat tails into the presidency, she'd have dumped him before he could become a liability to her campaign.

 Yet time and again, folks turn around towards Hillary's relationship to her man, her being a mother, her being a woman when they talk about her politics. One of the hotly contested pieces of legislation from Bill Clinton's campaign is his racially targeted crime bill. Bill Clinton was strongly behind it. Hillary supported it. Sanders *voted* for it. Yes, Sanders voted for the crime bill because it included other important legislation that he wanted to see passed.  Yet we spend far more time talking about Hillary supported her man and hearing that she is a cookie cutter creating a third Clinton term.

Times have changed. People are learning and growing. Hillary Clinton has repudiated her former stance on the crime bill as the social issues and ramifications have become more clear. Yet instead of fighting for single-issue bills, which would have made a huge difference in Sanders' decision to vote for the crime bill, we're arguing that Hillary supported her husband.

How many politicians have previous presidential candidates been related to? I honestly have no idea. The first two that pop into my head are the Bushes and the Kennedys. However, it is Hillary who is being presented as a man's husband, as a grandchild's grandmother, as a pants wearing shrew.

It's a load of donkey doo. Disagree with her all you want - in fact, disagreeing with a politician is a right and a privilege of being an American. Just don't forget to sit down and think for a moment about whether your dislike stems from the policies she wants to put in place if she becomes president. Did you have this knowledge before choosing to vote against Hillary? Did you hate Hillary for her mannish ways (a non-nonsense demeanor, i.e. a bitchiness) and her familial relationships, or did you honestly look at her record before making a decision on how you feel about her?

Hillary Clinton is a woman. You cannot forget that. It is an integral part of who she is. Yet judging her as a fit presidential candidate based on her female hormones is absolutely insane.  
 


*  UPDATE 06/07/16: As a friend pointed out, I used the word "himself" when I should have used the word "herself." I have corrected it in the text, but I would like to pretend for a moment that I purposely used the "he is for everybody" grammar rule from days of yore to demonstrate that Hillary is participating in the men's arena, and consequently, the public is fighting back on the personal, female level. "Hillary has had to separate himself from his policies, and she has a platform that isn't a Copycat Clinton Regime."

Misogynistic Troll

There's a lot of discussion right now about the "pro-rape" rallies that are coming up, and I'm not going to link to the articles or the man behind them. There's enough news out there about these jackasses, and I'm not going to add further links to them. If you haven't heard about them, this guy who runs a misogynistic blog and has written "how to pick up chicks" books is holding international rallies to make sure everybody finds out about his cause. Apparently one oft the main causes of the groups is to legalize rape on private property.

http://www.wiu.edu/heather/trolls.php

I've been invited by a few different friends to be part of protest groups surrounding a local event, and I refuse to go. Why? I don't want to participate in the farce this man is creating. He's riling up the public and instigating men, and he's doing it for attention and to push everybody's buttons. I'm sure he knows that the world isn't going to suddenly say, "You know what? You're right. Anybody who spends any time ever on private property can totally be raped because they aren't in public space then they obviously wanted it." By putting that out as the agenda he's calling attention to his books, making sure that haters (and sadly the folks who agree with him) are all out and riled.

This man is looking to push buttons. He wants fights so that he can claim to be the one being victimized: his right to free speech has been taken away, his right to rape at will has been taken away, his right to gather freely with others of like minds have been taken away. He can use all this crap to get people thinking about how if what he says can be banned then what anybody who doesn't go along with the mainstream can be banned.

I'm treating this man's ridiculous message in the same manner that I treat many other things that I disagree with. I'm not going to hear it. I think that everybody should avoid it and him, and they can easily and quietly fade after their one minute of news fame. He wants to be heard. Don't listen.  I bet that his stupid little group was off everybody's radar until he started purposely pulling out this bullshit. He's the worst kind of troll, and we all know that you shouldn't feed the trolls.

