Femslash February Friday: A Classic

Welp, Femslash February is just about over, which is sad.

The good news, however, is that Femslash Friday will continue. It is an election year, and I'm not sure we will make it through the news cycle and political bullshit without additional femslash in our lives.

Today, in honor of the month, I bring you a classic. This one's a Xena/Gabrielle fan video to the tune of "Holding Out for a Hero."

Because aren't we all, in these desperate times?

Content note: If you watch it. you will officially become more lesbian for doing so. No, I mean, even if you're not a lesbian, because I know there are those of you who read here who aren't lesbians, and I certainly don't want to erase you!

I truly believe we can all be united in harmony here in Fannie's Room around a shared appreciation for femslash. High fives all around!

And, I have to say, it makes me especially happy that some of my potential bigot readers might become more lesbian.

But seriously, it's just that it's scientifically proven that watching a fan video that was at one time a Xena Convention Winner will result in slight shifts in one's place on the Kinsey Scale.

(Hey, people have claimed homosexuality is "caused" by worse things, yeah?)

Twitter Takes Steps to Address Safety; Jerks Flounce

Related to my ongoing interest in Internet civility, Twitter has recently announced the formation of a Trust & Safety Council. From Twitter's blog post about it:

As we develop products, policies, and programs, our Trust & Safety Council will help us tap into the expertise and input of organizations at the intersection of these issues more efficiently and quickly. In developing the Council, we are taking a global and inclusive approach so that we can hear a diversity of voices from organizations including: 

• Safety advocates, academics, and researchers focused on minors, media literacy, digital citizenship, and efforts around greater compassion and empathy on the Internet; 

• Grassroots advocacy organizations that rely on Twitter to build movements and momentum; 

• Community groups with an acute need to prevent abuse, harassment, and bullying, as well as mental health and suicide prevention.

The devil will be in the details of implementation, of course, but it is heartening to see a major social media company actually putting thought and resources into addressing the safe use of its platform.

Of course, some are already concern-trolling the decision, as can be expected anytime a forum purports to address civility, with the usual whinging about political correctness run amok and the threat to free speech.

Conservative/Actor/Gamergate um "personality"/opponent of "political correctness" (because of course) Adam Baldwin recently flounced from Twitter, linking to an absurd article about Twitter's Trust & Safety Council published at libertarian/conservative site The Federalist. A few other similar folks who shall remain nameless have also flounced apparently.

*shrug*

Well. Gotta say, I'm all in favor of jerks flouncing from social media platforms.  Truly.  It just saves some woman from having to take time out of her day to teach a jerk on-demand feminism, defend herself from harassment, or be a jerk whisperer.

Besides, how many thousands of women have quit Twitter due to harassment and safety concerns?  Our Fantabulous Free Speech Avengers never bring up the speech lost due to harassment and unbridled free speech/Anything Goes policies.

No matter what the policies are, someone's voice is always going to be silenced.  It's just a matter of whose and what kind of speech we collectively value more.

Quote of the Day

"...[M]ale writers don’t receive critical attention because they are good; they get coverage in the New York Review of Books because they are men."  -Eva Jurczyk, writing at The Awl

Welp, I hope your interest is sufficiently piqued, even if in a #NotAllMen sort of way, to read the article.

In it, Jurczyk discusses her belief that the publishing industry has widespread biases against women writers and her subsequent decision to, moving forward, only review books written by women.

HOO BOY THE COMMENTS!!! 

Her decision, of course, is being decried in the comment section as sexism.  And, well, maybe it is. And maybe that's okay, at least until the publishing industry stops granting male writers a disproportionate share of unearned, unmerited kudos, contracts, and recognition.

Indeed, her approach seems born by the lived frustration and experience of seeing one too many crappy dude-authored tomes lauded while better female-authored books barely received mentions (she recounts one female writer submitting a manuscript under a female name and getting two requests back, and submitting the same manuscript under a male name and getting seventeen, for instance).

By reviewing books only by women, she suggests she's doing her small part to upend "hundreds of years of ingrained inequity."

I agree.

Related: My Year of Reading Only Women Writers

Sexism as "Under the Conscious"? Hmm, Cute.

Via The Washington Post:

"After surveying roughly 1,700 students across three biology courses, they found young men consistently gave each other more credit than they awarded to their just-as-savvy female classmates. 

