A discussion that needs to start happening now.

Jerusalem Cries for Peace, by Jehanzeb Dar at Racialicious and Broken Mystic.

. . . The Palestinian people have suffered a great deal and their story is still neglected by the mainstream media, which is what frustrates Muslims around the world, myself included. A common mistake that many anti-Islamic and even well-intentioned conservatives make is that they think anti-Zionism equates anti-Jewish (yes, I’m one of those people who refuse to say anti-Semitism, since Arabs are Semites too, not just Jews). This is absolutely false. Another mistake is that they think Islam teaches Muslims to hate and kill Jews. Again, this is false. The conflict between Israelis and Palestinians has nothing to do with Judaism and Islam; this conflict needs to be understood in light of historical context. More than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were brutally and systematically evicted from their homes by the terrorist organizations known as Irgun, Stern Gang, and the Haganah, “the precursor of the Israel Defense Forces.” Examples of where these groups evicted Arabs can be found in the villages of Deir Yassin and Duwayma. According to Dan Freeman-Maloy of ZMag, the Zionist forces controlled 78% of mandatory Palestine by 1949. They declared the State of Israel after razing “some 400 Palestinian villages to the ground.” As mentioned earlier, to this day, the creation of Israel is infamously known around the Muslim world as a great historic injustice and/or the Nakba (Catastrophe). In the years that followed, the Israeli military occupation (or the Israel Defense Force) patrolled the Palestinian settlements for “security” purposes. This is not to insult or stereotype the Israreli Defense Force, but just to point out that so many horrific crimes against innocent Palestinians have been committed by countless Israeli soldiers, who are not branded “terrorists” or charged with war crimes. In 1982, the prime minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, ordered the massacre of Palestinians in Lebanese refugee camps. He formed an alliance with a Lebanese Christian militia-men, who were permitted to enter two Palestinian refugee camps (Sabra and Shatila) in an area controlled by the Israeli military. They massacred thousands of Palestinian civilians — something that the Palestinians and the Muslim world will never forget . . .

. . . We are told that the Palestinians “hate freedom and democracy”. This is probably one of the biggest insults to human intelligence. By promoting this mentality, we are ignoring what is called cultural responses. When people are oppressed by a foreign invader, they develop a stronger connection with their culture and religious background. When the British occupied India, for example, they stripped the Indians of their language, culture, and religion. Many Indians who studied in England would come back to the India and didn’t even know how to speak their own language. They were culturally confused. The rebellion against the British was sparked by the violent and brutal treatment of Indians, but the Indians also used their culture and religion(s) to energize and motivate them even more. “Why should we be like them?” they thought, “they’re taking away our culture and religion.” So they established a stronger and more patriotic connection with their ethnic identity and used that to fuel their energy to rebel. Cultural response . . .

. . . Do I know what it’s like to have a Loved one murdered? Do I know what it’s like to see my home demolished? Do I know what it’s like to be evicted and deported to another country? I have not been in these situations, yet I am deeply saddened and disturbed whenever I hear about what happens. Both the Israelis and Palestinians are suffering heavily, and whenever I speak about Palestinian causalities, I am accused of being a “terrorist sympathizer.” I would like Israelis (and those who support Israel) to know that Muslims do not hate Jews and that there is nothing within Islam that teaches us to hate or kill them. Whenever Palestinians are killed by the Israeli military forces, those soldiers are never called “terrorists.” When Israel bombed Lebanon in 2006, we were told by the mainstream media that it was an act of “self-defense.” And yet, when a Palestinian defends him/herself, it is an act of “terrorism.” I had a neighbor who was once an American soldier stationed in Israel. He saw with his own eyes, Israeli soldiers taking two Palestinian teenagers on top of a hill and then beating their faces in with rocks. He wanted to stop it, but his fellow soldiers held him back and told him to “let it be.” The next day, as my neighbor told me, there was nothing on the news about what happened to those two Palestinian teenagers. What were their names? Who were their families? Who cares? . . .

.

Sex and the City turned me into Miranda.

Just like Daria turned me into Daria. And Will & Grace turned me into Will.

Except not. I was already uptight and introverted and meticulous, respectively, when I began watching those shows:

'Sex and the City' Fiend: Show Turned Me Into Samantha, by Sheila Marikar, ABC News via Yahoo! News.

. . . ["Lisa"] got hooked on "Sex and the City" when she was a 14-year-old growing up on Long Island, N.Y. It was the same year she lost her virginity. She soon graduated to ordering cosmopolitans at bars she snuck into and cheating on her boyfriend with up to seven other guys -- in one week. "When you're that age you try to emulate people on TV. Carrie smoked, so I smoked, Samantha looked at hooking up with random people as not a big deal, so that's what I did too," said Lisa, now 22. "It wasn't 'Sex and the City's' fault. I love the show, but I think it made it a little easier to justify my behavior." . . .

. . . Lisa left her "Samantha" ways behind at 19, when she moved to Utah, became a Mormon, married a man within the church and gave birth to two children. For the first year of her marriage, her husband forbade her to watch "Sex and the City" for fear that it would lure her back to her habits of sex, drugs and one-too-many cosmos . . .

I wish my husband would try to forbid me from watching a TV show. I doubt he would make it out the front door alive.

Some apropos comments followed:

For the love of God almighty who prints this crap?!?!?! ABC should be ashamed of itself, but like most corporate entities it's only ashamed when the ad dollars dry up. This is journalism. People dying due to fascist regimes in and out of our country and this is what you print? To hell with your news department ABC. I'm taking my business elsewhere.

- NightEmber79

and

So SATC wasn't around when I was 14 and I had sex. Who should I blame? LOL

- sarahthewitch

LOL indeed, sarah. LOL indeed.

Also, where does Ms. Marikar get off printing the line, "To be clear: "Sex and the City" can't be blamed for creating a generation of sluts." What self-respecting journalist, and woman, would make that kind of backwards, judgmental statement in a "news" article. Probably the same kind of writer that would include the quote, "It wasn't 'Sex and the City's' fault. I love the show, but I think it made it a little easier to justify my behavior.", and still choose the contradictory title, "'Sex and the City' made me have sex at 14".

~

In other "Oh, really?" news:

Boy band creator [Lou Pearlman of Backstreet Boys, 'N Sync and O-Town] sentenced to 25 years in prison, by Travis Reed, AP via Yahoo! News.