Don't Rape Anybody

I am sick and tired of people telling rapists and abusers to imagine someone else assaulted their mother, daughter, son, cousin, father, or best friend's sister's brother's cousin's uncle's wife's husband's twins.

"You raped my sibling last night. Just imagine how you'd feel if someone raped your child."

What makes you think a rapist cares about the person you're listing? For all you know, they've already assaulted that person. It isn't important that they worry about whether or not someone has hurt a person they care about.

These asshats are making a choice to commit violence against another human being. They don't need to hope that nobody hurts a person they are protecting. They need to stop violating others. Period. I do hope that the mothers and sons of rapists aren't raped by anyone, but comparing them to someone else doesn't change things the rapists' behavior.

Rapists are predators. They want to hurt and control someone. They think they're entitled to whatever they want, whenever they want. They don't care if it's your mother or their mother or anybody else's mother. They are taking away someone's power and getting off on it.

I don't give two shits whether they are concerned about someone in their life. What I care about is that they stop!

Sit or Stand

Ages ago I started a Livejournal account where I rated bathrooms at different establishments I visited. I gave it up years ago because I was, apparently, the only person interested in how different bathrooms in Tucson, Arizona, rated on my scale (based on cleanliness, size of the area, whether or not you had your own private bathroom with your own sink, how good the locks were, etc.).

Nowadays, though, the bathroom ratings would have to include who was allowed to pee where. You know what? I don't really care. The toilet debate is dumb. I don't care what your plumbing is, I'm certainly not going to stop and do a visual inspection on each person who's entering a public restroom, and considering that the trans person is more likely to be hurt by a stranger in public than the cis-gendered person, I think the people who should get the most say in this debate are trans folks.

I Define My Consent

I've had conversations where I felt it necessary to defend my right to define my own consent and to define my past consent. I have participated in activities where I gave full and informed consent to and for things I did not enjoy and that resulted in my being miserable.

However, my consent was very, very clear and was given with full knowledge that I wasn't sure if I wanted to continue, even during regular check-ins by the people I was with. There was no coercion. I may have had many reasons to participate in a variety of things I didn't like, or that I later realized I didn't like, and that is my right. I know myself and my body better now, and I learned most of that through trial and error.

Not every interaction I've had in my life is something I'm proud of or happy about. Some of the things I've done were for reasons other than pleasure or sharing with someone else. That doesn't mean that I was coerced into those activities.

I know a lot more about who I am and what I want than I did 20 years ago, 10 years ago, one year ago. I've changed how I connect with people, and my honest is more open and less "honest through omission" than it used to be. I've completely changed how I interact with people, and I am a lot happier now.

That being said, I'm not sorry I participated in activities that hurt me or things that I could easily be ashamed of if I let myself. Would I go back and choose not to do some of those things? Who the hell knows. I do know that there are quite a few things from my past that I wouldn't do NOW.

I really, really hate that I end up feeling defensive about my past actions. If I'm having a conversation with someone who then freaks out about something I hadn't realized would be considered an issue, I end up defending a person or action that I strongly dislike. My choices, good or bad, were my own and made with both eyes wide open.

TV: It Must be Good for Something?

I watched tv yesterday.

Flaunt It!

#nolabeings #neworleans. 

This photo popped up on my Facebook feed today, and here's the caption:

"My granddaughter called me up one day, she said ‘Famor, I was just thinking, since you’re so dark, I think maybe you need to do something with your hair in color.’ I said 'Well, what are you thinking?' She said, ‘Well, right now my hair is pink.’ And I said ‘Yeah, but you live in London and y’all are wild and crazy.’ She said ‘No I want you to try this. Since you’re royalty and purple is your favorite color, you should try purple.’ […] I tell you from the minute I got my hair done, all of the ladies in the shop said ‘I wish I had enough guts to do that!’ I said ‘You can! What’s stopping you? You worried about what people say?’ You got to please yourself first! Who cares?!" #nolabeings #neworleans" 

I'm tired of worrying all the time. Once upon a time I could see past all my flaws and still manage to do what I wanted, but it's harder now. A few years ago, my life fell apart, and I knew I was too old, too fat, too ugly, too replaceable to succeed. I knew I'd never make friends or if I did it would be because they were too lonely and afraid to believe they had any other options. I was sure that I'd only ever be a pity date or it's an end of the night and I don't want to go home alone fuck. 