Men over-ranked their peers by three-quarters of a GPA point, according to the study, published this month in the journal PLOS ONE. In other words, if Johnny and Susie both had A's, they’d receive equal applause from female students — but Susie would register as a B student in the eyes of her male peers, and Johnny would look like a rock star. 

'Something under the conscious is going on,' Grunspan said. 'For 18 years, these [young men] have been socialized to have this bias.'

Being male, he added, “is some kind of boost.” At least in the eyes of other men."

Unfortunately, my perusal (n=1) of comments following various articles about this study suggest that something very much above the conscious might also be a factor.

Now, obviously, I know the study's authors didn't base their study on Internet comments, but I'm troubled by the going out of one's way to not acknowledge that we live in a society with very explicit biases against women's competence.

That is, some men are just fucking sexist and very intentionally only see other men as their intellectual peers. This happens in college. It happens in workplaces. It happens in politics. It happens everywhere. Constantly assuming the best about men who hold such biases seems a leeeeetle, shall I say, "politically correct," yes?

Echidne breaks the study down, if you're interested. And is maybe nicer about it than me. My fucks to give about being nice about this shit have run out, officially.

Femslash February: Dragon Age Inquisition

In honor of queer Bioware fans (and my second Dragon Age: Inquisition play-through), today's Femslash February Friday is brought to you by the mixed-race, mixed-class romance between Sera and Female Qunari.

Sera is honestly one of my all-time favorite video game characters. During my first play-through as a human female mage, I took the relatively-easy route of romancing Josephine at first, but ultimately broke up with her to pursue Sera.

What can I say, at first Sera seemed like Drama with a capital "D," but over time, she proved herself to be, not just a humorous addition to the team, but more complicated a personality than first impressions might lead one to think.



Plus, there's something about being on adventurous missions in caves, abandoned fortresses, and hissing wastes that time and time again turns into a romantic bonding experience.

While playing as female Qunari, I've been building Sera up as an archer rogue, which is quite handy (when I played as a mage, I built Sera up as a dagger rogue). So, in addition to being an accomplished baker, Sera is also a skilled fighter.  And meanwhile, what all is Josephine even doing for the cause?

Okay, so lots of important diplomatic stuff.  But still. Sera. Woof!

Quote of the Day: On Benevolently Sexist Laws

"Amici are historians of the United States, whose research focuses on the lives of women. This brief, based on decades of study and research by amici, aims to provide accurate historical perspective on laws claiming to protect women. From their vantage point as historians, amici wish to point out the constraints on women’s liberty and equality in laws that purport to protect women, by sketching the long history of such laws and showing that intentions to protect had the effect of restricting women’s choices and undermining their dignity as full citizens."

- via the Brief (PDF) submitted by historians in Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt, contesting a Texas law designed to shut down most health clinics that provide abortion services in the state. 

If you have time to read it all, it's a worthwhile account of the US legal system's history of paternalistic "benevolent sexism" toward women. Examples cited include coverture, by which a woman's legal identity was incorporated into her husband's, and women's exclusion from political and occupational spheres.... for their own benefit.

Such laws often relied on arguments that stated, in various ways, that women (weak, dependent, intellectually incompetent) were as a class "opposite" of men (strong, autonomous, intellectually competent). This framing of the genders was taken, as it is still often is, as a commonsense truth that barely required proof.

Similarly, the Texas law at issue in the above case purports to protect the health and welfare of women seeking abortions in the state, and recounting the history of such paternalism, the brief ultimately argues that such laws ought to be carefully scrutinized "to assess whether its ostensibly protective function actually serves to deny liberty and equal citizenship to women."

Femslash February Friday: Antiheros

The antihero, the dictionary tells us, is "a central character in a story, movie, or drama who lacks conventional heroic attributes."  Wikipedia currently tells us that conventional heroic attributes include "idealism, courage, and morality." TV Tropes tell us the antihero leans toward the cynical side of the so-called "Sliding Scale of Idealism Versus Cynicism."

I like that.

However, the truth is, however we define them, I'm of the opinion that the line between hero and antihero is a thin, subjective one. Is there any hero who is the perfect archetype of hero?   Every hero has their weakness, their lapse in judgment, their mistakes.

