I can't stand that pink thing about shaving

Unfortunately, i can't seem to find it through Google, so i'll have to describe the thing from memory: a scanned image of a drawing and writing in black on pink paper. The drawing is of a hairy leg being shaved, and i guess it's meant to be seen as female because the nails are put in as a detail. The writing, of which i can no longer remember the actual phrasing, went something along the lines of how shaving is "slightly mutilating" one's body.

There is so much wrong with this that i don't even know where to start, except that i'm glad i haven't seen the thing in over a year.

Let's start with the language, because it's the first thing that can strike someone has being not just problematic, but frankly disgusting. When you remove hair, however you do it, you are simply removing hair. You can't hurt hair. Equating the removal of hair with mutilation, specifically with self-mutilation, is thoughtless and hurtful. Do you know what self-mutilation is? It's not hair removal. It's not even nicking yourself when you shave. If shaving is mutilation, then what's a hair cut? What's getting a tattoo? Piercings? All things that people who don't shave can and still do. But seriously, this is beyond unfortunate language use, it's plain ignorant. It's ignorant of the truth of self-harm, of the emotions involved in it, of the stigma surrounding it. It paradoxically plays it down by trying to elevate shaving to a hyperbolic level. Hair removal is not self-harm. You degrade & downplay the experiences of all self-harmers when you trivialize them like this. Removing one's hair is not the same as cutting, and it is outright disgusting to see someone try to claim it is.

And the fact of the matter is that it plays right into shaming. It's already problematic enough that mutilation is regarded as shameful, as "What the fuck is wrong with you?" which doesn't help people at all, but for this supposedly feminist "don't shave" image, it's made doubly disgusting that they should fall back on this fact.

Which leads into more of the issues with this image. Because, at its heart, it's not actually changing anything. It still is relying on shame and shaming, the same as everything in society that tells women "This is who you should be, this is how you should look." Society relies on shaming women to get them to shave, by telling them their hair is gross at its worst and worthy of frat-boy humor at best. This is clearly wrong and harmful and something should be done, yes, but this pink drawing isn't doing it. The paradigm remains the same: it still relies on shame. It relies on the view that mutilation is shameful, which leaves many people to suffer in silence; it relies on the shaming of someone who decides what to do with their own body. It relies on telling you that you are wrong if you don't do X. It doesn't matter that now they're saying "shaving is bad; don't shave," the message is still the same, the structure is still the same.

It's one thing to be aware that, when one chooses to remove one's hair, that messages from society-- and even family and friends-- play into that decision, that there is still an element of societal shame at work. But for some people, they make more of a choice because they want to do this thing, the same way as someone may make the choice to not shave. The same goes for wearing dresses, or makeup, or high heels. Yes, there is always society's patriarchal ideas of "this is what a woman is," but there are also those women who say, "I want to do this thing." That doesn't make them any less of a person, or any less of a feminist (if they are one). Hairy legs do not a feminist make.

I was under the impression that feminism meant "I believe that you can be who you are and that you should still be treated as a human being and an equal, no matter what." That no matter whether you shave or not, that you should still be treated as a person, as an equal, with dignity.

This image is not revolutionary. All it's doing is flipping who says what is "beautiful." It switches A for B and vice versa. If society says "Shave your legs because your hair is gross," this image says, "Don't shave your legs because that's mutilation". How is that any better? Both play on shame that has been ingrained into certain acts by our society. Now instead of following society's idea of beauty, you're expected to follow a new one, while putting down anyone who opts for the former. That's not any better. It's actually really petty, when you consider the actual issues that feminism faces, and the issues that people have with it, such as excluding transwomen (and i'd guess many other gender-queer/-fluid people) and women of color. But no, let's instead fixate on telling women not to shave!

What would really be a change is actually so obvious that it should be embarrassing that it has to be pointed out: Telling women that whichever they choose, they can, and that it's okay. Shock! It's fine if you want to shave! It's fine if you don't want to shave! How hard is that to say?

These are the kind of people who go on and on about the patriarchy, and yet fall back on the same tools used by the patriarchy. That isn't feminism, it's internalized misogyny. To shame other women who do shave, or wear makeup, or like the color pink, isn't being feminist or ~*revolutionary*~, it's called being just as sexist as anyone who would shame a woman who doesn't shave or wear makeup. The paradigm remains the same, the terms just change.

