Ukulele Songs, Grad School and Dinosaurs-with-Tiny-Arms

I know I tend to rant and climb on a soap box, but I don't mean to always be negative. After reading through my last few posts, I decided I needed to share something more fluffy.... something light-hearted and fun. Then today I saw this:

Ukuleles are such happy, social instruments! I love it! I've been playing myself for a few years (The hipster in me must point out that I was into the ukulele way before everyone else rediscovered them!!!), but gotten more serious recently.

This is the ukulele I've been playing. His name is Cecil.
We are really getting along well!

I'm also getting ready to start grad school next month..... Yippee! 

Going to be studying library science, with an emphasis on archives.

Support your local library!

And finally, this gave me a nice chuckle this week:

Have a happy, marshmallow-filled, butterfly-attacking, chocolate-covered week!

Other Interesting Things I've read this week:

The Things We Are Prepared to Walk Away From
Why I Wouldn't Attend Pastor Steepek's Church
Feminism and the New Domesticity

Chivalry vs. Misogyny

A few days ago at work, a coworker and I were discussing a task, a task involving some physical effort. He made the comment, 'You shouldn't do it by yourself, you know... Because of chivalry.' I immediately responded, 'You mean misogyny!'
Does chivalry even exist? Or is it an invention by the male-centric structure of human culture to make subjugation more palatable? Let a man open a door for you, it's chivalry! Let a man pay for your meal/movie/entertainment, it's chivalry! This process teaches women, and especially young girls to not be independent, to rely on men, that they are unable to provide for themselves. It allows thought processes where a woman's place is at home, protected and reliant upon their man.
Can you imagine if the common dating methods were gender swapped? Most men I know would cringe at the thought of a woman paying!
When I've tried to discuss this idea with other women, I inevitably get some response to the effect, we could take care of ourselves but its important to make men feel needed and important. This is completely belittling any action taken by men, to the passive aggressive control of women. This is not a function of a healthy relationship!
I think that men and women should individually act in the best interest of each other, dividing tasks and repositioning according to ability and experience, not gender. There is nothing as frustrating to me, as not being allowed to do something simply because I was born with a certain genetic code.
Just to clarify, I'm not blaming men for acting 'chivalrous'. They are acting in noble, polite and according to how society teaches them to act. They are just as much victims in this gender-imposed mess as women. And they deal with and are negatively affected by misogyny as much as women.

The Modern Children of Israel

Disclaimer... The opinions expressed here are my own and not those of my employer, my church, my university, my family or my friends. These opinions will change from time to time... Here is today's rant.

I've been reading the Book of Matthew in the New Testament lately. I'm trying to get a new perspective on Christ and his gospel. Today, in Matthew 12, the thing that really stood out to me was how anti-establishmentary Christ was. This whole chapter is him breaking traditions and rules, upsetting people. He is consistently outwitting and dressing down members of the traditional religious community.

The Mormon Church is much like the Children of Israel in the Old Testament. They take great pride at being different. At living in the world but not of the world. In the days of David and Solomon, one of their greatest sins was polluting the purity of the community by marrying foreign wives. There was no proselyting, no invitation to join the "saints", but rather war and death over property rights. These people could not live together in peace because they were so intolerant. This also perfectly describes the Pharisees and traditional religious leaders, with whom Christ constantly is butting heads. Elder Oaks has discussed the importance of not tolerating anything but pure Mormon Christianity (here).

As a young woman, I took great pride in my long shorts, my dateless status and my refusal to participate in school dances or activities. I had more righteous, important things to do with my time, was my thought process. I went to seminary (a church class) at 6 AM every day, went to church services 3 hours on Sunday, church activities on Wednesday nights, dances occasionally. But, I'm not so sure that we are any different from the rest of world, especially the conservative Christian world. There are many other Christian groups that are just as self-righteous and sure that they, and only they, have the truth.

Any organization/establishment has to deal with the dilemma of "melting pot" vs. "mixed salad" in terms of culture, structure, organization, etc. America used to be seen as a melting pot, a place where people of all cultures could come together and discard their cultural identities to become America. The concept of a mixed salad is that people can and should retain their identities while interacting with and supporting the structure.