To me, I know an antihero when I get the feeling (a) they might be, at any given moment, on the verge of going rogue; and (b) they engage in questionably-moral actions for what is perhaps a noble purpose.

Mostly, I appreciate the antihero because they remind us that good v. bad is not always (or even often?) clear cut. That is not to say that all morals are relative, just that life is fucking complicated.

Perhaps because I too gravitate toward cynicism and have a strong appreciation for dark humor, antiheroes are some of my favorite characters in TV/Film.  I especially appreciate the female antihero as contrasted with the female character whose responsibility is to be perky, upbeat, and a moral compass of the show, however that is defined in the particular 'verse. It is a real life trope for women, as men's "opposite," to be morally responsible for keeping others, men especially, in line. The female antihero subverts that. She keeps no one in line. She barely keeps herself in line.

And, relevant to the Femslash February Friday theme, people, and by people I mean me, also love shipping the antihero.  Specifically, the damaged, cynical, brooding antihero with a more traditionally-noble hero.

Here are some of my favorites:

• Faith (Buffy the Vampire Slayer): 

Faith was, in some ways, Buffy's shadow character.  Buffy had a Scooby Gang who supported her survival and kept her sane. Faith was a loner.  Bitter and alienated, she was a legit villain at times. Even as a slayer, seemed to genuinely enjoy killing foes in a way that Buffy did not.

But, I'm a sucker for a redemption story, and Whedon a company delivered it in the final season. Faith continued to have questionable judgment, of course, but ultimately joined forces with Buffy in defeating the final big bad. 

Did you know that Faith/Buffy femslash is one of the top pairings at A03 in the Buffy fanfic archives? It is second in femslash pairings in the Buffyverse only to Willow/Tara.  Also, people are super into Xander/Spike, another antihero pairing.  

All of that is five by five with me.

• Tamsin (Lost Girl)

When Tamsin entered the Lost Girl 'verse in Season 3, I assumed she was being brought in as a competing love interest for Dyson, one of the main male characters. I was pleasantly surprised to find that  she was actually more interested in competing for Bo's interest, with Dyson and Lauren being her competitors.

Like many an antihero, Tamsin lends the appearance of giving zero fucks about most things or people while in reality her sensitive feelings are covered under a thick veneer of acting rude, carefree, and smart-assy.  She's the woman who'll tell someone to "eat a sack of tits" one day, and then the next wrap herself in a bow and give herself to someone for their birthday.

(Let's just re-imagine that scene for a moment, shall we? Or better yet, re-watch it):

Preferred ships include: Tamsin/Bo (#Doccubus) and (even better, in my opinion) Tamsin/Lauren (#CopDoc).

• Indra (The 100)

Now, I've watched The 100 since the beginning of the series and, I have to admit, until around mid-Season 2, I mostly thought of it as "teeny-bopper."  However, (Spoiler Alert), shit got legitimately real when Clarke killed Finn, the characters started making a ton of morally-questionable choices, and queerness became maintext.

Indra stands out to me as antihero for her decision to (Spoiler Alert) follow Lexa in abandoning their previous commitment to Clarke and the Sky People near the end of Season 2.  She was faced with an unenviable moral choice of (a) obeying her commander and breaking a promise versus (b) disobeying her commander and keeping a promise.

Perhaps we are all the antihero when faced with such choices. Perhaps I exaggerate.

Nonetheless, preferred pairing: Indra/Octavia.

• Jessica Jones (Jessica Jones)

Simply put, if an archetype exists for antihero, she is Jessica Jones.  She drinks too much, swears too much, and will legit smack a dude down if he barks at her to "smile" (and can we all watch when that happens?)  

Unlike (ahem) some male superheroes, there are no playboy mansions, butlers, or batmobiles. It's just Jessica, living in a hovel, not giving a bag of dicks what kinky shit other people are into as long as they're into it quietly.

Preferred Femslash Pairing: Jessica/Trish for the bad/good dynamic. Jessica/Hogarth for the bad/bad.

Add more antiheroes in the comments!

Male Commuter Rage

[Content note: Misogyny, misogynistic slurs, assault]

In this article, which I first saw in a Shakesville blogaround, really struck a chord with me.