Telling women (cis, trans*, and everyone in between) not to shave by making the act shameful is not the same as pointing out the issues with telling women they have to shave, and then connecting that to the broad, overarching issues. It's one thing to say, "Let's talk about how society shames women into altering the natural state of their bodies and what that can do to a person." That's something that ought to be discussed. But not by shaming, and not by making it out that, if you don't shave, that makes you a better person and feminist. Isn't there enough shaming of women already? People get it from society as it is, do they really need any more from so-called "feminists"?

Far be it from me to keep anyone from doing something they like, especially when it comes to visual art. But i feel like the words "art" & "artist" (& maybe even "creative") get thrown around a lot. Maybe it's just me. And i'm the person who doesn't call herself an "artist" despite years of magnet school + college major classes. It just feels pretentious to me to call myself that. (But i'm also extremely uncomfortable with labeling. Like, i really don't like labeling at all.) And since i find that pretentiousness stupid, isn't it hypocritical kind of be like, "dude, why are you just gluing magazine pictures in your journal/sketchbook & then making little swirly doodles & then writing quotes"? It's hypocritical, stuck-up, & rude of me. I mean, if it makes them happy, right?

To contradict myself even further (liek omigod dont u just luv it???!!!11!!??/), i have discovered something else art related that aggravates me: the whole "oooooooo mystical; ooooooooo muse" thing. I feel like i've read quotes pertaining to this sort of thing. Really, seriously, art is not this ooooo wiggly fingers mysteeeeeerious thing that only certain people can do & ooooo the muuuuse, the muuuuse & diviiiine gifts & inspiration-- No. Really. Seriously. Maybe there's such a thing as talent, maybe not (i once saw, in high school, something in a friend's sketchbook about "What is talent?" & how it probably doesn't really exist; it's haunted me ever since). Maybe talent is dependent on how you take & use (or choose not to use) what you've been taught. Because, honestly, without classes or self-teaching, how many times is someone going to tell you that you have "talent"? Exactly. It's called "taking art classes that teach you stuff, or teaching yourself stuff."

Maybe the fact that i'm such a non-religious heathen also plays into why this idea annoys me, but really, it just makes it seem ohsomysticalandmysterious, when really, anyone who either has access to good visual art programs or the drive to teach themselves can learn how to draw. (And even then, like art in general, "learning how to draw" is probably subjective. Though i would assume that most people take it to mean drawing representationally?) It's not some gift from some god, it's not "divine inspiration." If you want to wax philosophical on the "magic" of something being made that wasn't there before, okay fine, i can see that. But all this new age-y mystical stuff that seems to still persist & surround visual art (&, what do i know, maybe other art as well) is just eye-roll inducing. Maybe not everybody can do whatever they consider to be art, but everybody can probably learn, one way or another.


contadictscontradictscontradicts

So on the eighth, i went to the public library with a list of names, of books, authors, & musicians, to go check. After wandering around for an hour (i thought they opened at 8; they open at 9 a.m.), i was finally able to go & complete this mission. Alot of the names weren't there, but a few were, & i came away with three books & five CDs. I wandered around Towson the rest of the day, & only bought The Golden Compass (used at Ukazoo), a turkey club wrap at Trader Joe's (i was so hungry i felt sick), & a cinnamon latte at the resident Barnes & Nobles' Starbucks cubby (& drew & listened to people whilst eating & drinking).

The books & CDs are due back a little more than a week from now, & i'm only just now actually getting through most of the CDs, i'm in the middle of one of the books, finished another, & the third i still need to do. But i already roughly know the plot of the third, as it is The Thin Man, by Dashiell Hammett, & i'm more than well acquainted with the movie. So i've just kind of flipped through it, & i think i might like the movie better, if i ever get around to reading this: there's a lot of "Jesuses" in the book, it seems, & while i'm One of Those Horrible Little Heathens more often than not, the feeling of the book doesn't seem the same as the movie.

The book i finished is Haruki Murakami's After Dark (if you want to write his name the Western way). I think Murakami's name is fairly prevalent when it comes to books, & so i picked up this book based off the dust jacket's little summary; it sounded interesting enough. It's also not a long book (just shy of 200 pages at 191), but i still didn't fly through it because i kept falling asleep early. And, as the setting is nighttime, i thought it only proper that i read it at night into the small hours of the morning.

