In August, 2001, the American television channel CBS aired an interview with a Hamas activist Muhammad Abu Wardeh, who recruited terrorists for suicide bombings in Israel. Abu Wardeh was quoted as saying: “I described to him how God would compensate the martyr for sacrificing his life for his land. If you become a martyr, God will give you 70 virgins, 70 wives and everlasting happiness.” Wardeh was in fact shortchanging his recruits since the rewards in Paradise for martyrs was 72 virgins. But I am running ahead of things . (more…)
Irritated today by a radio interview I heard about the stupid Rihanna/Brown thing.
I can’t stand them, and am disappointed by how so many people are talking about them as though they matter…
But what really got my goat was the discussion NOT mentioning that Chris Brown is mentally ill.
The ‘expert’ went on about his “unfortunate lack of contrition”…
It sounded inane…like observing the lack of contrition of a schizophrenic.
And in the same vein…battered women are ILL TOO!
Why is this not more commonly observed?
Sane women, when punched in the face the first time…LEAVE.
CALL THE COPS.
SHOOT A GUN.
Do something, and seek recourse…take umbrage.
Insane women, seek that masochistic thrill over and over and over.
It’s been studied and reported on so many times in my life.
I am surprised that this whole episode is being discussed as though it were the 1950s or 1550s and not 2012, when we KNOW that..both parties to (chronic) Domestic Abuse are basically insane.
[And here, of course I am not looking to 'blame the victim', by any means...but observe a scientific reality]
I am not surprised, and am saddened that I am even babbling over this in this post.
I do not expect them, these “stars” to behave normally, nor do I expect people we may know, who are not celebrities, to behave normally .
Women who find themselves in a series of abusive relationships NEED HELP.
It is not easy, actually, to find the men who WILL actually punch you in the face, kick you when you’re down, and bruise you so it isn’t publicly visible…jesus.
You have to hunt for them.
This is the same reason I get infuriated when Honour Killing is quickly labelled, without thought, ‘Domestic Abuse’.
Honour Killing is Socially Sanctioned. It is a COMMUNITY CONSPIRACY.
Domestic Abuse, on the other hand involves the insanity of one, and more than usually, two.
INSANITY.
We can not analyze behaviours to seek normal reactions of (victim) escape, (perpetrator) contrition, etc.
The expert on the radio actually compared Brown with Michael Virk–the dude who abused DOGS (and is now apparently very contrite and making public service appearances).
Hurting a DOG is obviously different from hurting a human life partner. (and I never like placing animals as lesser than humans, but in domestic abuse situations, I must–you don’t have sex with your dog, you don’t have children with your dog, you don’t have the complexities of an adult human relationship with a dog)
C’mon people.
I hate when the media fails to spread knowledge, but merely perpetuates further ignorance.
I don’t have high expectations of the likes of Oprah, but this was CBC Radio.
______________________
I think in almost all circumstances both partners ought to be held on mental health legislation, for professional intervention and addressing underlying causal conditions.
I really enjoyed this film. Having been recently ruminating once more on the sociological pathology of Honour Killings and the necessity to control the chastity of young females in most patriarchical societies, this film made me wonder whether it was indeed the birth of the Austrian-’Jewish’ school of psychoanalysis which led to the advent of the liberation of female sexuality in Western society. This may be obvious to some, but I find the potential of this quite intriguing. Especially in light of my introduction to Otto Gross from this movie. He actually deserves a separate post on his own (soon). I think psychoanalysis may be owed a great debt by the Western Society generally, a society which today is quite distinct from its Victorian Era incarnation, having had so many taboos and inter-related psychic truths brought out of closets into the public to be acknowledged and dealt with.The writing in this film is quite erudite, making one almost want to take notes at times. Such as the questioning of WHY humans, while such sexual animals, have this overwhelming need to repress this sexuality at the same time. This of course, is what the foundation of psychoanalysis was all about–the search for an understanding of this unfortunate duality…which inevitably leads to emotional baggage in a great number of humanoids.This film is recommended for neurotic uber-ruminators. Perhaps as a elementary introduction to the history of psychoanalysis. Also do readThe Interpretation of Murder.
-rudhro
Keira Knightley in ‘A Dangerous Method’ — Oscar-Worthy or Laughable?
