Monthly Archives: February 2012

by

Lana Del Rey and Indie Authenticity

I used to pride myself on my broad, in-depth knowledge of pop culture. You play any song, and I could name the artist, title, album, and approximate release date. I’ll name that tune in two notes, George.

In the last couple of years, though, it’s become painfully clear to me just how out of touch I’ve fallen. Part of the problem (for me) is that people just don’t get music the same way anymore. I acquired much of my musical knowledge from watching epic countdowns on VH1, MTV, MuchMusic and Fuse back in the day. Shows like Alternative Nation and 120 Minutes helped to keep me clued in, and PopUp Video and Behind the Music gave me all of the behind-the-scene details I needed.
My friends exchanged mix tapes and cds. Do people do that anymore? Or do they just link to playlists on Spotify and Rdio?

Despite being relatively clueless about the current state of pop music, there have been a few acts I haven’t been able to escape:

  • Justin Bieber
  • Nikki Minaj
  • Mumford and Sons
  • Florence and the Machine

And then the name that’s been just about everywhere lately: Lana Del Rey. What struck me as particularly odd about Lana Del Rey, however, is that I wasn’t ever hearing her music. And no one was talking about her music. It was always about how much everyone hates Lana Del Rey.
After about two weeks of hearing one story after another about how “controversial” Lana is, and how “everyone” despises her, I couldn’t help but wonder, what the hell did this girl do? So I did what any curious person with internet access would do: I googled “Why does everyone hate Lana Del Rey?”

This article from Good Culture does an alright job of breaking the issue down. It isn’t “everyone” who hates Lana Del Rey. It’s indie music that can’t stand her. And apparently, indie music hates her because she’s “inauthentic”.

Ohhh man. Just reading that sentence sent me into a fit of laughter. “Inauthentic”. “Indie music”. Hahahahahahaha. But wait. It gets better. The Good Culture piece links to this gem on Hipster Runoff (“Hipster Runoff”??! Hahahahaha. Seriously?).  Now, even if I were to look beyond the author’s apparent opposition to vowel usage (“LANA DEL REY: EXPOSED. B4 she was alt, she was a failed mnstrm artist without fake lips”), this piece would kill me. All at once, the author asserts:

In a world where Best Coast is celebrated for being ‘pro-women’ and ‘empowering’, Lana Del Rey is a massive step back for the anti-cyberbullying feminist movement within indie rock. Her career works against the indie ideals that if you are ‘talented enough’, u can make it. She repackaged herself as a brunette with collagen filled lips packaged as a lofi diy broad. 

and then:

Lana Del Rey will be the most divisive indie artist in years, and she will put the blogosphere thru many of our biggest challenges. Who will choose to ‘cover’ her? What blogs will be ‘simple’ enough to hype her manufactured indie pop sugar? Who will ‘pan’ LanaBB? Who will be a coward and say “It doesn’t matter where she comes from and what she looks like. She makes good music, and that’s all that matters”?

 (emphasis mine)

And the author says this without the slightest hint of irony. So, lemme get this straight. Lana Del Rey is a horrible, shallow human being because she changed her appearance and was “rebranded” in order to be successful…so we should punish her by focusing on her appearance, regardless of whether she makes good music or not?

You know, it was funny the first time I read it, but now I just have a headache. I get that Lana Del Rey has had given some questionable performances. She’s been lambasted for her lukewarm performances on SNL last month:

It’s not like anyone else has given an atrocious performance on SNL, though, right?

For comparison, here’s a song recorded by Lizzy Grant (pre-makeover):


and here’s Lana Del Rey:

Jake Kroeger pretty much nailed the anti-Lana phenomenon with this article over on Nerdist:

Unfortunately, Del Rey represents a delicate balance in pop culture that is absolutely necessary, especially to those who need something to blog about. She’s not Top 40 and yet not Pitchfork-approved either, which, instead of developing a crossover appeal from hipsters and non-hipsters alike, has translated instead to intense bickering between, basically, people who have too much time on their hands and people who have way too much time on their hands (a/k/a “Internet trolls”).

