Yesterday, on my way to class, I ran into Tina. I was really tired, I didn't feel like going to class, and it was nice to run into a familiar face.
She said, "Hey, you're in BUST!"
Me: What.
Tina:Yeah, I was reading the letters to the editor, and it said something about the Healthy Models Coalition, and I thought, "Hey, I know someone who's into that," and then it had your name and I was all, "oh."
Me: ...what...the...holyfuckingshit
The next 24 hours I have been absolutely pumped with excitement.
For those of my two or so readers who are unfamiliar with BUST, it's a feminist fashion/music/pop culture magazine that has a nationwide readership--and, according to another letter to the editor in that edition, even has some readers internationally.
Hence my freaking out.
Anyway, I was already almost late for class, so I had to sit through 1.5 hours of slow (albeit captivating) lecture on sociocultural anthropology of Indigenous peoples of Latin America. Before class I texted Kyla and Claire, meaning of course that they had to wait an hour and a half before THEY could get the details too (Now that I'm thinking about it, I probably should have waited--but I was so excited coherent thought left me).
After class I called up Kyla, walked to the bookstore to buy the magazine and as I'm sputtering out half-words to Kyla, I searched for the article that had me in it.
It's the VERY FIRST letter to the editor--almost the first written thing in the entire magazine, apart from the table of contents and the Editor's letter.
As I'm reading it, I recall about two months ago having sent this very letter to the editor, my thoughts being, "I really want Healthy Models Coalition in print in BUST magazine. How can I do this? I know, I'll find an article in BUST that's sortof similar in feel and somehow put in Healthy Models Coalition...maybe that will work." I remember scrupulously nitpicking my words, trying to make the letter as short as possible but still say everything I wanted to broadcast, and at last I remember thinking:
"There is no way they're going to publish this--its so transparently an advertisement for HMC"
And yet. I read my own writing in BUST and laughed at how crazy the world is.
I'm still in a daze. Today I wrote two more sample letters for the website, wrote an announcement to everyone in the HMC, posted it on Facebook and the HMC website, wrote everyone I know to spread the word about HMC and to spread the word on boycotting bad fashion magazines.
Next step: I need to write a petition. I need to print out pamphlets. I need to come up with a coherent speech to tell everyone when I go canvassing next Saturday.
I need to stop checking the HMC website and Facebook for encouraging comments. I have to assume that at least some people who have received my emails are excited about what's going on too, that I'm not alone, that someone else will also show up next Saturday to accompany me while I canvass, because I'm nervous to do it by myself. I have to get myself to believe that even if no one else shows up, I can still successfully talk to store managers on my own. I have to assume that even if none of them take me seriously, that at least one of them will start to think differently.
I have to assume that someone not in San Diego will also do some canvassing.
I have to assume that someone read the email I sent them, that someone cares.
I'm honestly a little depressed when people I know haven't responded to joining the HMC facebook group--(My self-doubt speaking: why aren't they joining? Don't they think this is an important cause? Don't they care about me?)
I have to be strong. A leader. So weird.
I take heart though when I see that there are 12 whole pages of members on facebook, some people not even being friends of me or Kyla.
Just today: 6 new members on the facebook group. I wonder if they joined because of BUST.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
possible relation between anti-depressants and heart disease....
Possible relation between anti-depressants and heart disease...
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/story?id=7042749&page=1
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/story?id=7042749&page=1
Sunday, March 8, 2009
What good does it do?
I wonder what good it does to write when I'm angry and frustrated.
My previous post was definitely an angry and frustrated post--I wonder, if any of my friends at whom the ire was directed read it, would they really consider the points I had to make, or would they be taken aback by the anger and decide I was crazy?
I suppose I shant know.
--KR
My previous post was definitely an angry and frustrated post--I wonder, if any of my friends at whom the ire was directed read it, would they really consider the points I had to make, or would they be taken aback by the anger and decide I was crazy?
I suppose I shant know.