In it, the male writer describes his experience of having long hair, being mistaken for a woman, and thus being on the receiving end of disproportionate levels of male road rage compared to when he was readily read as male.

Male rage at women in public is something I've long noticed in my 10+ years of commuting in a major city.  Just in the past month, I've seen the following "male commuter rage" incidents on public transportation (race and gender noted, because I think the dynamics are relevant):

• A white woman was trying to get off a crowded train by saying "Pardon me." Her tone was assertive and not what is typically thought of as, in my subjective opinion, "sweet." The white man who was standing in her way didn't move, so she repeated herself, this time more loudly. As she was leaving the train, the man shouted at her, "Fuck you, BITCH." As though he couldn't stand having to move for a mere woman.

• A white man was trying to get off a crowded train. Instead of using his words, he began shoving past people. He happened to knock into a black woman and her young, approximately 5-year-old, son. The woman yelled, "Watch it!"  The man turned around, stepped back into the train and, I shit you not, slapped the woman on the head. The woman then went after him and the train conductor yelled at them both to back off. The man left the train platform without further incident or being in any way questioned or detained.

• A white man was trying to get off a crowded train. Instead of using his words, he began throwing elbows as he passed people, to urge them out of the way. He ended up elbowing my spouse, a white woman, in the back pretty hard. He then exited the train without further incident.

I have dozens more examples witnessed over the years, which I could also share.

My point is that white men, especially, seem prone to feeling entitled to express their rage in public in ways that other groups are not.  I have literally never seen a woman start assaulting people on a train because they weren't moving out of her way fast enough. I have never heard a woman start screaming at people for merely being asked to move out of someone's way on a train.  I'm sure it has at some point in history happened. But, the sheer disproportionate numbers of men I have seen do these things compels me to believe that this is a gendered, and likely racial, phenomenon.*

Ultimately, such verbal and physical assaults seem similar to the anger that drives so many white men: The realization that all the resources/status/space/hot women that our male supremacist society engrained in them was uniquely their birthright was a lie. 

It turns out other people are human, too, and they/we also have places to go and shit to do of their /our own that might mean a white guy doesn't get to go to all of his important places in a completely un-impeded rose-petal-strewn path.

The horror.

[*Yes, I did do a cursory review of stats regarding road rage, and the studies I found in actual academic journals suggest that the expression of road rage is a male gendered thing.  See citations here, for instance - with 97% of the most serious incidents perpetrated by men.  Various "pop media" sources, like this Fox News article, try to present a counter-narrative where women are more ragey than men - citing an un-linked to CareerBuilder survey where people self-reported their "road rage."  Really, I think a lot of people joke about having "road rage," so I would be skeptical of the self-reported survey. That could mean anything from "I beat people up for how they drive" to "I get annoyed when people don't use their blinker."  A key distinction in these studies is whether the road rage is actually expressed and acted upon - and it seems men are more likely to act on it, even if we all get pissed now and then.]

A Space Alien's Take on the CDC Alcohol Guidelines for Fetal Incubators

[Content note: cissexism, heterocentrism]

You may have heard of the CDC's recent guidance regarding "Alcohol and Pregnancy."

A snippet:

"It is recommended that women who are pregnant or might be pregnant not drink alcohol at all. FASDs do not occur if a developing baby is not exposed to alcohol before birth. 

Women can:"

There's then a bunch of pixels spent telling women what they can do to prevent fetal alcohol syndrome, and telling health care providers what they should tell women to do to prevent fetal alcohol syndrome. Included is the much-maligned gem, in which the CDC recommends that health care providers "advise a woman to stop drinking if she is trying to get pregnant or not using birth control with sex."

Sex is not defined. The assumption seems to be that sexually-active women are engaging in penis-in-vagina sex - so, when I say yes to a health care provider who asks if I'm sexually-active, the CDC is advising health care providers to advise me to not drink because I, a lesbian, might accidentally get pregnant. And let me tell you, I have been oh-so-helpfully advised by more health care providers than you might imagine about "birth control" because they assume people are engaging in hetero sex until explicitly told otherwise. Is it odd to educate your health care providers? It is, right? And, trans people are assumed to be non-existent. Thanks CDC for servicing these narratives!

Anyway, my point here isn't to debate whether or not women should drink alcohol while, or while not, pregnant. Rather, the focus today is the guidances' prescriptive tone toward women solely.