Personally, I’m liking her sound, regardless of her haircolor or how big her lips are. I think it’s idiotic at best to hold an artist accountable for any potential shallowness of the listeners. After all, it isn’t Lana’s sound that has changed. If people weren’t interested in her music before, because she didn’t look “indie” enough, but now they’re all about her because she’s “hot”, that’s on them, not her. Apparently “authenticity” has nothing to do with the music. :sigh: So what do you guys think? Is Lana Del Rey the most divisive artist to hit the airwaves in quite some time? Or is it these indie bloggers who are being divisive? Leave me a comment and let me know your thoughts.

Edit: If you’re looking to criticize Lana Del Rey, this is the way it’s done.

by

Facebook, Politics, and Police States

Not-sure-If-I-hate-facebook

As you may have been able to guess from my last couple of posts, Facebook conversations are probably the largest trigger of rage in my daily life. I suspect that I’m not the only one who feels this way. I fully understand that I could just pull the plug. Delete my profile, or at the very least, stop reading my feed. Like many others, however, I’ve got a number of people (including my brother who is currently serving in Afghanistan) who I don’t really have direct contact with otherwise. I don’t chat on the phone, and people don’t really e-mail anymore outside of business- and annoying religious and political-themed chain e-mails. The bigger problem with walking away from Facebook, for me anyway, is that it doesn’t actually solve anything. I’d just be subscribing to the “ignorance is bliss” ideology, and well, I think that’s bullshit.
I sort of feel like a hypocrite tonight. Back in the fall, when the Occupy Movement had just started gaining steam, I found myself frustrated at the level of indifference amongst many of my acquaintances, and really, people in general. I couldn’t understand how people just really didn’t seem to care about things that affected them. I wanted to rally people up.”Open your eyes!” “Fight for your rights!” and all that jazz.

And yet here I am, two steps away from smashing my head against the keyboard because people are doing just that. More specifically, people are outraged because of recent changes to the law in LA County  that effectively ban the use of frisbees and footballs on beaches between Labor Day and Memorial Day.

The term “police state” has come up more than once in discussion of this issue. It blows my mind, particularly when you consider that this is really nothing new. The LA County ordinance is merely a revision of  already-existing laws on the books, and in fact is somewhat more liberal than the old laws. The law which previously read:

It is unlawful for any person to cast, toss, throw, kick, or roll any ball, tube, or any light object other than inflated rubber balls not less than 10 inches in diameter upon or over any beach regulated by this Part 3…

Has been amended to read:

A. General Prohibition: It is unlawful for any person to cast, toss, throw, kick, or roll any ball, tube, or any light object other than a beach ball or beach volleyball upon or over any beach except the following:

  1. In an area that may be established and/or designated for such use by the Director.
  2. When the person first obtains a permit by the Director to conduct such activity.
  3. When using a water polo ball in or over the Pacific Ocean opposite such beach.
  4. When using any other object over or in the Pacific Ocean opposite such beach, the person first obtains previous authorization from the Fire Chief or ocean lifeguard to conduct such activity.

B. Exception for Off-Season: The ball-playing restrictions set forth in subsection A shall not be applicable during the period between Labor Day and Memorial Day, provided the involved ball-playing activity is carried out in such a manner so as not to endanger any person or property on or near the beach. In no event shall any structure or improvement used for ball-playing purposes be placed on the beach without the previous authorization of the Director.

You see how that’s a bit different than “omgggg the 5-0 are trying to steal our good time!!!”?
I suspect that the ordinance only exists in the first place due to the inability of some people to use common sense, and the tendency of those very same people to be kind of lawsuit-happy, but I can’t say for sure. It really doesn’t matter to me. This isn’t the authorities saying “You can’t play ball”. This is the authorities saying “You can’t play ball in the middle of this crowded area unless the lifeguard says it’s ok, because we don’t want to have to deal with someone freaking out because they got railed in the head. Take your ball over there. Or use a beach ball. You know, something that is less likely to give someone a bloody nose if they get in your way.”

But maybe that’s just me.