--KR
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Just one sentence can set me off
I was trying to read my homework today, when I read one sentence:
"Indeed, there is evidence that, thanks to modern industrial fishing, boats are taking fish out far faster than the fish can reproduce" --Joseph Stiglitz, from "Making Globalization Work," page 162
And I was seething for about an hour at how hypocritical just about everyone I know is in one respect or the other.
point 1: In my opinion, it is impossible for someone to say they care about global poverty and environmental issues but still eat meat and fish. To do so is hypocritical: it shows they really don't care, they're just caving into the "green" rhetoric that is so "hip and happening" these days without really thinking about what being "green" means on a personal responsibility level.
Part of this frustration stems from recent conversations with people about why I think vegetarianism is important. I explain that if current consumption patterns continue, there will be no more fish in 50 years; I explain that cows in the USA are not fed grass, but corn, which is so bad for their stomachs that by the time they are ready to be slaughtered almost all of them have thrown up repeatedly and about 13% have abcessed livers; that cows are hopped up on antibiotics, growth hormones, corn, that they are actually not healthy for humans to eat anymore; that within the USA, the meat/agricultural subsidy system is one of the most environmentally costly, and the USA produces 25% of all greenhouse gasses in the world--
The response: Well, I don't really eat that much meat.
How much meat is "not that much?" Twice a week? Even if they did only eat meat twice a week, this would not be sufficient to offset the global trends. But as it is, these friends absolutely do not eat meat only twice a week--every time I see them they eat meat--which means, probably twice a day (or more), they eat meat. Do they not see the hypocrisy in their words and actions?
The idea, "well I really don't eat that much, so it's okay" seems to me to be very much the same mentality that allows anti-evolutionists to exist.
Obviously that seems like a stretch. Here's the logic behind this assertion: Creationists believe that there is no way things could have just evolved because you can't get morphology to change from monkeys to humans, no way, just wouldn't work. They don't understand the scale of how many years it took for that change to occur.
The reason how this is relevant is because my friends (and other meat-eaters) don't understand the scale of their actions. Sure, perhaps one week eating meat every day really doesn't contribute that much to pollution--but week after week, year after year. And millions of people doing this--it adds up. Here we run into the collective action problem: it seems like one person taking the action of not eating meat won't really do any good, but when hundreds and thousands of people start, it can have an effect.
point 2: It seems to me that the terms, "Catholic Feminist" and "Pro-life Feminist" are oxymorons, except perhaps in very, very specific situations.
The situation for example, if someone is part of an inner-catholic movement to make it okay for women to become clergy. Or, if one is part of a "catholic pro-choice" movement.
Other than that--nope.
Why?
The only reason I have ever heard for justifying the catholic church's exclusion of women from the clergy is on the basis of "tradition": there have never been any women before, we shouldn't start having women now. Feminism, however, is mostly about challenging the traditional ideas of women's roles, femininity, the female experience in general, and therefore, to call oneself a feminist, they would have to challenge the Catholic Church's exclusion of women from the clergy.
As for Catholic/Pro-life?
As long as religious men can rape ten-year old girls, impregnate them, and bishops and popes can say that girl cannot get an abortion because the life of the child is sacred, more sacred even than the life of the mother because giving birth could KILL a ten-year old girl and the fear of childbirth could induce her to get an unsafe illegal abortion--but bishops and the pope can claim that the girl should have thought of that when she supposedly "tempted" the man to rape her, and still have any kind of authority whatsoever--
It shows that Catholic hierarchy is not interested in love or God, but power, and specifically, power over women's bodies and women's capabilities.
3: My half-sister's step-dad decided to leave. Her own mother is thinking about leaving her. They are officially two of the worst people on the planet.
I can truthfully say I believe it is okay to abort a fetus. Some people who abort were raped, they are ten years old, they have no money, and they simply have no ability to take care of the child they might give birth to--giving birth might even endanger their lives.
But when you've been taking care of a child for nine years, you live in the USA and therefore have at least some economic recourses in the event of economic shocks, and you only have one child to worry about, deciding to leave that child makes you officially a scumbag.