The whole book takes place over the course of one night, starting at 11:56 p.m. & working its way on from there. After reading it, i can say that while the jacket's little summary could be called correct, it's also way off the mark. It makes everything sound like it follows a very linear plot, the kind that's recognizable in most stories. And there is something like that, but mostly the book reads very realistically, in that there are many unsolved things & people walk in & out of it the way they might over the course of a night. The summary claims that one of the characters' sleep is "mysteriously tied to the businessman plagued by the mark of his crime," but there's no revelatory part in the book where this is displayed. Maybe it's something tucked away in the story, something that makes you go "oh" when you make the connection. There is something of an obvious connecting bit, but it doesn't go beyond that; it doesn't elaborate.

There are some stranger bits to the story, concerning the sleeping character, Eri, & the unplugged TV in her room that turns itself on. But the majority of the story focuses on her sister, Mari, a little younger than she, & the events & people she meets when she stays out away from home one night. At first, the rhetoricalness of anonymity might be annoying, but if you keep reading, it steadily gets better. You can also pick out the differences between countries-- for me, between Japan & my place in America-- such as the convenience stores (konbini in Japan, apparently, genuinely live up to their name) & the concept of love hotels (&, i may be wrong, but i don't think Denny's over here stay open quite as late as the Denny's in the book?).

The characters are from all walks of life, as hackneyed as it sounds: Mari (a freshman college student herself) meets Takahashi, who's in a band; Kaoru, who is the manager of the love hotel Alphaville & works alongside Komugi & Korogi there; & a young Chinese prostitute, who ends up being beaten by a man who comes to the love hotel. Eventually the man who beat her comes into play, as well, & reading about his thoughts & doings, you wonder why he did it, what kind of man is he, really? But you don't ever find out much about him. Much is left unsaid & unknown about pretty much everyone in the book, & certain issues never climax. It's in a somewhat stark contrast compared to most other books, where authors try to try everything up neatly by the end. In that way, it seems more realistic: you're only seeing a portion of time that these people are all passing through. You discover bits about their pasts, but not everything, & you don't know their future. There's forboding signs for some, hopeful for others, but you don't know what's going to happen to them. The reader just simply isn't told. In that way, it's a fairly open-ended novel.

Of course, the fact that the book is translated from the Japanese can leave people to wonder about discrepencies between the original language & the one it's being translated to-- philologistical stuff like that. (At some point, i found myself wondering just how Takahashi & Mari were speaking, if they were using anything that got lost in translation.) But even with that in mind, it's well-done. It's written in the present tense & describes things as "we recognize the bed," & is very easy to read, &, i want to say, personable. I was kind of expecting it to be written the way many modern novels seem to be written, which i can't quite describe, really, but it's very often off-putting. But i didn't find anything off-putting about After Dark. The beginning made me despair a little, thinking that it was going that route, but as time went on, i was proven wrong. It's a strange kind of point of view: sometimes the reader knows things the characters in the story don't, but very often, the reader knows just about as much/little as anyone else.

For some, it might seem like a strange book written in a kind of strange way, & maybe the lack of a real definitive plot & resolution to things-- & there's something at the end that's a bit of an eyebrow raiser, maybe-- but overall it's an extremely likable, well-written, intriguing & interesting book. I think i'd like to buy it, myself. The only thing was that i did feel rather distanced from the characters-- not that i always take to characters in every book i read, but something about these people felt more distant than from other books. I mean, i liked them all, & at one point i definitely had worry flare up for Takahashi, so there was connection. It just felt odd to have such a palpable feeling of distance.

The last book is a book of short stories by Lorrie Moore & is called Birds of America. I am three stories away from being finished, but... i don't even know. This book is probably partially the reason for my current mood, & it keeps doing that. The praise for the book that they put on the cover talks about how it's "fiercely funny book," & "at once sad, funny, lyrical, & prickly." I don't know where these people are getting "funny" from, & maybe it's unfair of me to basically review & critique the book before finishing it, but i've read enough to say that i probably can't quite land on how i feel about this book. I think i like it, but i also think i hate it.

I can't decide if i like or dislike Moore's style, either. (This book is one huge ball of "i like it.... i hate it.") It's the kind of modern writing that i was worried After Dark would be filled of, & i don't feel like i can pick out any passage or sentence that would work as an example. Looking through, it feels like it has to do with how the story as a whole is written, & how it sticks together. I don't know how to put this "modern writing" into words: with Moore, i guess, there's a lot of weird-ish descriptions, a lot of depressing situations. I can't describe it, seriously; just find a copy & read it yourself. Or just one story, if Amazon or someplace will give the story list.