It's about time. [Update: Defamer, I re-reported this story first. Again. Yes, it might be my only post this week compared to your "27 POSTS IN THE LAST 24 HOURS", but no matter. Victory is mine!]

and

American to charge for 1st checked bag, cut flights, by David Koenig, AP via Yahoo! News.

Boo.

.

Blair Switch Project

The relevant funny starts 3:30. B-T-dubs, last week's Gossip Girl was L-A-M-E. As I told Stephanie, the episode turned out to be bo-ring. Serena almost got raped (again!) by some guy who overdosed on his own line of cocaine; then she called 911 for help. Why does she think she killed him? Why should I care? Why does she keep feeling sorry for the people who try to rape her?! Did she forget what happened with Chuck in the first episode? Dude!

Preach the word, Sister Girlfriend.

I'm not a niche. I'm more than 50% of the world population.

The boys of summer, by Dorothy Snarker at AfterEllen.

. . . One needs only to look at this summer’s slate to see the sad truth. Besides all the testosterone-driven superhero flicks, it’s all dudes – old and young. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull: old dude with a whip. Speed Racer: young dude with a car. The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian: Prince dude. You Don't Mess with the Zohan: secret agent turned hairstylist dude. Get Smart: not-so-smart dude. The Love Guru: enlightened dude. Hancock: burned-out super dude. Hellboy II: The Golden Army: big red dude. Pineapple Express: stoner dudes. Bangkok Dangerous: why-is-he-still-getting-leading-action-roles dude . . .

. . . But this leads us to the classic chicken or egg question: Are there few successful female-driven films because they don’t do well, or do female-driven films not do well because there are so few of them? I have to believe the latter. Baby Mama, a comedy with not one but two female leads (way to eat up the year’s quota, ladies,) opened No. 1 and beat out a comedy with two male leads (Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay). Perhaps you’ve also heard of Alien, The Devil Wears Prada and some hardly-seen flick called Titanic.

Hundreds of male-driven films flop each year, but there are so many of them, we hardly notice except for the biggest-budget disasters. But if one or two female films fail (like Nicole Kidman’s The Invasion and Jodie Foster’s The Brave One last year) and it’s time to pull the plug? In the last three years Nicolas Cage (the aforementioned “why-is-he-still-getting-leading-action-roles dude”) has had bomb (Next) after bomb (The Wicker Man) after bomb (The Weather Man) after bomb (Lord of War); yet there is his big creepy face on movie posters for Bangkok Dangerous scaring small children.

The problem isn’t that women’s movies don’t do well; the problem is that women’s movies are treated as a niche. The choices in female-driven films simply aren’t as broad as the choices in male-centered films. For the most part, we are either in romantic comedies (because, you know, all women want to get married) or thrillers (because, you know, women in peril sells). It’s pretty simple: more choices mean more opportunities to connect, means more chance of success.

Women-centered films can become the Field of Dreams of cinema. If you make good ones, we will come.

Favorite comments:

I reckon its time our het sisters refused to get dragged by their men to such tetosterone fuelled movies.

- notshane

I don't have a man, notshane, but if you know some nice, straight guys, I'll drag them to see Baby Mama.

And re: Nicolas Cage,

He's not an outstanding actor**, he's not attractive, he's not charismatic. WHY does his career EXIST??

This is one of the greatest mysteries of our era.

- zenarcade

zenarcade, I thought I was the only one pondering this enigma.

For you readers who think my lyrics are too abrasive for public consumption, I direct you to the following article in the indie publication called The New York Times. Read it while you can!:

Is There a Real Woman in This Multiplex?, by Manohla Dargis. Emphases on the snark, mine.

. . . Nobody likes to admit the worst, even when it’s right up there on the screen, particularly women in the industry who clutch at every pitiful short straw, insisting that there are, for instance, more female executives in Hollywood than ever before. As if it’s done the rest of us any good. All you have to do is look at the movies themselves — at the decorative blondes and brunettes smiling and simpering at the edge of the frame — to see just how irrelevant we have become. That’s as true for the dumbest and smartest of comedies as for the most critically revered dramas, from “No Country for Old Men” (but especially for women) to “There Will Be Blood” (but no women). Welcome to the new, post-female American cinema . . .

. . . In “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” the lucky guy is Peter (the screenwriter Jason Segel), whose stunning conquest, Rachel (Mila Kunis), is so out of his league as to be in another universe. No matter. Peter snags this prize specifically because — from his full-frontal nudity to his penchant for hugs and voluble crying jags, for which he’s literally mistaken for a woman — he’s basically another chick, or what Arnold Schwarzenegger once called a girlie man. (The softly plumped Mr. Segel even looks as if he could fit into an A cup.) In one scene Peter goes swimming with Rachel only to end up clinging to the side of a cliff. Rachel, who has already taken the plunge, laughingly yells up at him, “I can see your vagina!”

Better a virtual vagina, I suppose, than none at all. Last year only 3 of the 20 highest-grossing releases in America were female-driven, and involve a princess (“Enchanted”) or pregnancy (“Knocked Up” and “Juno”). Actresses had starring roles in about a quarter of the next 80 highest-grossing titles, mostly in dopey romantic comedies and dopier thrillers. A number of these were among the worst-reviewed movies of the year, including “Premonition” (Sandra Bullock) and “The Reaping” (Hilary Swank), the last of which was released by — ta-da! — Warner Brothers. The days of “Million Dollar Baby,” for which Ms. Swank won an Oscar, and “Speed,” which rocketed Ms. Bullock to stardom in the summer of 1994, feel long gone . . .

Hee! And, boo.

.

Courting the fictional chimpanzee vote

Curious George publisher mulls legal action over Obama shirt, by Jay Fitzgerald at the Boston Herald, via Defamer.

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt is considering legal action against a Georgia tavern owner selling T-shirts depicting presidential candidate Barack Obama as the Curious George monkey character.

In a statement, the Boston publisher, which owns the book rights to Curious George, said today the firm finds the T-shirt "offensive and utterly out of keeping with the values Curious George represents."

Because clearly George is a Clinton supporter. I'm waiting for official statements from superdelegates Lancelot Link and The Bear.

.

Musings from a black woman: Why I won't watch Iron Man

Iron Man, by Daisy at Daisy's Dead Air.

. . . Spoilers ahead.