I also suspect that I’m one of very few people who actually bothered to read the ordinance. Many of the media outlets even got the facts wrong, with initial reports stating that anyone in violation of the ordinance would be subject to a $1,000 fine (the actual fine is either $100, $300, or $500, depending on the number of offenses).

Maybe I’d feel better about the outrage if people were better informed, and it didn’t seem like they were just manipulating facts to suit their own agendas. Maybe I’d be ok with it if the people complaining ever did anything to facilitate change, rather than just playing the part of armchair critic on Facebook. I’m certain I’d feel a whole lot better if this hyperawareness and outrage extended further than the featured article on Yahoo! News…but that isn’t the case.


I know that isn’t the case, because I have yet to see a single mention of Syria. If someone can’t play frisbee wherever the hell they want to, we cry and stomp our feet and call it a police state. But  an actual situation where people’s basic human rights are at stake is met with silence.

I suppose it’s a good thing that people care at all, but I can’t help but feel angry and frustrated. I’m still screaming, “Open your eyes!”

by

Domestic Violence and Dinner Dates

If this keeps up, I’m going to need a cape. Good thing I have some friends who know how to sew!

Today’s ridiculous Facebook debate comes to us courtesy of Judge Hurley, in Broward County Florida, who ordered the defendant in a domestic violence case to take his wife out on a date.

  • “Not to defend a potential wife-beater, but…” reads a lot to me like “Not to sound racist, but…” Whenever someone says something like this, you can pretty much rest assured that whatever comes next is doing exactly what they say they’re trying not to do.
  • “She also noted that she doesn’t fear him attacking her.” I feel like anyone who would say something like this obviously has no knowledge whatsoever about domestic violence whatsoever. In many cases of domestic violence, the victim will side with the defendant because either 1)they’re in love with the person and don’t want to see anything bad happen to them/don’t want to “get them in trouble”, or 2)they’re afraid of what will happen if they speak out against the defendant. For a woman to stand in front of her attacker in court and say right out that she’s afraid he’s going to hurt her again is pretty rare, especially when there are the legal and emotional complications of marriage involved.
  • “ Basically, the judge awarded what she wanted and asked for. If you think he’s wrong, you’re saying the wife (the victim) should not be listened too.” Gahhhh. The combination of ignorance and audacity in this statement has me wanting to run around, flailing and screaming as though my clothing just spontaneously caught fire. Again, there’s seemingly no understanding of what happens in domestic violence cases. As I pointed out in my response, when you’re attacked by someone you care deeply about, who you trusted, there’s a lasting psychological impact. Oftentimes, you’re not fully able to see the repercussions of the situation. You may not have any visible bruises, and you may think you’re just fine…until you’re standing next to someone who reaches for something next to you, or who swats at a mosquito, and you suddenly flinch. Maybe it isn’t even that obvious. Maybe you catch a certain scent, or hear a particular sound, and next thing you know you’re in the midst of a full blown panic attack, and can’t quite figure out why. In many cases, the victim just wants things to return to normal, as quickly as possible. And sometimes, that means going back to their assailant, and acting as though nothing happened. Problem is, something did happen, and by failing to address it, we only heighten the risk of re-occurrence. I think the reverse logic this commenter used is what really disturbs me. It’s clear manipulation…”well if you’re really concerned with what’s best for the victim…” No. Just no. There are times when people aren’t necessarily capable of expressing (or even acknowledging) what is in their best interests. Immediately following an assault? That’s one of those times. That is one of the reasons why many places will have the victim represented by an advocate in court. That doesn’t mean that the advocate just makes a decision on their client’s behalf. Rather, the advocate speaks with their client at length in order to develop a clear picture of what the circumstances are, and what their client wishes to happen. Their job is to obtain a result that both protects their client and upholds their client’s wishes. Protecting their client’s well-being and preventing re-occurrence is the primary focus. Giving the client what they want is secondary.