By Sharon Knolle
Sep 2nd 2011
Keira Knightley’s bold performance in David Cronenberg’s ‘A Dangerous Method’ is splitting critics at the Venice Film Festival, who are finding her role as an uninhibited mental patient “fabulous” or laughable. Either way, those who’ve seen the film agree that her approach is extreme. (more…)
Despite decades of opposition from the right, and recent personal setbacks, Gloria Steinem remains one of the most outspoken and visible symbols of the women’s movement today. Produced and directed by Emmy®-winning documentary filmmaker Peter Kunhardt (HBO’s “JFK: In His Own Words” and “Teddy: In His Own Words”), GLORIA: IN HER OWN WORDS blends interviews of Steinem in her Manhattan apartment, archival footage, photographs from throughout her life and clips from press interviews over the years. Among those interviewing Steinem in the film are Barbara Walters, Helen Gurley Brown, Phil Donahue and Larry King. The documentary also features archival footage of such prominent women’s movement figures as National Organization for Women (NOW) co-founder Betty Friedan, congresswoman Bella Abzug and civil rights advocate Flo Kennedy.
GLORIA: IN HER OWN WORDS chronicles Steinem’s emergence as a driving force in the modern women’s liberation movement. She recalls beginning her career as a journalist in New York City in the early 1960s and making headlines with an expose on the working conditions of Playboy Bunnies, noting, “I learned what’s it’s like to be hung on a meat hook.”
Having had an abortion at age 22 (which she kept secret at the time), Steinem’s political awakening accelerated when she covered an abortion hearing for New York Magazine in 1969 and learned of the horrifying and humiliating experiences women endured attempting to exercise their right to reproductive freedom. She began to seek out everything she could find on the burgeoning women’s movement and helped lead the nationwide Women’s Strike for Equality march on Aug. 26, 1970, the 50th anniversary of the enactment of women’s suffrage. It was, Steinem notes, “the first time in my life, and I think for many other women too, that we marched for ourselves.”
Since then, Steinem has been ever-present on the front lines of social activism, co-founding Ms. Magazine, where she continues to serve as a consulting editor, in 1972, despite media speculation about the publication’s viability. She recalls that at the time “there was nothing for women to read that was controlled by women.” Steinem became the public face of the women’s rights movement, participating in marches, making media appearances and also weathering the inevitable backlash, feeling she had to work twice as hard to not be judged by her looks. Indeed, Steinem would become almost as well-known for her distinct style as for her political activism, remembering that her streaked blonde locks were inspired by the character Holly Golightly in “Breakfast at Tiffany’s.” Her signature aviator glasses were about concealment, she reveals, saying, “The bigger they were, the more I felt I could hide behind them.” GLORIA: IN HER OWN WORDS also explores Steinem’s early days. Born in 1934 in Toledo, Ohio, she studied tap dance as a child and watched her mother give up a career as a journalist to have children. Her parents had a rocky marriage and ultimately divorced. Steinem, who attended Smith College, wonders whether devoting so much of her time and energy to the women’s movement was a way to avoid the kind of suffering her mother experienced.
The film also looks at the challenges Steinem has faced in later years. Diagnosed with breast cancer soon after turning 50, she underwent surgery and radiation.“The cancer served a real purpose, making me a little bit more conscious of time,” she observes. Taking a break from public life after decades of traveling nonstop, Steinem “hit bottom” and began to look internally, writing the self-esteem book “Revolution from Within” in the early ‘90s. Interviewed at the time, she noted, “Being a social activist can be a drug that keeps you from going back and looking at yourself.”
And after decades of remaining single, she married entrepreneur David Bale – father of actor Christian Bale – in 2000, but he died after they had been married just over three years. GLORIA: IN HER OWN WORDS is produced by Peter Kunhardt and Sheila Nevins; directed by Peter Kunhardt; editing and graphic design by Phillip Schopper; original music by Michael Bacon. For Kunhardt McGee Productions: executive producer, Dyllan McGee. For HBO: supervising producer, Jacqueline Glover.
Fifty years ago this month, Jane Jacobs published Death and Life of Great American Cities and changed the way the world understands cities. Yet even when she’s acknowledged as an important urban thinker, the ‘housewife’ qualifier is invariably included. When we talk about strategies for city growth and economic development, women aren’t often offered seats at the table. They hold jobs in the field but few posts as critics. Jane was the exception. But the rules didn’t change a great deal.