The feeling of so many of the stories is just so bleak & sad; as the back of the book says, they really are about "the lost & unsettled of America." A few of them end in a way that leaves you confused, with a lot of strange descriptions, things happening suddenly & confusingly (was he dreaming? is he hallucinating? why is she a bird all of a sudden?) & just kind of left there. It's a different open-endedness than After Dark's. It's not the kind that implies that time moves forward & you as the reader won't see all ends. This is just a confusing open-endedness, like at the last moment, the story took a sudden strange & inexplicable-- sometimes inexplicably unrealistic-- turn. At the absolute end of the story. It gives you the feeling of, you know, it's bad enough i just read this depressing short story, but now the ending makes no sense whatsoever. The only story i can think of off the top of my head that had a slightly more uplifting end was the second one, "Which Is More Than I Can Say About Some People."

I'm not saying, "How dare Lorrie Moore write sad stories!" Who doesn't write or make sad things, & who doesn't listen to/watch/read/look at/whatever sad things? They're completely relevant & needed. Maybe for me, it's more the circumstances that Moore's characters seem to end up in that i find frustrating. A lot of it has to do with relationships, it seems, including the occaisional mention of an affair somewhere & that type of emotional wreckage. The woman at her family's over the holidays with her dyslexic husband. The woman whose boyfriend confesses that he slept with another woman who was of the 1960s. The woman who moves away from Hollywood & her bit as a small-time actress & starts going out with some guy & it seems like her what can't even be called a life is just crumbling & old & decrepit & that story makes no sense, i tell you. I think maybe the misunderstandings & the feeling of overanalysis are what i find frustrating. No, nothing's ever simple, but why can't people just believe in some things a little more? Reading these stories seems to hit on a lot of things that make me sad, & so they don't put me in the best mood ever. I even took ages to read two today, in front of the TV while MythBusters was on, thinking maybe that could counteract the sadness. Needless to say, it didn't. But at the same time, i can't help but like the book. I don't understand, really.

I got a Tumblr. So now i can put a bunch of photos & quotes & videos & stuff on there.







-sigh-

november sucks too

:(

our car died & the new one is probably going to be a cr-v. i don't like big cars like that; they look gross & wasteful. i'm already embarrassed.

i have a bad feeling that i still don't know what to do for my history paper.

i woke up at 4:30 pm today, & i still feel tired.

my stomach doesn't like me very much right now.

i wish i could go somewhere to see the leonid meteor shower.

fucking god this is the THIRD TIME I'VE TRIED TO POST
FUCKING ALT CODE GODDAMN YOUR ASS FUCK

now i'm PISSED OFF to couple with the lonliness & sadness & the thinking too much on EVERYTHING including something i thought i could get over easily. i want to get on a plane & just go somewhere. right now.

fuck



"calm" playlist (typing this bitch up is what keeps fucking navigating me away from the goddamn page what's the point of autosave if it DOESN'T SAVE YOUR FUCKING DRAFT by the time this works i'll have the list memorized)

1)Candyland-- CocoRosie
2)Slow Me Down-- Emmy Rossum
3)Shiaull Ersooyl--?
4)Arrane Ny Niee--?
5)Trees Lay By-- Josephine Foster
6)Monday's Rain-- The Clientele
7)Haunted Melody-- "
8)Lamplight-- "
9)One the Death of the Waters-- Shearwater
10)The Hunter's Star-- "
11)Return to Me-- October Project
12)Heart of Chambers-- Beach House
13)Rose-Red-- Woodland
14)Wild Child-- Enya
15)One By One-- "
16)May It Be-- "
17)Song of Nimrodel-- The Tolkien Ensemble
18)Gabriel-- Lamb
19)Beautiful Girl-- Poe
20)The Call-- Regina Spektor
21)Lullabye for a Stormy Night-- Vienna Teng
22)Shine-- "
23)Bonny Portmore-- Loreena McKennitt
24)The Lady of Shalott-- "
25)Temptasyon-- Mediæval Bæbes
26)Canon-- Johann Pachelbel
27)Last Night, Good Night (duet)-- Vocaloid song
28)Karenai Hana-- Shimokawa Mikuni
29)Istudemo Nando demo (Always With Me)-- sung by Kimura Yumi (composer: Hisaishi Joe)
30)At the Beginning-- Anastasia soundtrack
31)Fireflies-- Owl City
32)Allegria-- Cirque du Soleil