This article refers to the judge as “perceptive”. I find that description laughable, at best. It seems to me that Judge Hurley is ignorant. Whether it was his intent or not, he has set a precedence with this “untraditional” sentence. Judge Hurley has essentially told the community of Broward County that it is just fine to assault your partner, so long as you don’t leave any visible marks, and you take them out on a date afterward.
Cycle of Violence in abusive relationships

Judge Hurley obviously doesn’t know (or care) that those who are well-practiced in abuse (god, it makes me nauseous to even type that out) know exactly where to grab or hit so that they don’t leave visible bruises. Seasoned abusers know just what to say to manipulate their victims into thinking it was an accident, or that the assault was somehow the victim’s fault. The “honeymoon phase” is a part of the cycle of violence in an abusive relationship. During this phase, it is common for the abuser to lavish his/her partner with gifts and attention. By turning on the charm, the abuser hopes to assuage his/her guilt and to regain the trust of his/her partner. The problem is that most don’t seek help to address the underlying issues, so it isn’t long before the abusive behavior re-emerges. In handing down this ridiculous sentence, and dismissing the impact that domestic violence so often has, Judge Hurley is just re-enforcing the cycle of abuse, and the belief that such behavior is acceptable. Sure, he ordered the couple to undergo marriage counseling, but that does nothing to acknowledge the incredibly violent behavior demonstrated by the husband in this case. It also alludes to the idea that the wife is somehow responsible for the abuse.

I’m glad I’m not completely alone in my outrage over this sentencing. The comments on the Sun-Sentinel article are somewhat split, with some commending the judge for offering a “positive solution” to the situation, but the more recent comments are much more critical, with many calling for Hurley’s resignation.

***UPDATE: I wrote the above post before coming across the NPR article, featuring this video:[Youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ef9Rn_3LhyY&feature=player_embedded]

This video makes the whole thing even more troubling to me. Before Mrs. Bray even has a chance to respond, Judge Hurley says “I’m sure he’ll be out of prison today”. This, after Mrs. Bray says that it was not the first time she’s had to call the police to their residence for an altercation.

While I was writing this up, this happened:
So, yeah. Mr. Law School apparently can’t get his facts straight, and his approach to a debate is to ignore any points that don’t support his argument. Something tells me this debate isn’t over yet…

***UPDATE#2: I keep saying “update”, but I haven’t actually published yet, because this stuff keeps coming too quickly. Dude just invoked an OJ Simpson reference while trying to convince me that this domestic violence case is no big deal. I can’t make this up.






**takes deep breath** PHEW. That was a workout. I wouldn’t be surprised if this still isn’t the end of it. I wish I could get some sort of enjoyment out of this type of debate, but at the very least, it’s making it clear who I do notwant personal interaction with.

Also, me? Sexist? Yes. I am SUCH a man-hater. Give me a freaking break.

by

Rape and Responsibility

It’s 1am, and I’m exhausted. I can’t sleep, though, until I get a few things off my chest.

If you know me IRL (and, perhaps, if you don’t), you may have witnessed a particularly uhm, lively post on my Facebook wall this evening. In case you missed it, I re-posted this image:

screenshot from marxisforbros tumblr

CLICK TO VIEW LARGER

I had thought it was pretty straightforward. The sentiment expressed in marxisforbros‘ response is pretty cut and dry: Women’s clothing should be irrelevant when it comes to rape (or sexual assault, or harassment, etc.).
Needless to say, I did not anticipate the resulting shitstorm. Currently, we’re at 55 comments (and counting).**

I, er, WHAT?? How did it come to this? Why are we debating rape? How is rape even debatable? I thought it was just common sense: rape is bad. Horrible. And that’s a gross understatement. Rape is never, ever, EVER the victim’s fault. To blame the victim is to further victimize them. To assume that rape ever occurs as a result of some action (or inaction on the victim’s part) is a result of sheer ignorance, or unwillingness to acknowledge the truth about rape. I had thought that these people, who I choose to call friends (be it on Facebook, or in the real world) were rather enlightened people. I had assumed that we were of similar minds, at least when it comes to issues like this. So how the hell did we end up with a thread that is 55 comments long, and caused at least two people to seriously question our relationships, and our society as a whole?

I bet you were expecting me to give you an answer, huh? Well, sorry, kids. I ain’t got one. Not this time.