Just like any country or cultural group, religion has to deal with "melting" vs "mixing". Do we attempt to assimilate newcomers? Or do we respect their traditions and encourage them to maintain their identity? This is where my problems with missionary work come out. What right does any church have to come into someone's life and tell them that they are living incorrectly? Now, there are extremes, with drug abuse, alcoholism and other fundamentally detrimental behavior choices. But I think it takes a substantial amount of self-righteous moral superiority to tell Hawaiian women they are dressed immodestly, or African men that they need to wear white shirts and ties to church, or that quasi-traditional Protestant hymns are the only appropriate music for church, played on an organ. God is not only in those types of churches. I believe that many people feel the presence of God in different ways than three hours of church, listening to white-shirted men instill guilt in them.

Back to Matthew, why did there need to be an apostasy? We Mormons are taught that the gospel was taken from the earth after Christ's death because of the wickedness of the people. But if Christ established his perfect church, it should have stood the test of time. There are always wicked people on earth, but there are also always good innocent people. I propose that Christ didn't so much found a formal church, as debunk intolerance and religious superiority. He fought against the religious establishment. And the Mormon church has done the direct opposite, by building up a massive structure, a "pure" and "righteous" culture that people are expected to assimilate into to be a part of the "one true church". I remember the first time I saw pictures of the new conference center. I'll be honest, my first thought was of the great and spacious building discussed in the Book of Mormon, the embodiment of pride and sin.

The Church (yes, with a capitol "C") has grown so big and unwieldy that I feel it has lost touch with it's members. The combination of growth outside the US, political missteps and it's seeming refusal to allow women more substantial roles has made it a massive bureaucratic machine rolling on, intent on "melting" any violations from what it perceives as the norm. In other words, assimilation is your only righteous option. And after growing up in the church, it definitely is easier to just go with the flow, to accept the demands of the Church. I've taken real courage from my fellow bloggers, Young Mormon Feminists and Feminist Mormon Housewives. I am still trying to understand my relationship with religion, still trying on various ideologies and schools of thought. I don't have the answers yet, but I feel like I'm beginning to ask the questions.

My encounters with the Modesty Police

Buckle up.... This is a rant that has been building for over ten years. Apologies for the length. (hehehe... you'll get the joke at the end)

I've been thinking a lot about 'modesty' lately. It was recently pointed out to me that modesty should not be about what you are wearing, but rather how you act no matter what you are wearing. In other words, "the quality or state of being unassuming or moderate in the estimation of one's abilities". (Link) In my religion we have hijacked this word and made it synonymous with dress standards.
In my religious upbringing there are very strict dress codes and requirements. Now, dress and it's appropriateness is a cultural issue. It is not an eternal principle! It's not even a blanket issue for every member of our church, not even for every female member. I have also recently been thinking about the concept of 'slut shaming'. This involves shaming women into acting, dressing and behaving in "appropriate" ways. There are various levels and methods from comments by co-workers to being accosted in the street.

When I was twelve years old, I was a chubby kid with a very unfortunate mullet-like hair cut. I was very sheltered and innocent. In our church, at twelve children graduate from "Primary" and begin attending "Young Men" or "Young Women" classes. This is also when modesty indoctrination begins in the extreme. 
So, there I was, a young girl, very excited to grow up and become one of the teenagers. I will never forget one summer day, I went to a church activity, all pumped up with righteous excitement. After being at the activity for a few minutes, I could tell there was some sort of problem going on. The leaders were gathered together whispering. Finally, one of them came over to me and informed me that my shorts were too short. And if I wanted stay and participate I would have to wear a mumu wrap. Now, just to clarify I was not wearing short shorts. I was wearing shorts that were maybe 2 inches above my knee. I've always had long legs and in my innocent twelve year old mind it never occurred to me that my shorts were inappropriate. My parents never said anything either. This was my first experience where I was defined by what I was wearing and shamed. And it worked! The other girls were appalled! After that night none of them ever dared wear anything that would subject them to such degradation. I was the only one in that group who ever had to wear that wrap. 

Fast forward a few years. I was now about sixteen, moved to a different area. At this point I understood the concept of modesty. I knew that I had to cover myself because boys couldn't handle themselves. I accepted that and did my best to conform. I wore capri length pants, never shorts. I wore sleeves. 
In my church, the teenagers have a dance every few months or so. It's a huge social event and dress to said event is always a big issue. That year, the local leaders had implemented the rule that not only did shoulders, knees and midriff need to be covered, but that capri length pants were not acceptable. A girl's options were either long pants or skirts. And at that point I simply threw up my hands and said, "I don't understand!" Capris were now considered immodest? Maybe I was having flash backs to the experience as a twelve year old, but I was so frustrated and angry, my Mom suggested that I avoid going to activities like this in the future.
Then at church one night, we had a panel discussion where we, "the youth" could ask our local leaders questions. I raised my hand, and asked "Why can't we wear capri pants to dances?" The leaders quickly bypassed my very sincere question, with some mumble about it being a more formal occasion. We are not talking about prom here, we are talking about a very low-key, in the gym, juvenile dance. This was just avoidance.