Jacobs broke into the national discussion about cities somewhat by accident. She was a reluctant stand-in for her Architectural Forum male editor at a cities conference in 1956. She had written some insightful articles about how cities work, particularly in Vogue, documenting how New York City’s fur and flower districts evolved organically.
Today, her early observations are considered pathbreaking. But happenstance thrust her into the public eye.
Jacobs’ early attention-getting articles in Architectural Forum and Fortune Magazine happened because she had as a champion a distinguished male editor William Holly Whyte. Whyte gained fame for writing The Organization Man and for espousing ideas similar to hers. But he had to overcome a sputtering, angry Fortune publisher who once asked, “Who is this crazy dame?”
A housewife without even a college degree was unacceptable. After all, Lewis Mumford’s scathing review of Death and Life was headlined “Mother Jacobs Home Remedies.” (more…)
The United Nations estimates that on October 31st, the world’s population will reach 7 billion. Although the actual number is not certain, it does underlie the fact that our population is growing at an alarming rate. It took until the early 1800′s to reach the 1 billion mark, but the last 50 years alone have seen the births of 4 of the total 7 billion This rapid increase raises the question, how many more people can the earth sustain? Or have we already surpassed the earth’s capacity? Among the many people asking questions like this are Dr. Madeline Weld, President of the Ottawa-based Population Institute of Canada, and Robert Engelman, President of The Worldwatch Institute in Washington. They discuss how various factors – including access to contraception, the empowerment of women, poverty, consumerism, and the environment – apply to our population growth, now and in the future.
_____________________
_________RUDHROISM
“Be afraid, be very afraid…” I love this–I have thought about so much of what they discuss in this two person interview. Oil, a non-renewable resource has allowed us to “over-shoot” where we as humanity really oughtta be today. The ‘stlen’ or ‘free’ energy boost since the 1850s. The unsustainable industrialized production of foods such as corn. The inefficient production of meat. The fact that cultures have not changed, yet babies no longer die. Cultures dictated that a “real man” or a “real woman” reproduce at a rate much higher than necessary for population replacement. But this was so when if you had 8 children, 5 perhaps were not expected to reach reproductive age. Today all 8 will make it, and in turn produce 8 of their own children due to cultural memes such as religion which dictate that this is the ONLY WAY.
So many have disagreed with me. So many have called me simplistic to point to the growth of population as the REAL problem and climate change as merely a symptom. But it is in no way ‘Malthusian’ to ask, what is the POINT of ‘conservation’, ‘kyoto protocols’, ‘environmental awareness campaigns’ etc etc etc, if EVEN IF we maintain 1990 levels of pollution, carbon consumption, garbage, the number of showers a human takes, and how many times a toilet is flushed per day–thus water use…the food one eats and from whence it originates, IF?
There are 10 Billion, 20 Billion, or 100 Billion humans?
This is not an irrational observation, though I have been told it is. This is not a simple minded, non-intellectual, comment.
This is about the Tragedy of the Commons. This is about witnessing the growth of certain cities, such as Calcutta, Shanghai, Lagos, Mexico City, Tokyo etc and seeing that for a given level of infrastructure, from trains, buses, roads, all the way to the farming lands that feed and the water basins that provide potable water to these megalopoli–only a certain number of people can enjoy them before it all becomes a hellish experience of the scarcity of resources writ large, on a daily basis. No room for your child in school, no electricity, no water, no fresh fruits and vegetables, no room on the road for your car, no sufficient public services of any kind.
I have been told that life and economics is not like this, as eventually all people reduce their fertility rates when they reach a standard level of income. I actually have a minor in Economics and have studied a variety of theories on developmental economics. So I am not speaking from ignorance or ‘a little learning is a dangerous thing’. Listen to what is stated as ‘the scientifically sustainable human population’ in the audio link above.
I’d also recommend listening to Robert Wright’s Massey lectures on his book (or reading the book itself) called ‘The Short History of Progress’–where he shows that human history is filled with groups of humans not paying heed to the natural feedback loops of nature. We are a part of nature. And it frustrates me to no end, when humans in 2011 deny the unity that is humanity. There are no more ‘groups’–we are all one group, and are aware of this, in some respects yet not others.