Seriously. I’m confounded. I knew that people thought this way. Hell, I’m a religious follower of STFU, Conservatives, STFU, Sexists , and Cognitive Dissonance…I see posts with this type of insanity all the time. But it’s a little bit different, seeing the blurred avatars on a 13″ screen when you have distance–both geographical and emotional–from the people involved. When you realize that these are people who you know…the very same people you’d be likely to turn to if–god forbid–something were to happen to you…it’s jarring, to say the very least.

I feel sick. I feel sick because people still feel the need to justify rape, even when they don’t know that’s what they’re doing. I’m angry, but not just at some of the people who posted. No, what angers and disturbs me even more is the silence. You see, I currently have 456 friends on Facebook. How many engaged in this conversation? 10? (I don’t feel like counting. I hope you understand.) And of those, how many bothered to support my end of the debate? Yeah. It isn’t that no one agrees with me. I’ve had friends tell me they do, whether it be in a message as a result of this thread, or in some other, independent conversation. Yet their absence here seems profound. My entire point, in the original post, throughout this debate, has been that there is a HUGE freaking problem with the fact that we hold the victim responsible when it comes to rape. As a society, we antagonize those who have already been attacked and abused. The fact that no one wants to speak up in defense; that no one is willing to step forward and challenge this antiquated, sexist ideology kind of punctuates that.

According to a number of studies,  60% of rapes and sexual assaults go unreported. Do you think that the stigma; the fact that so many people look to blame the victim, or immediately assume that any accusations of rape or sexual assault are false might have anything to do with that?

Relevant:

I’m sorry if this post isn’t terribly cohesive. I’m not lying when I say I’m exhausted. This has me completely drained. Before I go to bed and hope for pleasant dreams that have nothing to do with sexual assault or rape apologists, though, I’ve got one last thing to add to the conversation. The best tips I’ve seen to date with regard to how to avoid rape/sexual assault:

Sexual Assault Prevention TipsMull that over for a bit. I need to give my brain a break for a bit.

**My apologies for the choppy screenshots. Whenever I tried to take it all as one piece, I wound up with a bunch of lines either missing, or compressed. You can click on each chunk to make it larger. (And if you know of a good, free screenshot tool, let me know. I’m currently using Screen Capture for Chrome.)
***Although I’ve linked directly to the conversation, my Facebook privacy settings might not let you see it. I’m sorry about that, too, but I don’t feel like changing my settings at the moment.

by

Susan G. Komen Ends Funding to Planned Parenthood

Earlier today, Planned Parenthood announced that the Susan G Komen for the Cure foundation has decided to halt all funding for breast cancer screenings conducted at Planned Parenthood health centers due to increased pressure from anti-abortion groups.

According to a message posted on the Planned Parenthood website:

Over the past five years, Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation funds have enabled Planned Parenthood health centers to provide nearly 170,000 clinical breast exams and referrals for more than 6,400 mammograms. These cancer detection and prevention programs saved the lives of women who often had nowhere else to turn for care.

Now, after facing criticism from anti-choice, anti-women’s health groups, the Komen Foundation has decided to stop supporting women seeking care at Planned Parenthood health centers.

Needless to say, I find this absolutely infuriating. I have been a patient at Planned Parenthood for the past 10 years, since I turned 19 years old and went there for my first annual exam and PAP. As a woman without access to affordable health care, Planned Parenthood has been my only source of consistent health care. I’ve gone there diligently, every year, for my annual exam and cancer screenings. I have a long history of fibroid tumors in my family, and receiving hormonal birth control from Planned Parenthood has spared me from countless agonizing symptoms. I’ve developed a rapport with my practitioner at the local clinic, and I know I can ask her for advice regarding just about any health issue. If I have a question she can’t answer, or a problem she can’t address, I can get her professional referral.

To say I’m dismayed at the decision of the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation would be a gross understatement. The way I see it is this: you either support women’s health programs, or you don’t. In the 10 years I’ve been a patient with Planned Parenthood, I’ve never had a decision forced on me. I was the one who determined I didn’t want to become pregnant. I was the one who decided to go on hormonal birth control. I was the one who chose what form of HBC I wanted. All Planned Parenthood did was provide me with options, and educate me on both the benefits and risks of those options. Largely in due part to the services provided by Planned Parenthood, I have never been pregnant. I’ve never had an abortion. Yet, according to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation, I don’t deserve access to these valuable services, because I receive them from a provider that also offers abortions/abortion referral services.