For instance, during the early scenes in which the evil Arab terrorists in Afghanistan take Tony Stark (hotshot weapons manufacturer and war profiteer) hostage, I am not at all sure the numerous ill-behaved, noisy suburban brats behind me understood that this was not how all dark-skinned Arabs behave. His ally during captivity is a lighter-skinned, well-educated, erudite sort (played by Shaun Toub), while the bad guys are all dark, dirty and mean. I felt uncomfortable with that, and would have found it necessary to editorialize if I had brought small children to the movie.

At one point during these early scenes, the ally complains he doesn't understand what the terrorists are saying because they are speaking in Hungarian. Hungarian? Obviously, someone on the set complained and they decided to throw that in for those of us who might complain all the terrorists are Arabs.

Later in the movie, we learn the situation is not as we thought (and nicely done, I must say!), but I don't think the younger kids behind me could fully understand the twists and turns of the plot. Jeff Bridges (great villain performance, bravo! Good movie villains are hard to come by, and Kevin Spacey really disappointed me in SUPERMAN RETURNS) morphs into the the villain in a deliciously-greedy fashion and we discover he has hired the terrorists to kidnap Stark and take over Stark Industries. But doesn't this mean the Arabs are still mindless and evil, just that they are working for an American instead? Is terrorism for American dollars and weaponry supposed to be better than terrorism for some supposedly righteous cause?

Hmm.

There's also this: Black Like Downey: The Dark Overtones Of 'Tropic Thunder'. And this: 'Tropic Thunder' Trailer Doesn't Exactly Bury The Whole Robert Downey Jr. Blackface Subplot.

There are brief moments when I wonder why so much of what I write about involves injustice, discrimination and ignorant privileged folks running my American media. Then I realize, it's not like I go looking for the crazy; the crazy comes to me. Iron Man and Tropic Thunder are not only mainstream movies; they are tentpole events. This isn't Will Ferrell and his relatively less famous friends making an allegedly humorous video about rape on their own website. This is a group of major studios and distributors deciding that perpetuating anti-Arab sentiments and blackface (?!) is still acceptable in 2008.

.

I smile less, and I'm getting more rude.

One of my new friends (Thank you, new friend!) forwarded this article to me:

Catcalling: creepy or a compliment?, by Anna Jane Grossman on CNN.com . . . in the Living section. Clearly CNN knows where a story about harassment should go, right Thomas?

When Holly Kearl was researching her master's thesis on street harassment last winter, she was pleasantly surprised that lewd remarks were few and far between. Then spring rolled around.

"Suddenly, it was April, and I was getting yelled at everywhere by men in cars," said Kearl, who has since completed a degree in women's studies and public policy from George Washington University.

As part of her research, Kearl conducted an anonymous, informal e-mail survey of 225 women on the subject. She found that 98 percent of respondents experienced some form of street harassment at least a few times, and about 30 percent reported being harassed on a regular basis.

"For me, anyone who interrupts my personal space to objectify me or make me feel uncomfortable or threatened is harassing me," she says . . .

This article comes at a fitting time, considering I recently had some strong words over here: Maybe it's coz I'm not pretty enough., by Holly at The Pervocracy. You have to scroll down to the bottom for my firm stance on the subject.

But some of the CNN commenters--mostly, but not exclusively male--had things like this to say. Emphases mine, sic implied:

At the risk of sounding crude and sexist, there is a small portion of blame to be placed on 'some' women. While I wouldn't do this (and never have) to any woman, I have seen many cases over the years where it is obviously 'invited' by the woman walking by. A man walking down the street in a speedo would be met with laughter; by other men and/or women. But a woman wearing a form-fitting skirt that barely covers you-know-what, a low cut blouse, and high heels is pretty much saying, "Look at me!" For those women to be offended by comments regarding their looks is ridiculous, and in some ways, offensive to the intelligence of men. As if they are 'wrong' for noticing and bringing attention to, an attractive woman who is obviously trying to draw attention to herself. If people dress for success, and are the victim of truly offensive catcalls, then they are perfectly correct in being upset. If they dress like they walked off a Playboy photo shoot or from a local exotic dance club, then they are obviously doing nothing to prevent, and 'everything' to encourage catcalls. And lets not forget that catcalls have been occuring for generations and only recently, in this PC world we now are forced to live in, has it become such an offensive issue. I, along with the vast majority of men in the world, know that there is more to a woman than just her looks. But I'm sorry that some women feel so offended when ANYONE addresses their looks in a positive way. Before the workday begins, most women spend hours on cleaning, coloring, plucking, shaving, trimming, exfoliating. But once they arrive at work, we're not allowed to offer a compliment for fear of losing our jobs or going to jail. I just don't get it...

I just don't get it either. I look great in a Speedo.

. . . I don't want to hear crap from trampy women who are intentionally dressing like a street hooker in order to get attention. If you're going to dress like a hooker, then there is probably some loser guy who is going to say something to you.

Most women are trying to outdo the other women in order to gain attention of guys [even the lesbians?], regardless of whether they want to admit it or not. But, they're only happy with the attention when it gets the attention of someone they're interested in, and they'll ***** about the attention when a not so attractive guy becomes intersted in them. When they get what they want, their attitude completely changes.

If only I dressed like an indoor hooker instead of those street hookers. Then I'd attract some high class losers.

Get a life...

Conversation is not harassment or invading your 'personal space'. Catcalling as you call it, calls attention to yourself and is instinctive. Spring is a time of mating. Human beings are by our very nature an animal.

Unless there is violence or threat of violence, you are creating a environment of victimization where there is none.

Too much personal space and not enough violence. Now I understand, I understand everything.

Come on, when the weather gets warmer outside, many women wear less and less. The skirts get higher and the tops get tighter and smaller. What do they expect in the way that they dress? Why wear a mini skirt or a tight top? Not all do this, there's a lot of creeps around there, but be fair in your article! Women are to blame too!

What do I expect by wearing mini skirts? Wait, I don't own a mini skirt. Then I must be to blame for my . . . chinos and sensible shoes?

. . . Catcalls are expletives, a natural visceral reaction, not communication. It's a GREAT compliment, and if a woman doesn't like compliments she should dress like FLDS.

Really? FLDS? (I don't think they're buying this either.) I do recall a time when I was at a gas station dressed in jeans, a parka, and loafers, yet the toolio at the next pump saw me as a prostitute. Next time I might employ Vivian's method below:

. . . I just say "Jesus wouldn't act like that!" Usually that leaves them so confused they just shut up.

This one from Brenna is sad; so many women are victims of some form of Stockholm Syndrome:

It's not harrassment unless they touch you. I like the compliment. I get tired of being the smart girl all the time.