A very, very evil scumbag, a source of social instability, a wishy-washy fucked up person who thinks that a child's life is like a fashion trend, you can take it up when it's good, but when it gets bad, maybe you get bored and think it's okay to drop it--you never really loved that child, ever. That's (one of the reasons) why crimes occur, because strong parental figures don't figure in their lives to keep them to a good way of life, and because they don't have enough money to really stay on the right track--and they have to not go to college in order to stay above the poverty line.
The worst part of this is, now her mom is thinking this could be a good idea too.
I really want to send him an email and say, "You are a scumbag. You are one of the worst people that ever crossed the planet. How dare you leave my half-sister? You're a fucking retard."
The part of me that doesn't want to send him that email is the part of me that thinks there may be some sort of sanction, like yahoo taking away my ability to send and receive emails. Can they do that? Does anyone know, because if not I WILL write that email.
"Indeed, there is evidence that, thanks to modern industrial fishing, boats are taking fish out far faster than the fish can reproduce" --Joseph Stiglitz, from "Making Globalization Work," page 162
And I was seething for about an hour at how hypocritical just about everyone I know is in one respect or the other.
point 1: In my opinion, it is impossible for someone to say they care about global poverty and environmental issues but still eat meat and fish. To do so is hypocritical: it shows they really don't care, they're just caving into the "green" rhetoric that is so "hip and happening" these days without really thinking about what being "green" means on a personal responsibility level.
Part of this frustration stems from recent conversations with people about why I think vegetarianism is important. I explain that if current consumption patterns continue, there will be no more fish in 50 years; I explain that cows in the USA are not fed grass, but corn, which is so bad for their stomachs that by the time they are ready to be slaughtered almost all of them have thrown up repeatedly and about 13% have abcessed livers; that cows are hopped up on antibiotics, growth hormones, corn, that they are actually not healthy for humans to eat anymore; that within the USA, the meat/agricultural subsidy system is one of the most environmentally costly, and the USA produces 25% of all greenhouse gasses in the world--
The response: Well, I don't really eat that much meat.
How much meat is "not that much?" Twice a week? Even if they did only eat meat twice a week, this would not be sufficient to offset the global trends. But as it is, these friends absolutely do not eat meat only twice a week--every time I see them they eat meat--which means, probably twice a day (or more), they eat meat. Do they not see the hypocrisy in their words and actions?
The idea, "well I really don't eat that much, so it's okay" seems to me to be very much the same mentality that allows anti-evolutionists to exist.
Obviously that seems like a stretch. Here's the logic behind this assertion: Creationists believe that there is no way things could have just evolved because you can't get morphology to change from monkeys to humans, no way, just wouldn't work. They don't understand the scale of how many years it took for that change to occur.
The reason how this is relevant is because my friends (and other meat-eaters) don't understand the scale of their actions. Sure, perhaps one week eating meat every day really doesn't contribute that much to pollution--but week after week, year after year. And millions of people doing this--it adds up. Here we run into the collective action problem: it seems like one person taking the action of not eating meat won't really do any good, but when hundreds and thousands of people start, it can have an effect.
point 2: It seems to me that the terms, "Catholic Feminist" and "Pro-life Feminist" are oxymorons, except perhaps in very, very specific situations.
The situation for example, if someone is part of an inner-catholic movement to make it okay for women to become clergy. Or, if one is part of a "catholic pro-choice" movement.
Other than that--nope.
Why?
The only reason I have ever heard for justifying the catholic church's exclusion of women from the clergy is on the basis of "tradition": there have never been any women before, we shouldn't start having women now. Feminism, however, is mostly about challenging the traditional ideas of women's roles, femininity, the female experience in general, and therefore, to call oneself a feminist, they would have to challenge the Catholic Church's exclusion of women from the clergy.
As for Catholic/Pro-life?