I posted the following to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure facebook wall:

I am beyond disappointed to learn that you have pulled funding from Planned Parenthood. As a woman without access to affordable health insurance, Planned Parenthood has been my *only* source for valuable cancer screenings for the last 10 years. If you were really concerned with women’s health, you would know that Planned Parenthood provides a variety of vital services to help women maintain their overall health. In your info, you state “Nancy G. Brinker promised her dying sister, Susan G. Komen, that she would do everything in her power to end breast cancer forever.”. “…do everything besides providing valuable funding for cancer screenings to those you don’t agree with politically” seems to be more like it. Well, that goes both ways. Susan G. Komen for the Cure will no longer be receiving any support from me.

Of course, this brought out the trolls. One particularly noteworthy response:

Facebook Response

are you SURE you're anti-troll?

I’ll admit, I’m not up on my abortion-related research. So I decided to do some digging. It didn’t take long, however. A quick Google search of “abortion cancer” brought me to the National Cancer Institute site; more specifically, the factsheet entitled “Abortion, Miscarriage, and Breast Cancer Risk“. According to the NCI:

The relationship between induced and spontaneous abortion and breast cancer risk has been the subject of extensive research beginning in the late 1950s. Until the mid-1990s, the evidence was inconsistent. Findings from some studies suggested there was no increase in risk of breast cancer among women who had had an abortion, while findings from other studies suggested there was an increased risk. Most of these studies, however, were flawed in a number of ways that can lead to unreliable results. Only a small number of women were included in many of these studies, and for most, the data were collected only after breast cancer had been diagnosed, and women’s histories of miscarriage and abortion were based on their “self-report” rather than on their medical records. Since then, better-designed studies have been conducted. These newer studies examined large numbers of women, collected data before breast cancer was found, and gathered medical history information from medical records rather than simply from self-reports, thereby generating more reliable findings. The newer studies consistently showed no association between induced and spontaneous abortions and breast cancer risk.(emphasis mine)

As far as the free clinics go, guess what? We don’t have one where I live. There may be 8,000 free clinics in the United States, but when you consider that there are 1003 towns and cities in my state alone, that really isn’t very many. As a matter of fact, there are 442 free clinics in New York State, and from what I can tell, all but maybe 3 of them are in New York City. I live approximately 90 miles from NYC. It’s a 2.5 hour commute in each direction. I don’t have a car, and I can’t afford the $50 for the round-trip bus ticket. In my town, we have some urgent care clinics, but they require payment in full at the time of service, and they don’t provide any preventative care services. With limited funds and no health insurance, if I want any sort of women’s health service, Planned Parenthood is literally my only option.

I know I’m not alone in this. It’s certainly not beyond me that the majority of Planned Parenthood patients are low income, and have limited resources. So it makes me wonder about the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation. What is it that they are really looking to do? It certainly doesn’t seem to me that they are concerned with promoting women’s health.  If they were, they would not be revoking funding from such a crucial provider of women’s health services. The information on their Facebook page states:

Nancy G. Brinker promised her dying sister, Susan G. Komen, that she would do everything in her power to end breast cancer forever. That promise is now Susan G. Komen for the Cure, a wonderful reflection of her.

Apparently, “everything in her power” does not include providing funding to organizations with differing political opinions than she holds.

As I stated earlier, Susan G. Komen for the Cure will no longer be receiving any support from me. Instead, I will choose to focus on organizations that care about providing comprehensive care for women, and that do not buckle to political pressure. If you agree, please consider doing one (or both) of the following:

Sign the petition at Change.org urging the board at Susan G. Komen to reverse their decision regarding the halting of funding to Planned Parenthood.

Donate directly to Planned Parenthood

Tell Susan G. Komen for the Cure that supporting women’s health is more than buying pink, or wearing a ribbon.