I have never gotten tired of being the smart girl. Though I know other people have gotten tired of me. :)

The title of this post came from a comment by MattE, which has somehow disappeared from the comment thread of the the catcalling article. To summarize, Mr. E lamented the fact that these days, women have become less friendly. Therefore he now only speaks to polite elderly women who know their place.

For more equally sensitive thoughts on this article, I refer you to the following:

I’ll Take The Rapists For $500 Alex!, by sherlock (he wishes!) at Bakerstreet, a blog with the subtitle, "Equal Opportunity, Politically Correct, I Insult Everyone Equally".

Catcalls Turn Women Into Crybabies, by Cara Ellison (it's a lady!) at her blog.

I am snarky today!

Ed. note 5/15/2008: I found the comment that inspired the post title. It was by MarkE, not MattE.

Ok, so that is why women dress nicely, always make sure their hair is wavy and beautiful, etc. I have noticed a shift in women's attitude in the last few years. They seem to smile less, and are quite frankly getting more rude as time passes. Oh and before you comment ladies, I am the same weight and have not changed much(yes I still have all my hair) in the last few years, so it's NOT that, as I'm sure the ladies would like to objectify. hmm. Anyway, I have stopped speaking to women, I have stopped holding doors, (except for the elderly, which seem to have NOT lost their friendliness) WOMEN, listen carefully, if you want to be equal, then quit whining and grow some. -- and don't expect men to treat you differently. As far as catcalling. all men should ignore women, then we would see complaints.

.

Best line of the day

Regarding the $100 million costing/$20 million grossing abomination that is Speed Racer, raincoaster had this to share on Defamer:

"Who in god's name ever thought Emile Hirsch could open so much as a window?"

.

On this Mother's Day,

I am thankful for my Mummy and Grammy.

With that out of the way, here's what I'm angry about. It started with this Feministing article which led me to the source: My Spring Weekend Nightmare, by Melissa Bruen at The Daily Campus. Most of the comments following the original article were supportive. However, some other people had the gall to write the following responses, emphases mine, sic implied. First the doubter:

This story seems like a graduating journalist's cry for fame. If I'm mistaken, then I am sorry, but I don't buy into any of it. Sweet picture on the front page, and nice "swimmer's build," but I feel sorry for anyone who is actually a victim of assault and doesn't have such a romanticized story to tell.

Then the critic:

Let me first start off by saying that I feel sorry for what happened . . .

Now, on to some journalistic criticism. This is on journalistic matters and how this story was handled, NOT about the situation itself. I felt that the article was poorly written and should not have been put on the front page above the fold. If anything, it should have started in the Commentary section and continued elsewhere. Normally, any story that is printed a week after the occurence rarely gets on the front page of any paper. Yes, I know it was traumatic, and if she couldn't bring herself to write it before, then perhaps a reporter should have done an interview, so she could get her story out there and more timely.

Maybe if she had been killed, then she would have been front-page material. But being assaulted by multiple men on a college campuse belong in the "Commentary section". Right. He continues:

Secondly, the picture is totally inappropriate for the article. The first thing I honestly saw when I picked up the paper was the three words "SOME GIRLS LUCKY". We all know that "lucky" is another word for having sex, and to wear that shirt and talk about being sexually harassed, well that was just in very poor taste. After looking closer, I saw that there were smaller words, but from afar, no one would honestly see them. Another photo should have been used, or a different shirt.

Thirdly the article being released when it was was poor timing. Yes, I know taht she might not have been able to talk about it right away, but I ask that you go back to where I said that she should have talked to a reporter. To have the Editor-In-Chief who is graduating next week tell this tale without another issue for anyone to comment about the article seems also in very poor taste. This article should have run sooner, or it should not have ran at all. From my perspective, it seems like she wanted to get her story out there (and I give her full credit for that and support it), so she used her power as Editor-In-Chief and put it on the front page above the fold for the last normal issue.

Finally, because accused rapists allegedly hurt more than the people actually being assaulted:

Oh wow, you're sooooo brave. Please. There's a story of a kid in Georgia who was imprisoned for several years for having consensual sex with a 15-year-old girl when he was 16. THAT'S injustice, not whatever minor shenanigans happened with you. There are COUNTLESS instances of false rape accustations that lead to arrests, convictions, or simply the staining of a guy's name. (Duke lacrosse is only the foremost example).

When it comes to "rape", the vast majority of the time the only injustices are felt by men, not girls. I'm sick of supposed to be feeling sorry for girls (and yes, I say girls just to annoy feminists). This editor will probably have here future paved with gold by newspapers who will hire her only because she's female, while far more qualifed male reporters/editors, etc. get the shaft. Happens every day, in companies, newspapers, etc. across the land. Who's getting raped there?

The anger hit me again when I read this comment under a related post on Feministe from kayline:

. . . Anyway, I wanted to contribute to the larger discussion evolving here about campus rape culture. In my second year of college I dated a a guy named Jake for about a month, before I decided that I was feeling emotionally manipulated and pressured to engage in sex even when I really wasn’t interested. (In one instance he came into my room at 2am while I was asleep, crawled into my bed, and started fondling me. Sounds romantic? Is actually really unpleasant.) After I broke it off I mostly avoided him, but one night about a month later I was at a small party in a mutual friend’s room. I had been having a really bad week, and drank too much too quickly. When I decided to go to bed I was a little unsteady on my feet. Jake offered to walk me back to my room, and I shrugged and said sure. When we got to my room (I had a single) he helped me into bed, then crawled into bed with me. I blacked out after that. When I woke up he was gone and I was completely naked. I know for a fact that I got into bed with all my clothes on.

When I woke up I didn’t quite know what to think. I was hung over, and confused by the gaps in my memory of the night’s events. But as the day went on and I started thinking more clearly, I realized that I was feeling OFF. I couldn’t stop thinking about, but I kept talking myself down. “You don’t know what happened, it was probably nothing, don’t be so dramatic, you’re just looking for attention.” This was happening inside my own head. Finally I called my mom, and though I love her dearly, she failed me that day. I told her what had happened and she basically said: You don’t really know what happened, you’re never going to know, there’s nothing you can do about it, so just don’t think about it . . .

If you read the rest of the comment, the situation ended Jake getting a six-semester suspension from the college and his classmates throwing him a going away party, while simultaneously shunning the multiple women that he raped.