The Honor Code at the university I attended had extensive dress requirements, unfortunately with a self-righteous aspect of shaming. It is also blatantly biased towards infractions by women.There have been numerous experiences by women publicized lately which reveal the demeaning actions and humiliation encountered by women who have been singled out as violators. (One on Valentines' Day) As part of this Honor Code, every potential violation is investigated and the perpetrator is made to feel like they have taken advantage of the poor men around them, who are at the mercy of those around them. There was even an uproar about women wearing messenger bags, because it emphasized their womanly curves. 
I'm sorry if my appearance offends you, my burka is on back-order! And in cultures where women wear burkas, their eyes are sexualized! There is no winning this battle!

All these rules do is shame women into believing that they are defined by their appearance. That who they are is not important, but the appearance that they present is the most important. 

I'm also the first one to jump on my soap box about how lax and lazy our culture has become in their appearance. Visit any Walmart and look at the people in their pajamas, flip-flops or waistbands around their knees. But I'm not going to impose my appearance desires on anyone else or define women by the length of their clothing. I am a capable woman. I can be responsible for my thoughts and actions and I extend that same privilege to those around me. 
I will not dress "sexier" for you, I will not "cover up" for you. 

And that is the long and short of it.

And now back to our regularly scheduled programming....

Joss Whedon. The man. The legend.

Last week, when it was announced on facebook via one of the many "intellectually enthused" (i.e. geek) organizations that I follow, that Joss Wedon had given a commencement address, I immediately found a transcript and read it, then later with time permitting I watched the video. More than once. This King of the Geeks proved to me once again why he holds that place in the ever allegiant world of fandom. From Buffy to Firefly to Dr. Horrible's Sing-A-Long Blog to the main-stream Avengers, the man can seemingly not make a wrong step.

Side-note: If you became a Joss Whedon fan post-Avengers, I have one question for you.... Who is Vera? If you can answer that you may have the status and title of a Whedonite.

He talked about the contradictions within us all. The tension that is created by these contradictions. And how decisions based on this tension and contradictions becomes identity. 

I love the idea of fluid identity, that it is an active, dynamic process. As Alice told the Caterpillar, on his inquiry as to her identity, "I--I hardly know, sir, just at present-- at least I know who I was when I got up this morning, but I think I must have been changed several times since then." I know I feel this way most days, the process of successfully making it through a day a monumental achievement, akin to the development of cold fusion. In other words, I'm not happy with a static situation. I never have been. I wonder sometimes if this is a piece of social dogma that I've somehow missed in my indoctrination, I mean education. Should I accept the concept of settling down and just living the life I've ended up with? Be a happy little proletariat, content to sell my time to the bourgeoisie?

Identity... the idea of constant change and growth, development, is the antithesis of stagnation and passive acceptance of a situation. People can and MUST change. If you are not changing, identity developing, you are dying. A concept also discussed by Joss Whedon, our bodies' ambition is death. As in Shakespeare's immortal Hamlet soliloquy:

To die,—to sleep,— 
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heartache, and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to,—’tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish’d. To die,—to sleep;— 
To sleep: perchance to dream:

Or in the words of J.M Barrie, “To die would be an awfully big adventure.”

Joss Whedon also has a history of defying the pressures of convention and doing things his way. When the writer's strike shut down much of television and entertainment production, he produced "Dr. Horrible's Sing-A-Long Blog", bypassing the studio structure and releasing it on-line. He is the rebel to Darth Vadar's Empire. This man is not only a genius because of the quality of his work, but because he consistently is true to his own identity. I very much look forward to watching that identity actively progress. Thank you, Mr. Whedon for your inspiring words.

Going to buy a milk cow and some chickens

I read a very interesting blog post over on Young Mormon Feminists the other day, wanted to add some of my thoughts. It's called "Hate the Extrative Economy, Not the (domesticity) Game"

The author basically argues that many of the real issues facing women in our society are a result of amplified "principles of capitalism", a system of "extractive economy that mines any person, place and thing withing its reach", which have affected both men and women. The author quotes Betty Friedan in saying that the real reason behind the closing of the earnings gap between the genders is substantially because of the drop in men's earnings. More women are working, but not in addition to men. Men and women need to unite in this battle against the capitalist machine, instead of declaring each other enemies.