We are all one. It doesn’t MATTER if you live in Edmonton, Mexico City or Calcutta. It doesn’t MATTER what your last name is, what religion you’ve been handed down or converted into and what this meme teaches you. There are basic facts about the sustainability of the human earthling population.
If you add to the population, it affects the whole world. But I don’t think humanity is yet ready to understand that we are indeed one.
Brooksley Born warned that unchecked trading in the credit market could lead to disaster, but power brokers in Washington ignored her. Now we’re all paying the price.
BY RICK SCHMITT PHOTOGRAPHY BY ERIKA LARSEN
MAR/APR 2009
SHORTLY AFTER she was named to head the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in 1996, Brooksley E. Born was invited to lunch by Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan.The influential Greenspan was an ardent proponent of unfettered markets. Born was a powerful Washington lawyer with a track record for activist causes. Over lunch, in his private dining room at the stately headquarters of the Fed in Washington, Greenspan probed their differences.“Well, Brooksley, I guess you and I will never agree about fraud,” Born, in a recent interview, remembers Greenspan saying.“What is there not to agree on?” Born says she replied.“Well, you probably will always believe there should be laws against fraud, and I don’t think there is any need for a law against fraud,” she recalls. Greenspan, Born says, believed the market would take care of itself.
For the incoming regulator, the meeting was a wake-up call. “That underscored to me how absolutist Alan was in his opposition to any regulation,” she said in the interview.Over the next three years, Born, ’61, JD ’64, would learn first-hand the potency of those absolutist views, confronting Greenspan and other powerful figures in the capital over how to regulate Wall Street.More recently, as analysts sort out the origins of what has become the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, Born has emerged as a sort of modern-day Cassandra. Some people believe the debacle could have been averted or muted had Greenspan and others followed her advice. (more…)
THE RATIONALITY OF CANADIAN REGULATORS AMUSES AND PLEASES ME.
-rudhro
Panel okays Buckcherry song as not ‘aimed at womanhood’
MICHAEL BABAD |
Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2011
“The panel reviewed some of the CBSC’s previous decisions involving the word ‘bitch’ and concluded that the use of the word in the song ‘Crazy Bitch’ did not reach the level of abusive or unduly discriminatory comment as the song only referred to one particular woman rather than generalizing all women as ‘crazy bitches,’” the CBSC said in a statement today.
The case stems from a complaint by a listener, who said it was offensive to women, after it was broadcast on CKQB-FM in Ottawa, so the panel looked at the issue under the human rights sections of the Canadian Association of Broadcaster code of ethics.
The panel said it’s troubled by the “lowering of the bar for coarse language,” but in this case it’s not a breach.
“The panel recognizes, however, that the complainant was also concerned about the context in which the term was employed in this particular song. She asserted that the message of the song was an objectification of women, in her words, that ‘a crazy bitch remains useful as long as she is good in bed.’ The panel does not agree with that interpretation; it does not consider that the expression ‘crazy bitch,’ as used in the song, is aimed at womanhood in general.”
This guy experienced more global intrigue than James Bond.