If I were, say, an alien from space reading this guidance as a way to learn more about humanity I would think, Okay, clearly fetuses are transferred from the aether and into the womb due solely to the efforts of people with uteri, whom apparently are fetal incubators for humanity.  It does not actually take two humans for human reproduction to happen!

And furthermore, I would think that this arrangement is why the CDC guidance does not also include guidance to people with sperm who, say, may engage in sexual activities with people with uteri on how they too may help prevent fetal alcohol syndrome (e.g. - "Don't have sex with a woman who has been drinking without using birth control" or, simply, "Don't have sex with a woman who has been drinking" or, I don't know be creative, since we're apparently limiting people's personal rights here).

The point is that the suggestion is that people with sperm, it seems, are irrelevant to the baby-making process.  In an argument that parallels "advice" surrounding sexual assault "prevention," pregnancy is something that "happens to" women.  Where is any concurrent preventative advice to men? Are all the men just fucking each other? I'm cool with that.

The guidance also discusses the harms of "drinking too much" for "women" in general - which, okay, but is there a concurrent guide discussing how alcohol also harms men in general?  I did a cursory search and didn't see one. Could this be an instance of sexism against both women and men? Oooh, perhaps! Feminists and MRAs unite! (insert mirthless laughter)

Nonetheless, the stated harms of drinking too much for women in general include: "injuries/violence" and "unintended pregnancy." 

Here, I would then envision, if I were an alien, that the mechanism by which the unintended impregnating happens is that, apparently, beer bottles jump out of women's hands, knock them over the heads, and then proceed to implant fetuses into them?

Don't you just hate when both "impregnation" and "violence" "happen to" you? Thanks CDC! I'll .... keep all of this in mind?

(#WhatAboutTheMenz?)

A Movie Non-Review

Via AfterEllen, Djuna Barnes' 1928 book about her Parisian lesbian social circle, The Ladies' Almanack, is being made into a movie:

Aren't we all a little bit that woman in the middle, stuck between understanding a Djuna Barnes plot and deciding whether to enter an awkward threeway?

I must watch it immediately, for entertainment and blog reasons.

But also, I admit that I read Barnes' Nightwood and understood maybe 10% of it.  That is to say, post-modern literature is probably not for me.  I did, however, greatly enjoy Andrea Weiss' more literal account of the Paris scene in her book, Paris Was a Woman.

Femslash February: Giant Lady Houses

When I was but a wee lesbian, I think I often imagined that as an adult I would live in a large house with a bunch of other women.

Sort of like a sorority for grown-ups where one did not have to attend frat parties or "rush" to get into (is "rush" the right lingo, I don't know). Honestly, I'm still not entirely convinced that one day I won't find myself living in such a situation. Even if it's at a retirement home for queer women. Which would be entirely amazing.

Anyway, some of my favorite examples of group female living scenarios from TV/Film include:

• The Rockford Peaches' house from A League of Their Own.  Sigh. All those baseball players and not one lesbian or bisexual gal? I don't buy it! You know Doris was tip-toeing to Ellen Sue and/or All the Way Mae's bedroom after their nights out at the Sudsbucket

• Nonnatus House from Call the Midwife.  Nuns + Nurses + Uniforms  + Simple, Communal Living + Do-Goodism = queer lady catnip. I just started Season 4 of this series and am glad the show is finally introducing an overt same-sex relationship. But will it end well?!

• The Barden Bellas' house in Pitch Perfect 2.  When Beca briefly left Chloe for the Kommisar, do you think they made the giant German sled down the steps? Ja/Nein.

• Miss Robichaux's House in American Horror Story: Coven. A Caveat. Imagine a different version, in which Queenie is the obvious Supreme and, instead of competing with each other, the witches join forces with Marie Laveau and legit take down the patriarchy.  In this scenario, I would also write myself in as Mary Sue/Advisor/Lover of Cordelia Foxx.

I am missing some, and I was going to include Orange is the New Black, but a key characteristic I think is that the living arrangement be voluntary. Although, I will admit that the whole prison/jail theme seems to be a lesbian/bisexual trope/fantasy of sorts.

Additions?

The Case of the Invisible, Non-Existent Misogyny!