"sad" playlist
1)The Perfect Ending-- Straylight Run
2)Any Other World-- Mika
3)Speeding Cars-- Imogen Heap
4)Colorblind-- Counting Crows
5)Makka na Ito-- Plastic Tree
6)Field Below-- Regina Spektor
7)Chemo Limo-- "
8)Ode to My Family-- The Cranberries
9)Empty-- "
10)Wall of Silence-- October Project
11)Pilgrim-- Enya
12)The Godfather: Part II-- Harry and the Potters
13)The Legacy of Odio-- In This Moment
14)Carry Your Cross and I'll Carry Mine-- Tiamat
15)Eva-- Nightwish
16)Nemo-- "
17)Frutto del Buio-- Blind Guardian
18)Amity (live)-- The Gathering
19)Adagio-- att. to Tomaso Albinoni

"fuck you" playlist
1)Curse of Fëanor-- Blind Guardian
2)Leader of the Rats-- Arch Enemy
3)We Will Rise (live)-- "
4)Bye Bye Beautiful-- Nightwish
5)Stick it to Dolores-- Harry and the Potters
6)(never) Do What You're Told-- The Remus Lupins
7)Fat Fatty Fuckin' Pigs-- The Underneath

and then i had one for October & there's one for Hetalia, which is shorter than it should be. it's only got england's & america's Maru Kaite Chikyuu on there, & both of england's character songs. i never go on the lj comm to see if anybody else's has come out, orto go back through the tags to get any more. & i never listen to "einsamkeit" anymore; ffff gomenne, doitsu. that would fit on the "sad" playlist or something; a hurr hurrrrrr.

and now it's almost 5 am. thursday night i actually fell asleep at 10, woke up at 3 for a second, then fell back to sleep until 5:30-ish. it was unprecedented.

and so now here i am, sleeping in till almost 2 pm on saturday & then staying up till 5 am sunday morning. but i had this stupid idea to do a sketchbook of drawings before i went to sleep, so i have to do that before i go & keel over. & they're self-portraits, too; why; i don't even like self-portraits. i hate looking at my fucking face. maybe that's why. that makes no sense, probably. orz

meanwhile, we set stuff on fire at the senator yesterday & it got really terrifying at one point. like as in, excuse me while i have visions of the place going up in flames as Gayle dropped the bowl to stamp out the fire. i took pictures & put them on facebook. here's one



o yeahhhhh

...going downstairs, just asked mother if we were doing anything interesting today. her mouth was full, so she looked like some sort of gerbil or something & she shook her head & i was like, why, & she shrugged. i just said it was lame. because it is. extremely lame. i'm tired of being stuck in this house because i can't drive & i don't have any friends around who do. i don't have any friends around period. but i'm sick of being stuck here & never having adventures & shit & doing the things you're told you're supposed to do via quotes from (sometimes dead) famous people (like Mark Twain) & i'm jealous of people who are actually out there living. i don't like this. i don't like life. i hate this, i hate it ALL. goddammit.

actually had an interesting dream yesterday that i remembered & wrote down a quicky kind of outline about & it didn't do too many weird things. it had a plot & characters, actually, & i knew things that were plot points & stuff, like the fact the protagonist had pretzel sticks would get her in trouble because she wasn't supposed to have pretzels.

i need to stop refreshing facebook & sleep. ooo anastasia sooong. i want that movie on dvd or smthg. oh hey something else i can put on my wish list. it is absurdly difficult to think of a christmas/birthday wishlist, & i get aggravated when people bug me about it

yeah, well

i've put on "america &/or england's character CD"

decipher THAT ohohohohoho <-sounds more like france oh god wat



i clearly need sleep & will regret this post in the morning.

OI, NOVEMBER.

YOU BETTER NOT SUCK AS HARD AS OCTOBER DID, YOU FUCKIN HEAR ME, SON?




The picture is semi-relevant to my feelings; haha.

October, you letdown.

This week has turned out to be bad in the way that a weekend won't remedy. And in varying degrees, as well: quietly as well as very noticably. And in ways that i don't know how they'll resolve, if at all.

Meanwhile, while at Barnes & Noble, saw a tall guy with the teeniest little coffee mug i think i've ever seen. Eee.

Kind of about that size & style.







And regular mugs:




And, lyrics that currently seem to fit how i feel at the moment, for the most part: these & these.