Waves of Feminism

I was introduced to the third wave of feminism in the early-to-mid 90s. I define feminism as the advocacy of equal rights and opportunities for everybody; regardless of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, religious background, sexual orientation, body size or type, economics, age, family status, and physical or intellectual abilities, through political, social, personal, educational, and economic means.

First Wave Feminism, it takes money to get matching white dresses.

First wave feminism was the women's suffragist movement, a lot of which focused on getting the vote (think Margaret Sanger as well as the Pankhursts) but also focused on economics and sexuality. A large subsection of the suffragette movement was made up of middle to upper class women: Women who had the time to make matching sashes, the money to get pretty white dresses, and the education to write up and distribute flyers.

Second wave feminism is what many people think of when they think of the women's rights movement- the 1960s, the hippy movement, the push for equality with economics and culture and free love. However, it was still organized in the US by mainly white women. The equal rights movements had a decently sized divide among color lines, even as whites went down south to march for black rights, there was a distinction. While there was discussion of all races, there was a large push from middle to upper class women in the movement. There's also been rewriting of history that shows us a focus on these women in much the same way the new Stonewall movie is "forgetting" that Drag Queens and people of color were so heavily involved in that historical time.

Ok, so this picture is from a third wave of coffee site -
who knew there was a third wave of coffee?

Third wave feminism was made possible by the previous two "waves" and all the people who worked so hard!  I don't remember if we used the term third wave feminism when I first started learning about it in the 1990s, but I know that by the end of the 1990s it was becoming a common place term. I was pretty confused because I tended to think of the 1960s equal rights as being both women's rights and racial equality, so I didn't understand the differences. Looking back, I can see it more clearly. So much of feminism had been defined in the past through the lens of middle and upper class white women.

So, for me, the lead-up to the third wave of feminism was about opening up and realizing the need for discussion amongst people from a variety of walks of life. A funny current example of where this third wave of feminism has brought us is that most of the people I find interesting on OK Cupid have a note on their profile that says something along the lines of, "If the majority of books on your favorites list are by white men, I'll look askance, and we might not get along."

That is where I am and have been since the 1990s. Oh, my ideas and opinions have changed and grown as I've learned more and seen more of the world, but my basic ideology of equality has remained the same. I still see the fundamental problem as -isms (racism, sexism, ageism, etc.). They are all interconnected and will remain an issue as long as our society is focused on hierarchy. It's a ladder with everybody on it, and if we're going to be higher up the ladder, we have to put people below us.

A great example of one of my own hierarchical prejudices is that I have a college degree and often find myself thinking that someone else should have worked harder to get one. This is most likely to occur when somebody says something about how "it must be nice to have so much money," gets angry at me for expecting hot water always be available in my apartment, or sends me a resume for a writing job when they can't even put a decent sentence together on a document that represents their professional abilities when trying to get a job that will involve them putting together other people's resumes.

This is a real issue that I still fight against. especially as more and more discussions happen about why expecting good grammar is classist. I've reconciled it with the fact that I do need basic grammar to enjoy a good conversation, but it certainly doesn't have to be perfect. Clarity is important, and lack of punctuation, for example, makes it very difficult for me to follow someone's train of thought. However, my work grammar is very different from my home grammar, and my blog is often filled with grammatical errors and typos. At work, if I'm reviewing someone's sample documents for a writing job I definitely expect a higher level of expertise and will look down on someone who's applying for a writing job without actually having any discernible writing abilities.