It is a truism that literally every article, social media post, or tweet a woman makes saying some variation of how Hillary Clinton can be criticized but misogynistic attacks should be off limits will result in at least one male commenter feeling the need to contribute a claim that, while he does in fact hate Hillary Clinton, it is for other reasons that do not involve her gender, reasons that he does not, by special lucky chance, hate male politicians for.

The implication with this contribution to the convo is that (a) he, the man, does not require introspection into whether he might, in fact, have any inherent, subtle sexism shaping the way he compares male versus female politicians, and (b) women are mostly being irrational/paranoid/hysterical for suggesting some people might hate Clinton because of her gender.

2016 is shaping up to be a neat election cycle, isn't it?

In case you were wondering I will be voting for Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries.

I'm not super interested in debating that, but I will elaborate that (a) I believe she is by far the most qualified candidate of all parties; (b) I'm a pragmatist, so as much as I might agree with Sanders' agenda, I think his capacity to implement his vision will be limited given how the legislative process actually works; and (c) I think Sanders' more radical vision for the US would end up making him less electable than Clinton in the general election versus the Republicans.

That said, if Sanders' wins the primaries, I would vote for him over any of the garbage Repulican contenders, obvs.

Don't worry, tomorrow will feature some femslash fun.

MRAs Plan Social Meetups

[Content note: misogyny, transphobia, homophobia]

It's being reported that Men's Rights Activists (MRAs) are planning in-person meetups for each other, organized by a popular "pick-up artist."

From DNAinfo, I just have two items of note:

1) One stated purpose is for the men (heterosexual and cis only, guys!) to build meaningful relationships with one another. Because apparently they have trouble with that. Which I'm sure is a shock to literally everyone reading this.

2) The other purpose is:

By meeting in person, the men can more strongly connect and bond, as well as reaffirm their beliefs about "the enemy" — more specifically, the women they are trying to "pick up."

Here, I note that the framing of women as "the enemy" of men is an outgrowth of the belief that men and women are "complementary" or "opposites." This Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus worldview is accepted as "common sense" and advocated by many conservatives, anti-feminists, and MRAs in service of both sexism and homophobia.

If men are allies with one another, then  under this way of thinking of course women are their opponents, who must be "conquered" through seduction, dishonesty, and/or force.

It is with irony that I further note here the popular MRA talking point about Andrea Dworkin and /or Catherine MacKinnon as having believed some variation of how "all heterosexual sex is rape."

Like so many things patriarchal, that claim seems to be a projection of many MRAs beliefs: Female consent to heterosexual sex is unfair to men, which constitutes oppression, which means men should find ways to undercut consent. Extending the sexual entitlement further, their distinction between sex and rape becomes marginal. The subtext is not only "heterosexual sex is rape," but "heterosexual sex must be, should be, rape."

Have fun at your gathering, bro-dudes.

Claire Danes: Epic Crier

Today's post is dedicated to that feeling of when you at first are elated that Donald Trump did not win the Republican Iowa Caucus but then you quickly realize that that means one of the other nightmare Republican contenders did and that, specifically, that winner turned out to be arch-villain Ted Cruz.

Has there ever been a contest wherein all Republican candidates give you more heebie-jeebies than does Pennywise the Dancing Clown from It? Has there ever been candidate more hated than Cruz, who is hated even among a virtual who's who assemblage of other Republican jerks?

Now, I also feel the need to precede this post by saying that I adore Claire Danes as an actor.

Her portrayal of Angela Chase in My So-Called Life was instrumental in helping me realize that I am a lesbian. Now, yes, I know you're thinking I say that about literally every attractive woman I write about, but I mean it.  I also think she's done a fabulous job in her other work too, particularly Temple Grandin and Homeland.

 

Claire Danes crying on screen is, like, one of my constants in life, whether it's about Jordan Catalano (or, seriously, Rayanne Graff), or Leo DiCaprio (or Rayeann Graff), or Brody (or Rayanne Graff).

And serious kudos, because I don't think I could do the on-demand crying, myself.

For one, I'm not an actor. And two, I'm not what is referred to as "particularly expressive with my emotions." I doubt an audience would find my genuine crying face all that different from my typical resting face, which if you can believe it is not actually bitchy.

So, today, I'd like to invite you to sit back and appreciate Claire Danes, crying for pay.