It is a reality that "the modern workplace makes time and energy demands that are suited to men and assumes that they have a spouse at home to take care of the chores of daily life". Not only is this seen in the workplace, but I've seen this especially in my church. It is expected that each individual has that nuclear family support structure, which allows the church to place demands on this individuals time and ability. Men work, women support. Women are assigned multiple individuals to fellowship (Visiting Teaching), expected to provide food for activities, decorate, provide music for services, all while juggling childcare, house maintenance and any semblance of social life they might have. Would you ever see a man bring a casserole? Decorate for the youth dance? Don't even get me started on the inequalities of visiting and home teaching.
I think this is why some people get disillusioned and offended in the church, because leadership see people in terms of households, which cumulatively have more resources to offer. Those members who do not fit in the box of the ideal Mormon family simply don't have the same physical and emotional resources to offer.

So often feminists react to the demands of domesticity, rather than this consumer based extractive culture they are operating under. The real issue here is that "women's tasks" or domestic productive tasks are demeaned, expected in support to the all important male providing role. Before the industrial revolution households produced rather than consumed. Families worked together, doing whatever they needed, regardless of gender roles. It is only in post-industrialism that gender roles became so firmly entrenched. 

This idea fits right in with my developing perspective on Third Wave Feminism, the idea that each woman has the right to define feminism for themselves. There should not be any blanket description of femininity or masculinity that is imposed, in either extreme. The cultural emphasis of women as consumers, the "this product will make taking care of your family easier" tripe that we are fed daily in television commercials limits their identity. Where as "true domestic skills- ranging from gardening to fixing cars to cooking- offer a way to begin taking back our relationships" from the machine of capitalism. No one gender should have the monopoly on any domestic skill.

So, as my fellow blogger states, when asked about my future and I say "in all seriousness, 'I'm going to buy a milk cow and some chickens'" it is because I am writing my own definitions of femininity as a domesticly productive woman, taking a stand against the prevailing extractive consumption based culture.

Original post:
http://youngmormonfeminists.org/2013/05/29/hate-the-extractive-economy-not-the-domesticity-game/

A Minor Procedure

My dad... he’s quite a character.

For example...

I took him into the hospital for a minor procedure, albeit slightly painful. He was whining and complaining, but nothing more that I expected. He’s always been a bit of a baby about pain. He makes deathbed confessions and promises quite regularly. We’ve just learned to smile and pat his hand. “There, there...”

We went into the patient intake, the nurse asks some questions (birthdate, allergies, insurance) and then off-handedley says, “And we are going in through the right one.”

“The right?” Dad asks.

“Yes, the right.”

Awkward pause.

“But I only have one bladder...”

Cue my inappropriate laughter.  
“What if they accidentally take your bladder? Mr. 'Smith', I'm sorry to tell you this, but we've lost your bladder!”

"Or like a cow, six bladders!"
"Um, I think that is stomachs."

The poor intake nurse just stares at us.

--------

After they process him, he’s all attached to various machines, poked like a pincushion and minorly humiliated. They allow me back in and I magnanimously take on my responsibility of distracting him from the upcoming pain and awkwardness.

We first discuss the possibility to an alien tracking device being implanted in him during the surgery... pros and cons... are these benevolent anthropologist-like aliens? Maybe this implant can cure cancer, in which case we are all for it.

Then we move onto death by stepping into some sort of particle beam. “Kind of like in Quantum Leap!” I suggest

“Yeah! What was the name of the machine.... the kind of God like character that told him what his mission was...”

“Zoey.... Mickey... no...”

“Ziggy!” we both nearly shout in unison.

-----------

Through all of this sparkling conversation, he is complaining about being hungry.

“They say after the surgery I can’t leave till I eat, drink and pee. So I’m thinking a big steak from the 5 star Grill... but no... what do I get? Jello.”

“I like Jello.” I cautiously interject.

“But it’s so... hospitally.”

“Oh, very clique” I add helpfully. “And dangerous, remember in 3rd Rock from the Sun?”

“Oooh, maybe a big teriyaki burger!”

“Well, if you are really good, maybe you can have one for dinner tonight,” I suggest.
He rolls his eyes dangerously.

----

After the surgery, I text my mother for a status update.

“Is he out?”

And her superfluous response.... “He survived”.