As long as religious men can rape ten-year old girls, impregnate them, and bishops and popes can say that girl cannot get an abortion because the life of the child is sacred, more sacred even than the life of the mother because giving birth could KILL a ten-year old girl and the fear of childbirth could induce her to get an unsafe illegal abortion--but bishops and the pope can claim that the girl should have thought of that when she supposedly "tempted" the man to rape her, and still have any kind of authority whatsoever--
It shows that Catholic hierarchy is not interested in love or God, but power, and specifically, power over women's bodies and women's capabilities.
3: My half-sister's step-dad decided to leave. Her own mother is thinking about leaving her. They are officially two of the worst people on the planet.
I can truthfully say I believe it is okay to abort a fetus. Some people who abort were raped, they are ten years old, they have no money, and they simply have no ability to take care of the child they might give birth to--giving birth might even endanger their lives.
But when you've been taking care of a child for nine years, you live in the USA and therefore have at least some economic recourses in the event of economic shocks, and you only have one child to worry about, deciding to leave that child makes you officially a scumbag.
A very, very evil scumbag, a source of social instability, a wishy-washy fucked up person who thinks that a child's life is like a fashion trend, you can take it up when it's good, but when it gets bad, maybe you get bored and think it's okay to drop it--you never really loved that child, ever. That's (one of the reasons) why crimes occur, because strong parental figures don't figure in their lives to keep them to a good way of life, and because they don't have enough money to really stay on the right track--and they have to not go to college in order to stay above the poverty line.
The worst part of this is, now her mom is thinking this could be a good idea too.
I really want to send him an email and say, "You are a scumbag. You are one of the worst people that ever crossed the planet. How dare you leave my half-sister? You're a fucking retard."
The part of me that doesn't want to send him that email is the part of me that thinks there may be some sort of sanction, like yahoo taking away my ability to send and receive emails. Can they do that? Does anyone know, because if not I WILL write that email.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Studying things
Sometimes studying things makes me very depressed and excited at the same time.
For example, right now I'm doing a paper on maternal mortality rates (MMR) in Bolivia--I keep finding information, some of it contradicting each other, but it's highly interesting--and I'm excited that I'm actually getting excited about getting to write about something I feel passionate about.
The bad parts--the material is not happy news. Although certain types of abortion are legal in Bolivia since 1973, only 6 have taken place. That's about 40 years. of course, about 119 illegal ones take place every day in unsanitary conditions, 30% of MMR is a result of complications from illegal abortions, over half the people raped in Bolivia are underage, Catholic officials want to excommunicate a brave legislator who decided 12-year-old girl who was raped could get a legal abortion...
The other bad part: I keep reading, and nothing is getting written. Almost nothing.
The good part: I think I want to go to grad school and write my dissertation about the politics of reproductive rights in Latin America.
The bad part: I'm afraid to go to Bolivia because sexual violence is the norm, and I don't speak Quechua.
For example, right now I'm doing a paper on maternal mortality rates (MMR) in Bolivia--I keep finding information, some of it contradicting each other, but it's highly interesting--and I'm excited that I'm actually getting excited about getting to write about something I feel passionate about.
The bad parts--the material is not happy news. Although certain types of abortion are legal in Bolivia since 1973, only 6 have taken place. That's about 40 years. of course, about 119 illegal ones take place every day in unsanitary conditions, 30% of MMR is a result of complications from illegal abortions, over half the people raped in Bolivia are underage, Catholic officials want to excommunicate a brave legislator who decided 12-year-old girl who was raped could get a legal abortion...
The other bad part: I keep reading, and nothing is getting written. Almost nothing.
The good part: I think I want to go to grad school and write my dissertation about the politics of reproductive rights in Latin America.
The bad part: I'm afraid to go to Bolivia because sexual violence is the norm, and I don't speak Quechua.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Re-post from a Craft Magazine .
I'm very much into a crafting magazine, if only just to look at all the fun crafts they do. I found one craft in it that I can actually do! --Provided I have friends to join me :D
I actually found the page online, so I figure it's okay to repost what they said:
Zine Round Robin Page
"Zine Round Robin:
Start your own publishing empire by making a zine with your friends!