I also have to fight against other ingrained beliefs in this hierarchical system. It took me years to be comfortable around people who grew up with more money than I did. I resented their "easy" lives and bizarre ideas that high school kids shouldn't work because their job is school. I still get antsy when  people talk about how parents are "supposed" to pay for their kids to go to college and that their parents gave them $30,000 for their wedding or their grandmother took the entire extended family for a two week vacation in Europe. I become so jealous that I start looking down on them for taking advantage of what they have had all their lives and I boost myself up by telling myself that I'm better because I worked hard for what I have even if I am still paying off my college degree and can't afford to go on fancy vacations because nobody handed it to me. Blah blah blah, American dream, pulled myself up by my boot straps, yaddi yaddi yadda.

The fact is that I'm not better than any of those people. I have learned to expect certain privileges, and I have had a lot of luck in my life. I had parents who sure weren't perfect but who always, without fail, loved me. They didn't haver college diplomas, but they defined me through academic achievements. That wasn't always for the best; I still shy away from academic failure and even internet tests make me sweat if I can't get the right answer to who composed the Buffy theme song. Overall, though, it allowed me to become who I am and, apparently, to look down on folks who didn't have the same opportunities I did.

Yet I still find ways to be shocked at how some other people would apply feminism. Did you know that there is literally a Feminist Nazi movement?  I'm not talking about Rush Limbaugh's Feminazi crazy. I'm talking about female white supremacists who believe in equal rights for white women and all white people being "better" than anybody else. Needless to say, this is certainly not third wave feminism or any wave of real feminism. This is a prejudicial pile of of epic proportions. You can read about it in Lindsey Shrupp's essay "We Found Some Actual Feminazis - as in Feminist Nazis."

I don't know where feminism is going, but I know that feminist nazis aren't it. There are too many awesome people out there for us to let that happen. I am thrilled with the fourth wave of feminism and surprised that they're using the word "feminist" to define it. I'm glad that they are because the word has such a long and rich history, even though "fem" is such a small part of what we are really discussing when we think about feminism. I love the technological angle and the focus of individual self-definition, as opposed to allowing external definitions to be who we are (which was still present in the third wave of feminism and is still visible now). I also understand that the labeling of waves is in and of itself confusing. This falls under "your ideology is not my feminism, and your ideology is socially oppressive and not free from criticism."*

In the 1990s, I couldn't have imagined the current alphabet soup of terminologies (GLBTQPAI...) or how trans rights would change our ways of viewing the world and defining ourselves. With individual definitions and a strengths based approach, we are viewing people as survivors, as strong, as able to make their own decisions. Basic terminologies have changed, for example, we discuss survivors of domestic violence instead of victims of domestic abuse. Terminology does matter! That shit about sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me? It's bullshit. If someone calls you a victim enough times, it will be that many times harder for you to view yourself as something more. A rose by any other name would not smell as sweet because if I name my kid shit and always call the kid a piece of shit, they're going to feel like a piece of shit.

I didn't envision Occupy Wall Street or Black Lives Matter or so many of the amazing things that are happening around me. I also never envisioned that Planned Parenthood would be attacked or that women's basic rights would be eroding around me. I never would have guessed that someone like Bernie Sanders could be a real contender in the Democratic presidential options.  I look forward to seeing what comes next and hope like heck that it moves in a direction of equality for all!

I wanted to end this post with a photo and link to a site that sells shirts that say, "Pro Choice, Pro Feminism, Pro Unicorns," but I can't find anybody who sells them in 3x (my size), so damnit, I'm not going to link to their stores.





* This sentence is a paraphrase from a blog post I read at some point; if you know who or where it's from, please let me know, and I'll credit the original writer.

Too Ugly

Trigger warning. This article is about rape and beauty in American culture.

Preschool Teachers are Insane

I think preschool teachers are absolutely fucking insane. The work they do for the money they make? I wouldn't survive a week in a daycare. I can't think of a dollar amount that you could pay me that would be enough to attempt to do all the work that preschool teachers do, and they do it without taping the children's mouth shut, tying them to the chairs, or essentially violating any other child abuse and basic human decency laws.