Sunday , June 5 , 2011
Excerpted with the permission of Penguin Books India from His Majesty’s Opponent: Subhas Chandra Bose and India’s Struggle Against Empire by Sugata Bose
To Emilie, with love
That Subhas Chandra Bose met and fell in love with Austrian Emilie Schenkl in Vienna in the 1930s is well documented. But in a new book on his granduncle, historian Sugata Bose explains why they chose to keep their relationship and marriage a closely guarded secret. Despite the ‘enormous, intense’ love that Bose felt for Schenkl, his ‘first love’ was his country. An extract
WIFE AND DAUGHTER: Emilie and Anita, November 1948. Courtesy: Netaji Research Bureau
From the second week of June 1934, [Subhas Chandra] Bose settled down in Vienna, since he had a contract from the publishing company Wishart to write a book on the Indian struggle since 1920. In the course of looking for clerical help with preparing the manuscript Subhas met a woman who would bring about a dramatic change in his personal life…
It was June 24, 1934. A petite and pretty young woman named Emilie Schenkl arrived to be interviewed for the clerical job. Born on December 26, 1910, to an Austrian Catholic family, she knew English, could take dictation in shorthand and had competent typing skills. Jobs were scarce during the Depression. Her father, a veterinarian, was initially somewhat reluctant to let his daughter work for a strange Indian man, but in time her whole family — father, mother and sister — developed a warm relationship with Subhas. Emilie had a gentle, cheerful, straightforward and unselfish nature, which Su-bhas found appealing. He came to respect her strength of will and affectionately called her “Baghini” meaning “Tigress” in Bengali. “He started it,” Emilie states categorically about the romantic turn in their relationship. Their intimacy grew as they spent time together in Austria and Czechoslovakia from mid-1934 to March 1936…
Subhas Chandra Bose, according to his close friend and political associate A.C.N. Nambiar, was a “one-idea man: singly for the independence of India.” “I think the only departure,” he adds, “if one might use the word ‘departure’, was his love for Miss Schenkl; otherwise he was completely absorbed. He was deeply in love with her, you see. In fact, it was an enormous, intense love.” … (more…)
On the Dark Side of the Nation: Politics of Multiculturalism and the State of “Canada”
HIMANI BANNERJI
This paper is primarily concerned with the construction of “Canada” as a social and cultural form of national identity, and various challenges and interruptions offered to this identity by literature produced by writers from non – white communities. The first part of the paper examines both literary and political – theoretical formulations of a “two – nation,” “two solitudes” thesis and their implications for various cultural accommodations offered to “others,” especially through the mechanism of “multiculturalism.” The second part concentrates on the experiences and standpoint of people of colour, or non – white people, especially since the 1960s, and the cultural and political formulating derivable from them.
I am from the country Columbus dreamt of. You, the country Columbus conquered. Now in your land My words are circling blue Oka sky they come back to us alight on tongue.
Protect me with your brazen passion for history is my truth, Earth, my witness my home, this native land.
OKA NADA”: A New Remembrance, Kaushalya Bannerji
The Personal and the Political: A Chorus and a Problematic
When the women’s movement came along and we were coming to our political consciousness, one of its slogans took us by surprise and thrilled and activated us: “the personal is political!” Since then years have gone by, and in the meanwhile I have found myself in Canada, swearing an oath of allegiance to the Queen of England, giving up the passport of a long – fought – for independence, and being assigned into the category of “visible minority.” These years have produced their own consciousness in me, and I have learnt that also the reverse is true: the political is personal. (more…)
A grieving couple retreat to ’Eden’, their isolated cabin in the woods, where they hope to repair their broken hearts and troubled marriage. But nature takes its course and things go from bad to worse… (more…)
It is not unfair to say that Aztec culture was overwhelmingly eschatological in a way that can only be rivalled by early Christianity. The Aztecs, like the Mayans, believed that the universe had been created five times and destroyed four times; each of these five eras was called a Sun. The first age was called Four Ocelot (for it began on the date called Four Ocelot). Tezcatlipoca (Smoking Mirror) dominated the universe and eventually became the sun disk. The world was destroyed by jaguars. The second age was Four Wind, dominated by Quetzalcoatl (Sovereign Plumed Serpent); men were turned to monkeys and the world was destroyed by hurricanes and tempests. The third age was Four Rain, dominated by Tlaloc (the rain god); the world was destroyed by a rain of fire. The fourth era was Four Water and was dominated by Chalchihuitlicue (Woman with the Turquoise Skirt); the world was destroyed by a flood. The fifth era, the one we live in now, is Four Earthquake, and is dominated by Tonatiuh, the Sun-God. This age will end in earthquakes.
es·cha·tol·o·gy (sk-tl-j)
n.
1. The branch of theology that is concerned with the end of the world or of humankind.
2. A belief or a doctrine concerning the ultimate or final things, such as death, the destiny of humanity, the Second Coming, or the Last Judgment.
Among the many jabs temperance advocates like to take at alcohol is that it promotes promiscuity. One glass over the line and we all know what comes next. Loveless sex, lecherous men and “fallen women.”
But what if I told you that wine-drinking cultures throughout history have tended to be more monogamous than their abstinent counterparts? What if polygyny – the social doctrine sanctioning multiple female partners for a man – tended to prevail in societies that did not imbibe?
Jouissance is pleasure (and any stimulation) that can be too much to bear. It may be very largely felt as suffering. It is pleasure and pain together, a feeling of being at the edge.