Make a stack of blank, stapled booklets in advance (one for each person) 4.25" X 5.5" is a good size. Have a supply of drawing, writing, and collage materials on hand.
Give each person one blank booklet. Set atimer, giving everyone 10-15 minutes to decorate one page. Working quickly like this adds excitement and keeps everyone loose. When the timer goes off, everyone hands the booklet off to someone else. Set the timer for another 10-15 minutes for everyone to decorate a page of the next booklet. Repeat this process until all the booklets have been in everyone's hands once, and all the pages are filled. Everyone gets to keep an original art zine, made by the whole group."
I actually found the page online, so I figure it's okay to repost what they said:
Zine Round Robin Page
"Zine Round Robin:
Start your own publishing empire by making a zine with your friends!
Make a stack of blank, stapled booklets in advance (one for each person) 4.25" X 5.5" is a good size. Have a supply of drawing, writing, and collage materials on hand.
Give each person one blank booklet. Set atimer, giving everyone 10-15 minutes to decorate one page. Working quickly like this adds excitement and keeps everyone loose. When the timer goes off, everyone hands the booklet off to someone else. Set the timer for another 10-15 minutes for everyone to decorate a page of the next booklet. Repeat this process until all the booklets have been in everyone's hands once, and all the pages are filled. Everyone gets to keep an original art zine, made by the whole group."
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Art, Music--where do I fit in?
As I'm procrastinating doing my homework, I thought I might update a musing. I can't really call it a "rant" as I'm not angry about anything, just observing.
Art is a very weird concept. Lots of times I really abhor it; sometimes it seems hedonistic, people self-indulging in expensive drawings or sculptures that don't say anything about the human condition, that don't reflect much thought, that represent time and money that could have been spent helping dig people out of the poverty hole.
And yet I myself am a very creative person. I love to draw, I enjoy writing and creating things that really have very little overarching social value--sometimes it even digs into my homework, and I wonder if I am adhering to or betraying my ideals. Does drawing really improve the quality of my life or that of others?
One thing that has been bothering me recently is that I have been extremely unfocused on all my classes--I hardly take anything in, seem to be doing the bare minimum to get an A. One aspect of this doesn't bother me so much--I remember having set goals for myself to "be so involved in other things that I would have to get a B in something"--but still getting A's. I think part of this problem is that for a long time I described myself as a person who is good at school, who works hard and gets A's--but only in those terms. My whole formulation as a person has been based on doing things because I have to do them, not necessarily because I enjoy them.
I was in Band for many years, and while I certainly was exposed to many good experiences as a French Horn player, part of me is filled with regret: I hated practicing; I'm not sure if I'll really maintain contact with the people I met; there are so many people who I wanted to get to know better and things to do but I couldn't do because I had to do band--and I wonder if it's too late for me to redefine myself.
In any case, I relate this back to my current state of senioritis: Yes, I'm not trying as hard in classes, and supposedly in doing this I'm fulfilling the goal I had set for myself to have my life centered around other things. The problem arises in that I'm not actually having my life centered around things that are more important to me--my lack of attention to my classes is not upswept by a perponderance of productivity in areas of more importance to me--I am merely being unfocused in everything. To what do I owe this lack of focus?
Sadly enough I think this has to do with recent shifts in my self-identity. I identify as an ex-anorexic, meaning that for a long time my days were completely structured around my food intake. I no longer structure my days around this, but now my days simply have NO structure, and I don't get anything done. Part of this also has to do with my time in Spain: it was very hard to set my own goals and agenda, because there were different expectations of time there, so I gave up structuring my days--and I've still not been able to recuperate that.
Hm. This post began as talking about music, but my daily ruminations have leaked into it. Alright then. So music.