You'd think that people automatically assuming that preschool teachers are "too dumb" to teach older kids wouldn't surprise me, but it does. Has anybody looked at what preschooler teachers do? They have to be experts on every topic because you never know what a three year old is going to want to know about.

It's important to know how individual children are learning from an early age, so preschool teachers have to be able to perform assessments on the kids in their care and  evaluate their learning level and abilities. They need to catch any "early warning" signs that a child might need extra or different help.  The preschool teachers evaluate learning levels and abilities, and they sometimes work with children whose parents refuse to acknowledge or accept that a child would benefit from a different style of learning.

Preschool teachers work with children who are in some cases just barely able to talk. The ones who do talk are apt to jump from topic to topic faster than I can follow, and I generally jump topics every few sentences. I live next to a preschooler and a toddler, and I rarely know what they're telling me. The oldest will say they went to the park and the youngest will say something that appears to be, "tew98afs  oasdoiwer," while I stare at the grandparents asking for translations. The grandparents say, "We usually don't know what he's saying," the older sister says, "I know!  I love the slide, too!" The preschool teacher spent all day with the kids and would already know about the trip to the park and be able to understand what the preschooler was communicating. Preschool teachers work with the children from the time they are little, so they learn their personality and non-verbal cues as well as their verbal abilities. Even when a child is verbal, they might not be coherent. If you think a crying adult is difficult to understand, listen to a three year old sobbing and panting and attempting to tell you what's wrong!.

Preschool teachers provide all this individualized attention while tracking an entire classroom of little kids. Preschool teachers skip personal bathroom breaks and might manage to scarf some food down during lunchtime, but they're usually too busy making sure the youth in their care don't choke on their lunch. They're also busy keeping track of individualized notes from parents with specific instructions (for example, please tell me what time my child uses the bathroom and what the consistency of each movement is).


Preschool teachers are skilled at first aid, and yes, performing Heimlich on a three year old is very different than on an adult. They can fix booboos. They also track booboos, watch for physical, emotional, and behavioral signs of physical abuse, and sometimes cry their eyes out when they get home because they are mandated reporters and watched a child covered in filth and bruises go off with children's services while the police wait to arrest the parents at pick-up time.

Nothing that happens in your house is a surprise to the preschool teacher. Most children describe their home life in bizarre detail, and thankfully preschool teachers are the height of discretion (although perhaps giggling with their coworkers about the specific acrobatic feats you were accomplishing when your child walked in on you). Preschool teachers also field statements like, "Lift up your shirt and show me your boobies!" without lifting an eyebrow or assuming that the parents are deranged.

Preschool teachers make sure your children are aware that we play on the playground and pee in the bathroom. They clean up after children who have accidents or make messes, and there will be both in preschool - paint all over the floor?  No problem!  Pee all over your nap mat? Easy peasy! Many parents have difficulty getting their one or two children to lie down, but these preschool teachers get 20 children napping simultaneously every single day.

I'm sure you're aware that the toys at preschools need to be kept disinfected.  Do you think there's a disinfectant fairy who shows up?  Nope. The preschool teachers do it. They also spend their evenings on lesson plans. 

Oh, and like all other levels of teachers, they buy supplies for their classroom out of their own pocket, and they do it on a much lower salary.
Preschool teachers generally don't have health care or sick days, but they're constantly getting sick because mommy had to go to work and sent Johnny in with a stomach flu hoping that the school wouldn't notice all the projectile vomiting. When they stay home because they caught the stomach flu, again, they do it without pay. They get paid less than grammar school teachers. Heck, they are lucky if they get paid as much as the part-time softball coach at the junior high school.

You'll never convince me that people who are smart enough to do all of that, and do it for a salary that isn't a living wage, aren't bat shit crazy.