It can indicate a breaking of boundaries, a connection beyond the self. This can range from a mother feeling intense connection with a breast-feeding baby to meditative feelings of oneness with the universe.
One of the goals of life is to manage jouissance. Unchecked emotion will control and overwhelm you. Society helps this through controlling mechanisms such as education and cultural norms. It has been said that jouissance is ‘drained’ from the body throughout life, leading to the calm of old age.
In French, jouissance connotes orgasm as well as pleasure, and can be used to describe breaking down barriers between self and other. It may also be used to indicate orgasm that is not achieved or not ‘ultimate’, thus bringing a sense of lack, loss and something unattainable.
Lacan argues that the subject, separated from itself by language, feels a sense of absence, of being not fully present, and thus desires wholeness. We constantly put ourselves into the subject positions of language and cultural codes in seeking to fulfil the futile desire for wholeness. We feel jouissance as the pleasure/pain that the subject feels as it tries in vain to recapture the lost object.
Jacqueline Rose uses jouissance in description of women’s management of identity. In the phallic economy, the woman, who lacks the phallus, stands in the place of jouissance and the lost object and is thus becomes both desirable and ultimately unobtainable. This gives women a separate position from which they can ‘speak themselves’ and resist subjugation.
As post-Oedipal girls can sustain a closer relationship with their mother, they are consequently able to sustain a greater level of jouissance. This is something that boys envy and seek through dominance and possession of girls.
A significant part of the game of romance is in chasing jouissance. Although it can never be gained, the anticipated pleasure of hope makes the pursuit a very exciting experience.
Zizek aligns by saying that psychical life is about enjoyment, but which is interwoven with lack and alienation. Enjoyment comes from escapist fantasy. It gives ideologypower, creating meaning for the self within the frame of ideology. It cannot be incorporated into the symbolic.
The sexual connotation (i.e. orgasm) lacking in the English word “enjoyment”, and therefore left untranslated in English editions of the works of Jacques Lacan.[1]. In his Seminar “The Ethics of Psychoanalysis” (1959-1960) Lacan develops his concept of the opposition of jouissance and pleasure. The pleasure principle, according to Lacan, functions as a limit to enjoyment: it is the law that commands the subject to ‘enjoy as little as possible’. At the same time the subject constantly attempts to transgress the prohibitions imposed on his enjoyment, to go beyond the pleasure principle. Yet the result of transgressing the pleasure principle, according to Lacan, is not more pleasure but pain, since there is only a certain amount of pleasure that the subject can bear. Beyond this limit, pleasure becomes pain, and this ‘painful principle’ is what Lacan calls jouissance. (Dylan Evans). Thus jouissance is suffering (Ethics). (more…)
“hey, have you not heard that an anti-thesis of religion is in fact religion? When one hates a religion he in fact wants to create his own religion. So, he fucks himself too” – a response to rudhro’s ruminatoria
Begging the Question (Petitio Principii)
Fallacies of Presumption
By Austin Cline
Fallacy Name: Begging the Question
Alternative Names: Petitio Principii Circular Argument Circulus in Probando Circulus in Demonstrando Vicious Circle Category:
Fallacy of Weak Induction > Fallacy of Presumption
Explanation: This is the most basic and classic example of a Fallacy of Presumption, because it directly presumes the conclusion which is at question in the first place. This can also be known as a “Circular Argument” – because the conclusion essentially appears both at the beginning and the end of the argument, it creates an endless circle, never accomplishing anything of substance.
A good argument in support of a claim will offerindependent evidence or reasons to believe that claim. However, if you are assuming the truth of some portion of your conclusion, then your reasons are no longer independent: your reasons have become dependent upon the very point which is contested. The basic structure looks like this: (more…)
Cultural pluralism is fine, writes Tristan Ewins, but it does not expunge the need for moral judgment.
In Australia, multiculturalism has risen to the point where it is now perceived as a symbol of our maturation as a diverse, cosmopolitan liberal society. Having broken decisively with that Eurocentric orientation which derived identity from the old ties of Empire, and with old reactionary notions of ‘racial purity’, Australia has emerged as one of the most culturally pluralist communities on the planet.