There are times when I wonder if I actually am a musical person. Sure, I can sing...well, sortof; and certainly I used to be very good at playing French Horn, but my relationship with music is very much different today. There are people I know who claim music is what keeps them sane, and they are always on the lookout for new music that makes their heart soar. I'm not really that kind of person. When I listen to music (which is more often than in prior years, due to a feeling of inadequacy--I've sort of been forcing myself to listen to more music to feel like I fit into this human world) it's not mainly to revel in the sonorous quality of the song, but to have a relatively familiar and unobtrusive series of noises going through my head so as to not be distracted by the random noises that occur around me. I'm not that interested in the new songs--I just want a similar, soft series of noises to parade through my brain so that I can focus on my reading.
Part of me wonders if it's the music, being constantly in my brain, that has made it more difficult for me to get anything done. I have been listening to a lot of new music recently...Oddly enough, however, listening to music doesn't stall me from writing blogs--only from focusing on homework.
I wonder if it's just part of human nature to seek out hedonism.
Art is a very weird concept. Lots of times I really abhor it; sometimes it seems hedonistic, people self-indulging in expensive drawings or sculptures that don't say anything about the human condition, that don't reflect much thought, that represent time and money that could have been spent helping dig people out of the poverty hole.
And yet I myself am a very creative person. I love to draw, I enjoy writing and creating things that really have very little overarching social value--sometimes it even digs into my homework, and I wonder if I am adhering to or betraying my ideals. Does drawing really improve the quality of my life or that of others?
One thing that has been bothering me recently is that I have been extremely unfocused on all my classes--I hardly take anything in, seem to be doing the bare minimum to get an A. One aspect of this doesn't bother me so much--I remember having set goals for myself to "be so involved in other things that I would have to get a B in something"--but still getting A's. I think part of this problem is that for a long time I described myself as a person who is good at school, who works hard and gets A's--but only in those terms. My whole formulation as a person has been based on doing things because I have to do them, not necessarily because I enjoy them.
I was in Band for many years, and while I certainly was exposed to many good experiences as a French Horn player, part of me is filled with regret: I hated practicing; I'm not sure if I'll really maintain contact with the people I met; there are so many people who I wanted to get to know better and things to do but I couldn't do because I had to do band--and I wonder if it's too late for me to redefine myself.
In any case, I relate this back to my current state of senioritis: Yes, I'm not trying as hard in classes, and supposedly in doing this I'm fulfilling the goal I had set for myself to have my life centered around other things. The problem arises in that I'm not actually having my life centered around things that are more important to me--my lack of attention to my classes is not upswept by a perponderance of productivity in areas of more importance to me--I am merely being unfocused in everything. To what do I owe this lack of focus?
Sadly enough I think this has to do with recent shifts in my self-identity. I identify as an ex-anorexic, meaning that for a long time my days were completely structured around my food intake. I no longer structure my days around this, but now my days simply have NO structure, and I don't get anything done. Part of this also has to do with my time in Spain: it was very hard to set my own goals and agenda, because there were different expectations of time there, so I gave up structuring my days--and I've still not been able to recuperate that.
Hm. This post began as talking about music, but my daily ruminations have leaked into it. Alright then. So music.
There are times when I wonder if I actually am a musical person. Sure, I can sing...well, sortof; and certainly I used to be very good at playing French Horn, but my relationship with music is very much different today. There are people I know who claim music is what keeps them sane, and they are always on the lookout for new music that makes their heart soar. I'm not really that kind of person. When I listen to music (which is more often than in prior years, due to a feeling of inadequacy--I've sort of been forcing myself to listen to more music to feel like I fit into this human world) it's not mainly to revel in the sonorous quality of the song, but to have a relatively familiar and unobtrusive series of noises going through my head so as to not be distracted by the random noises that occur around me. I'm not that interested in the new songs--I just want a similar, soft series of noises to parade through my brain so that I can focus on my reading.
Part of me wonders if it's the music, being constantly in my brain, that has made it more difficult for me to get anything done. I have been listening to a lot of new music recently...Oddly enough, however, listening to music doesn't stall me from writing blogs--only from focusing on homework.
I wonder if it's just part of human nature to seek out hedonism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