. . . the worst part was what my classmates did.

I went to a REALLY small college. 75 students per class. I’d literally lived in the same building with these people for 4 years, and they abandoned me, and abandoned my roommate. They offered us none of the support that they offered Jake, because they couldn’t stomach coming to grips with what had happened to us. When I go to alumni events and visit with people from school, I look at their faces and think “The night I cried myself to sleep alone in my room, you were at a party for the man who raped me.”

I then thought to myself, I wouldn't just think that, I would say it to their faces. But that's me now. That wasn't me in college. That's not other people, nor does it need to be. I'm the one who screams about things, both here on the interwebs and also on the phone to my Mummy. I'm the one who won't shut up because there are stories that must be told. I'm the one who gets acutely annoyed when women who think they "haven't experienced much oppression" make posts like this:

. . . It's time to realize that you win nothing by exaggerating your own victimhood or claiming that all individual problems are systemic. Above all, it's time to stop saying "It sucks to be a woman," because really (I've been one for like a whole bunch of years now), it doesn't. Being a woman is not yet like being a man, but it does not suck...

I think it sucks for the 1 in 6 women (and 1 in 33 men) who will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime. I think it sucks for Senator Hillary Clinton who is being blamed for the entire downfall of the Democratic party, although Howard Dean has been the chairman of the Democratic National Committee since 2005.

As far as I know, Mike Gravel and Ron Paul are still running, too. Ron Paul is very popular among the passionate and growing Liberterian sect of the US. Yet why aren't we seeing any media coverage on them? And why no coverage on the effect that the $2 billion a week war is having on our failing economy? Think about that.

Why is there a picture of the latest Menudo group up there? I watched Dance on Sunset last night on Nickelodeon, and Menudo performed. How does this relate to rape or Mother's Day? It doesn't, but one of the earlier episodes of Dance on Sunset featured a performance by Akon. Yes, that Akon. That one, too. Note that the latter throwing was at a Radio Disney concert. Ooh the irony. This same video documented child attacker is now a-okay to appear on a Nickelodeon show.

But what about Menudo? To make my long brain process short, why are all five members of the by-definition Puerto Rican musical group some of the lightest people in the United States? Latino people come in every shade, despite what the commercials on Univision would have you believe. Also, why are both of the hosts on Dance on Sunset men? You know the show's audience has to skew female. Don't girls deserve at least one female role model . . . on a dance show?

.

Somebody likes my book!

Actually, two somebodies do:

Hooray! Book review!, by angryyoungwoman at angryyoungwoman blog.

Steve the Penguin, by Tobes at Hear me Roar. That's her picture featured above. If any of you other readers have taken, or would like to take, similar photos of yourself reading the book, I would love to include them on the site. :)

Both ayw and Tobes expressed genuine excitement about being asked to write a review. I was simply thrilled that they said yes and actually posted them. So hooray for everyone involved!

.

Racism, sexism and general bigotry don't exist.

Nor do they continue to affect the lives of everyday Americans:

Whoa., by The Law Fairy at Your Mom goes to Law School.

Two years and a lawsuit later, CA man gets his wife's last name, by Jessica at Feministing, whom I truly applaud for her appearance on The Colbert Report. Young, sassy feminists of all colors should be celebrated. And btw, I was a business minor.

College student sexually assaulted while crowd cheers, by Jessica at Feministing.

Womanhood: Getting dudes to buy you stuff, by Jessica at Feministing. Video featured above.

.

"He's dancing in Korean!"

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Stephen vs. Rain
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Protests

"Raaain!"

Rain looks like a ponytailed Wade Robson, while Stephen looks like a hot tranny mess.

Musings from a Black Woman: April Showers

This is some nonsense. This isn't "artistic" or "beautiful." This is not about whether teenagers are having sex, Defamer. This is a situation made of fail. Miley's parents failed her. Vanity Fair failed her. Annie Leibovitz failed her. Disney failed her.

Miley is 15. When I was 15, there is no way my Mummy and Grammy would have let someone take a picture of me wearing a bedsheet. That is nasty. All the perverts involved in creating this debacle deserve a visit from Dateline's Chris Hansen, complete with a pitcher of sweet tea.

Trai_Dep sums up my final thoughts on the matter:

When I see a picture of The Jonas Brothers tarted up, wearing smeared lipstick and posed so they look like they've just had the holy crap raped out of them, then I'll know that America has finally reached sexual equality.

Free at last. Free at last. Thank God Almighty, free at last!

Also, where were Taylor Momsen's parents during this photo shoot?

~

Next!

This appropriation situation got me thinking about Jessica Valenti's appearance on The Colbert Report last year. When it aired, I was proud that Stephen had a young feminist on his program. However I was also annoyed for reasons I couldn't identify. Now I know why.

In a May 20, 2007, post on Feministing, editor Samhita asked "why is Jessica the face of Feministing?"

Because she got to promote her first of three books on The Colbert Report, a program that prefers its guests to be older, white and/or male. The Report occasionally books female guests, but rarely are they of a nonwhite persuasion. (Yes, I do know Michelle Obama was on the show two weeks ago.)

Additionally, Jessica is listed as the "Executive Editor" of Feministing.

It's that simple. I haven't seen "Vanessa, Ann, Celina, Jen" or Samhita on any Comedy Central program. I haven't read any controversy stirred up about any of their books like the controversy fostered by the cover of Jessica's book. In fact, I haven't heard of any of their books. Do they have a three-book deal? And if so, why have I not heard about it?

Back to me. I was annoyed because I shared the feelings that MirandaJay expressed in the comment section of Jessica's latest mea culpa:

I'm glad you finally said outloud you realize part of the reason why the mainstream media picks up on your work is because you are cute, white and well dressed and not because you have anything edgy or new to add to feminism. I think you are right to be proud of being able to make a living off of writing, but it's good you understand why you REALLY got on to the colbert show.

And yes, Jessica finally acknowledged this sentiment in the post by stating

I have no illusions as to why my work has gotten the press that it has. The media likes nothing more than a young sassy white feminist who is mainstream-friendly. I know that there is work out there being done that is more nuanced and cutting edge - because I see it all around me. That’s not to say I’m not incredibly proud of the work I’ve done. I am proud. I know that Feministing and [her book Full Frontal Feminism] have made changes in people’s lives, and that warms my heart every day. I believe, whole-heartedly, in the work that we are doing and the women who I’m fortunate enough to blog with. But I also believe in our ability - and my own - to do better."