Countless Diaspora communities now call Australia home: African, Jewish, Kurdish, Greek, Serbian, Croatian, Turkish – Australia is a veritable patchwork of ethnic identities. As many commentators have suggested, the benefits of this process have been innumerable, emerging as a complex process of cross cultural fertilization that, at times, has worked to develop cross cultural understanding, sensitivity and rich cultural diversity.
And yet the multicultural phenomenon, which has been interpreted by many as comprising a policy of ‘cultural relativism’ and ‘anything goes’, could never have emerged were it not for the liberal political foundations upon which it was built. (more…)
this requires a fuckin FACE AND MOUTH AND EYES AND THE ABILITY TO ENGAGE WITH OTHERS
ME ESTROGEN -FILLED HALF:
i do not think that this public art act does anything but support the viewpoint that women and their bodies are objects and are not granted passive being, they are always becoming… meaning, I am a woman who wears hot pants & I get attention for it… and i am a muslim woman who must cover up my hot pants so I don’t get attention… and therefore I cannot simply BE. I always am what I am from what the point of view of the OTHERtime to evolve
____________________________
French women cause a stir in niqab and hot pants in anti-burka ban protest
By Henry Samuel in Paris
01 Oct 2010
Two French female students have made a film of the pair of them strolling through the streets of Paris in a niqab, bare legs and mini-shorts as a critique of France’s recently passed law. (more…)
Enrolled as I am in a course of the Multicultural City, for my Urban Planning Masters degree, I’ve been experiencing a niggling cognitive dissonance with the political perspectives, let’s say ‘slant’ of much of our classroom readings and discussions, of late. This dissonance, I found, I was not able to articulate to a fairly sophisticated, well-rounded argument until I came across this piece by Stanley Fish, who I am more familiar with as an occasional contributor to the NYT.
I have noted that in (my humble opinion) our Blind, Knee-jerk Leftish Canadian discourse of the trials and tribulations of nurturing the Multicultural Mosaic that is Canada–Yesterday, Today as well as Tomorrow–we lack some indeed very fundamental aspects, and gloss over those that perhaps may be found to be too sensitive or easily categorized as ‘politically incorrect’ lenses of analysis.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I am by no means a conservative, I am a socially conscious Canadian. I am the proud, progeny of immigrants to Canada. What I am though, and perhaps arrogantly (?) I perceive others around me as not, is a nuanced thinker. I like to ask questions. At times even meta-questions. I do not merely toe dogmatic lines of handed-down interpretation. Even “post-modern” analysis can somehow be turned into a dogmatic protocol, it seems to me.
From my perspective, discussions of Multiculturalism in Canada require depicting immigrants as zoo creatures, to be kept in captive enclosures of almost sacred respect and purity. Do visualize this metaphor, I cannot merely refer to this as ‘treated as children’, and it is key to see the zoo-like elements inherent in not involving a bi- if not multi- lateral interchange in that which is the “old” Canadian versus “new” Canadian interaction. (more…)
She began to seek out everything she could find on the burgeoning women’s movement and helped lead the nationwide Women’s Strike for Equality march on Aug. 26, 1970, the 50th anniversary of the enactment of women’s suffrage. It was, Steinem notes, “the first time in my life, and I think for many other women too, that we marched for ourselves.”
GLORIA: IN HER OWN WORDS also explores Steinem’s early days. Born in 1934 in Toledo, Ohio, she studied tap dance as a child and watched her mother give up a career as a journalist to have children. Her parents had a rocky marriage and ultimately divorced. Steinem, who attended Smith College, wonders whether devoting so much of her time and energy to the women’s movement was a way to avoid the kind of suffering her mother experienced.
“The cancer served a real purpose, making me a little bit more conscious of time,” she observes. Taking a break from public life after decades of traveling nonstop, Steinem “hit bottom” and began to look internally, writing the self-esteem book “Revolution from Within” in the early ‘90s. Interviewed at the time, she noted, “Being a social activist can be a drug that keeps you from going back and looking at yourself.” 
I’d also recommend listening to Robert Wright’s Massey lectures on his book (or reading the book itself) called ‘The Short History of Progress’–where he shows that human history is filled with groups of humans not paying heed to the natural feedback loops of nature. We are a part of nature. And it frustrates me to no end, when humans in 2011 deny the unity that is humanity. There are no more ‘groups’–we are all one group, and are aware of this, in some respects yet not others.
s
k
-t
l
)