I agree with all of that. I just wish that more people, like Amanda and, er, other people, could understand that when colorful people like myself point out the racial disparities in our media.

It is indeed a huge personal accomplishment to write a book. It is quite another thing to get it 1) published, 2) well-marketed, and 3) supported by a late-night talk show targeted at an 18-34 white male demographic. Those latter three qualities are much easier to attain if the people in charge of the publishing house, the public relations department, and the television network all think the author is "marketable", i.e. young, pretty and white. And if you have a thin, naked white woman on the cover of your debut book, all the better.

These are the feelings that have fueled the anger behind Amandagate. This isn't about trying to "tear up someone’s career" or "setting out to destroy someone’s reputation as sport". It Was Never About One Thing. This is about acknowledging that (perceived) talent and hard work aren't the only things that make people successful, especially in the arena of mainstream media, and that with great privilege comes great responsibility.

For more on appropriation, inaccurate media representation, taking a stand, and misguided ally chutzpah, respectively, I direct you here:

About Erasing …, by Thomas at Feministe.

Trans-Racialization in "21″, by Jenn at reappropriate.

To BFP: Chickens, Princesses, Gypsies, and Slaves. by Rainbow Girl at Team Rainbow.

Intellectual Appropriation, Attribution Of Credit & Privilege (UPDATED), at PhysioProf.

My favorite part was this:

OK. One final point about male privilege and the role of men vis a vis feminism. This partial excerpt of a comment to Holly’s post was written by a dude named Hugo:

I write all this not to distract from the conversation at hand. The point is, the meta-conversation between white feminists and RWOC bloggers (acknowledging that those categories create a bit of a false dichotomy) has produced a lot of pain — and a lot of growth — for a lot of us this past year. That conversation works best, however, when we move away from the personal attacks of the sort that have been thrown, primarily in one direction, this week.

I am not a woman, so there is, of course, no way for me to know how women would react to this kind of comment by a dude. But this made my jaw almost hit the floor. I sort of imagine that if I were a woman, my reaction would be “Us!? What the fuck are you talking about, dude!?” And it kind of surprises me that in the comments to Holly’s post, no one said, “Yo, dude. This particular argument is about and between women; mind your own fucking business.”

I have always assumed that women would find it really fucking annoying if I were to ever tell them what is feminist or not, or to use the pronouns “us” and “we” in reference to feminists. And I certainly never refer to myself as a feminist, as I don’t think it is for me to say if I am a feminist or not; it is for women to judge.

What I do is try to treat women like human beings, and tell other men what I think they can do to try to treat women like human beings. You gotta be fucking nuts to wade the fuck in there as a man and start taking sides in an argument between a white female blogger and WOC bloggers over how to further their respective common and distinct goals. Seriously.

I get that I am viewing Hugo’s remark as a privileged male, so I could be missing something important. Am I getting this wrong?'

Nope, you're not getting it wrong at all. Also, all you anti-choice men in the House and the Senate and in state legislatures trying to restrict my reproductive rights, please take note: you don't have a uterus, so get your laws off my body.

Seacrest out!

.

That's what I'm talking about.

Fox News, Soulja Boy and the Mailroom, by Jay Smooth at Ill Doctrine:

~

Men Who Take Their Partners’ Names, by Thomas at Feministe.

~

Some feminist self-reflection, by Jessica at Feministing, which was long overdue, considering.

~

Lock Him Down Now, Before You Intimidate Him Even More, by Miss Curly Bee at Bee to B-School, including my witty comment.

~

Cheerio!

.

A reason to vote for Ralph Nader

But for reals, y'all. Don't vote for Ralph Nader. No one needs John McCain in the White House. Eight years of this crazy is bad enough.

To all the guys (and the ladies) in blue shirts reading this, welcome! Feel free to leave a comment. I'm sorry I couldn't be there today. I'm sick. :( My nose is stuffed uppa to here. Fight on!

.

Someone's cruising for a bruising.

I started reading here: Allies Talking. Then I read this: An Open Letter to Jezebel, which included this--The True Story Of One Epic Day Nerds Groped Free--which was in response to this--The Open-Source Boob Project.

So I wondered what Feministing had to say, and I found this: Women's bodies: Just like open-source software!. I found a Nipsey Russell of responses here: Dear sir: I believe your patriarchy is showing.

In conclusion, my favorite reaction was this: A Modest Proposal, by misia.

As we all know, many women long to give a swift kick in the balls to some male person or other. Yet all too often women are prohibited from doing so.

Sometimes this is due to our culture's repressive attitudes toward female violence or because of societal pressure for women to behave in "ladylike" and feminine ways. At times women must censor themselves from administering a good solid boot to the greater masculine crotch due to historically justified fear of reprisal. At yet other times it is nothing more or less than men's self-serving, self-glorifying attitudes toward their precious little patriarchal testicles that lead them to cravenly avoid supporting women's emotional and political expression.

All in all, we live in a culture that routinely prohibits women this useful and healthy outlet for the outrage that almost every women eventually feels as a result of living in a sexist patriarchal society. Indeed, we live in a culture which punishes women for even thinking or talking about expressing their rage in this way.

This must change, and men, who after all have an obligation to help redress thousands of years of unearned patriarchal privilege, also have a moral obligation to help solve this problem.

To this end, we propose a community-based Open Source Swift Kick to the Balls Project.

Like other Open Source projects, the Open Source Swift Kick to the Balls Project (OSSKBP) relies on a wide pool of volunteers working together for the common good.

The Project has very simple parameters and it basically works like this:

Men who are open to being given a swift kick in the balls need do nothing. Women will simply assume that any man not clearly indicating his position vis-a-vis being kicked in the balls with an approved OSSKBP badge or pin is open to being kicked in the balls, as any progressive, free-thinking, feminist man ought to be, by any woman who wishes to do so . . .

.

Musings from a black woman: Cheese and Crackers, I'm tired.

I was reading Hear me Roar by Tobes yesterday, when I got sucked into this drama: This has not been a good week for woman of color blogging, by Holly at Feministe. I didn't leave any comments. I didn't even have an opportunity to read all of them.

That eventually led me to On having a black name, by Daisy at Daisy's Dead Air (where I did leave a comment), and Denial: It’s a White thing, by Ampersand at Alas, a blog, which led me to this comment by Leora:

My sister and I are both white females, both came from working class parents with a strong work ethic, and are both first-generation college educated with advanced degrees. Inasmuch as we can be similar, we are as sisters. The main difference in our lives is that she is able-bodied and I am disabled. (I am very obviously vision and hearing impaired.)

My sister is a very hard worker and has a successful career. I would not say that she hasn’t “earned” her successes because she put her nose to the grindstone, made the right decisions to get to her goals, and met her goals by working hard.

The difference between her and I is that she has always had the OPPORTUNITY to work hard. For her, say the goal is “D”. If she worked hard at A, it would get her to B. If she worked hard at B, it would get her to C. If she worked hard at C, it would get her to D. She pretty much has always had the benefit of the assumption that A B C=D. There was an obvious return to her investment.

For me, A may or may not = B, which may or may not get me to C, etc. And the time I will have to spend at any one of these steps (working just as hard or harder than my sister, is usually longer and may offer me less return on my investment.)

To use real life examples: My sister could earn money in high school by babysitting or doing high school fast food jobs. It was relatively easy for her to get the opportunities to work hard. I sat around a lot in high school earning way less money because people were less inclined to hire a deafblind babysitter or fast food worker. She had the opportunity to work hard.

She was in honors programs and I was in special ed, which didn’t even allow me to take the qualifying tests for honors programs. She worked hard in her honors programs because she had the opportunity to work hard.

She got through college more quickly than I did because she was able to work to pay for college at a much increased rate than I did. I did work, in high school and college, but I spent much more time job hunting and doing volunteer work to get my foot in the door or begging for more hours than she did. She did work hard to put herself through college, as did I, but the benefits allowing her to work hard gave her more opportunities.

Most notably, she got many jobs and internships, etc. by word of mouth. Someone would recommend her and she would get hired. I had people who were also willing to vouch for me, and they would come back to me apologetically saying that they put in a good word for me but that the other person said that they just didn’t know if they could see themselves hiring a disabled person.

In her case, with all of these opportunities to work hard, she was able to build on her success over time. In my case, any accomplishment I earned in the past by hard work was not likely to count for anything past my disability. Her past accomplishments led to more opportunities to work hard and earn more successes. I have to start over proving myself at every opportunity as if I have no past. I have to defend myself for things that may or may not happen in the future. I have no past and no future in regards to earning things, her past accomplishments are step ladders for her and no one expects her to prove that she will never make a mistake in the future she cannot foresee.

So, I have never understood this argument that sailorman gives. No one is saying that white people didn’t work hard to earn their successes. But don’t they understand how fortunate they are to have those opportunities to work hard? And how frustrating it is when you want to work hard, you have the skills, you have played by the rules, yet there is no return? Working hard and earning success is a privilege that is not afforded equally to everyone in society. Why is that so hard to understand?

As an interesting epilogue here, my sister has now reached the proverbial glass ceiling in her career. She is finding that she has reached a point that she cannot move out of. A B C is no longer easily equal to D. She is seeing younger, less qualified men jump past her in promotions and opportunities. And I’m sure they worked hard, too.

Notice how I linked to all those posts and acknowledged the authors, even though I was pressed for time.

Oooh! Also this: Taking credit for other womens' work isn't feminist. It's just tacky., by belledame222 at Fetch me my axe, and her comment about the origins of Rent. I knew Joey Fatone and Chris Columbus weren't the worst things to happen to that musical. Well, maybe Chris was. You can read more about the appropriation and whitewashing of the story here and here.

.

Princes, princesses, witches, serpents and Tom Sawyer = what?

Over the past year, I have tried to explain to my friends my love of the movie Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. My favorite scene involves Dick Van Dyke dancing at a carnival with a stick of bamboo in hopes to win enough money to purchase the eponymous jalopy for his children and for his father who lives in an outhouse. And that's not the most bizarre part. The second half of the movie revolves around the pseudo-European country of Vulgaria, where the Baron Bomburst and his much younger wife have outlawed children, forcing their citizens to send their (strangely all male) offspring to live in the sewers.

Yeah.

When I try to explain this to my friends who haven't seen Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, or who don't remember the movie, they look at me like I'm nuts . . . which isn't a rare occurrence for me. It is in this spirit that I direct you to the 1bruce1 recap of Sweet Valley Twins Super Edition #1: The Class Trip. This was recently brought to my attention via The Dairi Burger in the allure of the super special:

This one was so craptastic it was like Hemingway. The kids go on a school trip to a fantasy amusement park and Liz hits her head (or falls off a motorcycle or something) and imagines a scenario where she is fighting witches, goblins, and wizards. Wtf.

It is that good. It's not even like the people at Team Pascal had run out of ideas after decades of Jessica and Elizabeth stories, and decided to throw together whatever they hadn't used yet. It's THE FIRST ONE. It was printed after #19 in the Sweet Valley Twins series. They still had plenty of ghost and real doll tales to get through.

I can't stop laughing at this psychedelic piecemeal book full of ripped-off references, including Enchanted Forest theme park, the above-mentioned Tom, Prince Valiant, a princess named Rainbow Bright and a talking mouse. Wow.

.

Rewriting History

Newly Non-Sexist Judd Apatow Reaps Benefits of Wikipedia Whitewash, from Defamer.

If you observe Judd Apatow's pervy rom-com assembly line with even casual frequency, you probably don't need a Wikipedia entry to remind you how accusations of sexism and misogyny have plagued the writer-producer-director over the years. At least we hope you don't, because an eagle-eyed Defamer reader points out this morning how a loyal defender / relative / Universal publicist has spent the better part of the last week expunging the dirty little non-secret from the Wiki record. From Katherine Heigl to Mike White, follow the jump for a few of the latest line edits.

Booo, Wikipedia. Mr. Apatow, if your movies repeatedly showcase your fear of women, their vaginas, and what comes out of them, then it is fair to call them misogynistic. In fact, I would call them steaming piles of po--[This post has been edited by Team Apatow. We will now return to your regularly scheduled programming. Thank you.]


Also, Whither Our Superheroines? An Outraged Culture Demands To Know, from Defamer.

In all the drama surrounding Edward Norton's Hulk trouble and Iron Man star Robert Downey Jr.'s gloriously checkered past, we've overlooked one of the more conspicuous problems afflicting this summer's superhero glut. To wit: Where are all the women? Are there any comics featuring female heroes whom some studio will take a chance shepherding to the screen? At least one commentator shares our concern at Vulture, and the prognosis isn't looking good . . .

. . . Film Experience proprietor Nathaniel Rogers spent the weekend at New York's Comic-Con, recoiling from the near-second-class citizenry afforded icons like Supergirl and Batgirl while a new Jenna Jameson comic book sold like mad elsewhere in the building. Yes, we know that Elektra and Catwoman tanked, but Halle Berry's folly is no good reason for the long-awaited Wonder Woman movie to eternally inhabit Development Hell — at least not when Marvel will spend $300 million making The Incredible Hulk twice before throwing a quarter of that into spinning off Ellen Page's Kitty Pryde character from X-Men. We're just saying, boys.

That's what I'm saying, yo.

.

I approve this message.

This one, too!

.

Todd Punch

This is where I've been:

1bruce1

The Dairi Burger

Apartment Therapy

The Internet counts as a place, right, Randy Marsh?

.

Start at Home

For the past week, my television set has been tuned to HGTV. It's amazing! I have now decided that I want a finished basement in my home. Not that I have a basement, much less a home, to finish at the moment.

Right now I'm watching My House is Worth What?, hosted by Kendra Todd, previously of Apprentice fame. But so far my favorite show on the network is Myles of Style, hosted by the second winner of Design Star, Kim Myles.

Strangely enough, I got into HGTV last weekend by clicking on Clean House with Reno 911's Niecy Nash . . . on the Style Network. I didn't realize I was initially watching the Style Network. So I spent the past week wondering why Clean House wasn't on anymore. Silly me. :)

.

The CW doesn't care about black people.

I first heard about this today on "Big Boy's Neighborhood's Liz Hernandez".

Sitcom Saga: No Finale For 'Girlfriends' and Litigation Looms, by Jawn Murray, BlackVoices.com.

. . . The CW had opted to cancel [Girlfriends] without fulfilling its remaining nine episodes.

Well I've now learned exclusively that The CW made the cast members an offer to return for a "retrospective" episode that would feature recaps of the previous shows and cast members reflecting on those shows.

The CW apparently only offered to pay the actors half of their episodic salary to shoot the makeshift finale, thus the stars collectively opted not to participate.

In addition, several people close to the show tell me that The CW refuses to honor the contracts of the principal cast members and does not intend to pay the actors for the nine episodes that will not be taped.

Now the show stars have hired a litigator who will file a joint lawsuit on behalf of the talent, suing the network for the money they are due.

"The network told them point blank, 'Sue us!' After using this show to help build its name, The CW has turned their back on them and disrespected them in the most horrible way," said someone associated with the show, who spoke under the condition of anonymity.

This is some nonsense. I don't even watch Girlfriends on The CW, because the show has gone downhill since Toni left, and Joan and William got together, then broke up. However, the show did bring over a solid audience base from UPN to this redheaded amalgamated stepchild of a network.

First Dawn Ostroff came for Everwood. Then she came for Gilmore Girls and Veronica Mars. Now Girlfriends is getting the Ostroff treatment. Shame on you, CW. Shame!

.

My favorite advertisement of the week

And it's only Tuesday!

Absolut vodka pulls ad showing California in Mexico, Reuters via Yahoo! News.

The distillers of Sweden's Absolut vodka have withdrawn an advertisement run in Mexico that angered many U.S. citizens by idealizing an early 19th century map showing chunks of the United States as Mexican.

The billboard ad has the slogan "In an Absolut World" slapped over a pre-1848 map showing California, Arizona and other U.S. states as Mexican territory. Those states were carved out of what had been Mexican lands until that year.

Although it was not shown in the United States, U.S. media outlets picked up on the ad, and after a barrage of complaints, Absolut's maker said on Sunday the ad campaign would cease.

Defending the campaign last week, Absolut maker Vin & Spirit said the ad was created "with a Mexican sensibility" and was not meant for the U.S. market.

"In no way was this meant to offend or disparage, nor does it advocate an altering of borders, nor does it lend support to any anti-American sentiment, nor does it reflect immigration issues," a spokeswoman wrote on Absolut's Web site.

"Instead, it hearkens to a time which the population of Mexico may feel was more ideal," she wrote.

Absolut's blog cite has received more than a thousand comments since the ad campaign was launched a few weeks ago, with many calling for boycotts of the Swedish company.

"I have poured the remainder of my Absolut bottles down the sink," one blogger wrote.

Well that blogger was not this blogger. I would have taken the ad even further by simply adding a vodka bottle to this thanksgiving comic.

.

Never enough

Foreclosures come to McMansion country, by Andy Sullivan, Reuters via Yahoo! News.

Million-dollar fixer-upper for sale: five bedrooms, four baths, three-car garage, cavernous living room. Big holes above fireplace where flat-screen TV used to hang.

The U.S. housing crisis has come to McMansion country.

Just as the foreclosure crisis has hollowed out poorer neighborhoods, "for sale" signs are sprouting in upscale developments so new they don't show up on GPS navigation screens.

Poor people weren't the only ones who took out risky, high-interest loans during the housing boom. The sharp increase in housing costs -- and the desire to live in brand-new, spacious houses with modern features -- led many affluent buyers to take out loans they couldn't afford.

"People had in their head, 'I need a mud room, I need giant columns, I need a media room, and I'm going to do anything to get it,"' said Robert Lang, co-director of Virginia Tech's Metropolitan Institute, a research organization that focuses on real estate and development . . .

A mud room? I cannot understand the entitlement of these people who could probably afford a comfortable house in a nice neighborhood, but instead go above and beyond their means to either build or buy a monstrosity they can't afford. In the words of Charlie Brown, good grief!

.

Look, a review!

Novel Review: Steve the Penguin by Mahlena Rae Johnson, by by debrajohnson at She Likes to Read!.

Yesterday I was lucky enough to get my hands on a copy of a funny new novel entitled Steve the Penguin by Mahlena-Rae Johnson. I related to the book so well and found it so interesting that I did something that I haven’t done in quite a while; I finished the 189-page book in less than 24 hours! The heroine of Steve the Penguin is the likable, yet sarcastic 27-year-old single gal Bianca. Johnson manages to balance light-hearted comedy, romance, and social commentary in a refreshingly interesting way. Bianca’s thoughts on ethnicity, love, work, and sex mirror many of the things that people want to say, but, like Bianca, don’t always say aloud. Bianca is socially conscious yet socially insecure, full of ambition but at times full of self-doubt, and just like every other single twenty-something woman waiting for her Steve the Penguin to come along . . .

Thanks, debra!