Perception of Body Mods

Since yesterday was my 18th birthday, I did what many teens do when they hit this milestone: I bought a lottery ticket and a lighter. Why? Because I can legally do it. But I also got to fulfill a wish of mine. I was finally able to sign my own name on the consent form to get a piercing. I got an industrial piercing in my ear and a stud in my nostril. I'd been dreaming of the day that I could do it for years, and it finally came. This got me thinking about how people perceive body modifications like tattoos and piercings. I got a pretty positive response to my new piercings, but I had a few friends tell me that they didn't like it. Now, I don't take it offensively, but it's interesting that they feel that way.

The majority of those who disapprove or dislike piercings are of the older generation (my mom said it was my decision, but she didn't like it). Why is that? The common perception and acceptance of body modifications are changing. It used to be a taboo, that only a certain "undesirable" set of the population got, but now more than 70% of Americans have more than one tattoo.

But the opinion is not shifting radically. Though having tattoos and piercings is more accepted, most people believe that they should not be visible, especially in a professional environment. In a 2001 online poll, 85% of 1,009  respondents believed that having a visible tattoo or piercing would hinder you in the workplace.

There is also a negative stigma associated with tattoos. With all other factors the same, a person will be given more negative descriptions if they have a visible tattoo than if they do not by an audience.

Is this a fair assessment? Coming from a young woman who now has 3 new holes in her body and is planning on having more and some ink under her skin: no. What is on the outside of your body and the way you choose to express it does not determine who you are as a person. But I'm interested to hear what you all think. Are body mods appropriate in all contexts or only in certain ones? Does a visible body mod change your opinion of someone? Leave your answers in the comments below!

Why do girls hate each other?

I have a confession. I have a little bit of a guilty pleasure: JennaMarbles on YouTube. And recently, she posted a video entitled "Why Girls Hate Each Other." Warning: her videos feature excessive profanity, but if you don't mind that, she has some really interesting things to say.

Jenna explains a phenomenon that many girls experience, but don't understand why. Girls are raised to be competitive with one another. If you're a girl, I'm sure you've experienced a time when you didn't feel as pretty as someone or thought that they dressed better than you, and hated or judged them for it. Women are constantly qualified and compared: you are nothing if you are not better than those around you.

And I'm not kidding, every girl has felt this way at one time in her life. Sociological Images posted another interesting blog about a meme of Marilyn Monroe, saying that the "new beautiful" (aka skinny) has replaced Marilyn's style of beauty (aka curvy).

But what purpose does this meme serve? Telling anyone who's not shaped like Marilyn that they're not beautiful. There are girls who are naturally skinny, like the photo on the right. And growing up, I could count myself into that category. I used to be made fun of for being "too skinny."And why? Probably because the girls who were saying that felt inferior (even though I in turn felt inferior to them).

Why is this exclusive to girls? Why do girls feel this need to be perfect all of the time? ItsKingsleyB***h on YouTube explains this phenomenon manifested in the females in his life:

One thing I find incredibly interesting about what he has to say is that he does not face these same pressures because he is a man. And this is true: men do not face the same pressures women do to be flawless at every hour of the day. The reason his female friends are putting on makeup to go out to the store? Because they feel like they have to. Because they can't be seen at less than their "best."

How do we stop this? I don't know the answer to that, but I can tell you how I personally combat these types of feelings. You have to love yourself more than you care about what others think about you. I know that's way easier said than done...I get it. But it's a process, and all it takes are baby steps to begin. Start reprimanding yourself for negative thoughts about your body or appearance. Don't let yourself think that you're not good enough. Be positive. If you train yourself to think that way, eventually it will start becoming true, even if it's not now.

Because every person is perfect exactly the way they are, and they should be able to do whatever they want. If you want to wear a full face of makeup for fun? Go ahead. But you also shouldn't be afraid to be seen without it. Crazy clothes? YEAH!

If you're interested in this type of mindset, I'd like to direct you to one of my favorite blogs, The Man Repeller. Part fashion, part feminism; Leandra focuses on wearing whatever she wants, bonus points if it makes men run screaming.

And I'm interested to hear what you think about this subject? Is there a way to combat this mindset on a macro level? What about in your daily lives? What do you think?

Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson

I know I'm a little late on the bandwagon, but over my winter break I decided to pick up Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson. Many of you may have read it, but I'd like to offer a little different viewpoint on the novel than the typical technology lens. To begin with, I highly recommend reading this book. It offers a very enlightening view into our generation's great innovator's life and work. Walter Isaacson is a fantastic writer, and he definitely brings Jobs' story to life. And as a proud Apple addict, reading about all of the work Jobs and the rest of his team put into the products that rule my life only makes me appreciate them more.

But the thing that I most took away from this was how much work and thought was placed into the design and aesthetics of each and every Apple product. Steve Jobs was a maniac when it came to even the smallest part of a product's design. When the first Macintosh came out, he agonized over the little details of the title bars and fonts, and when another engineer called him out on how nitpicky he was being, he replied, "Can you imagine looking at that every day? It's not just a little thing, it's something we have to do right." It's not something you probably think often about, but looking at an ugly screen for an entire day would not be particularly pleasant.

I've always romanticized Apple products, and this just gave justification to that. From the moment that you open the box of a new iProduct, the aesthetic experience is engineered to be as good as it can be. And even the parts that you can't see are made to be beautiful. Steve Jobs learned from his carpenter father that, "When you're a carpenter making a beautiful chest of drawers, you're not going to use a piece of plywood on the back, even though it faces the wall and nobody will ever see it. You'll know it's there, so you're going to use a beautiful piece of wood on the back. For you to sleep well at night, the aesthetic, the quality,has to be carried all the way through," and this mantra informed his entire design philosophy.

Even in his most frail days before receiving a liver transplant, Jobs was fixated with products looking good. While under heavy anesthesia, he refused to wear a mask because it was ugly and made the doctors bring him different choices. This is extreme, but it is what we have to thank for the beauty that is the iPod, iPhone, iPad, and Mac computers.

Whether you're interested in technology, aesthetics, or just are fascinated or intrigued by the genius that is Steve Jobs, I would highly recommend picking this book up. Jobs had such an impact on our society, and I believe that this biography was a great representation of the man that founded one of the most influential technology companies in the world.

BLACK PEOPLE IN THE HUNGER GAMES?!

By now many of you have probably read the novel The Hunger Games. If you haven't, here's a quick synopsis. There has been a huge uproar in the fandom about the characters Cinna and Rue, who many pictured to be white. I'm willing to admit that I can count myself into those who imagined these characters as white. But let's take a look at how they are described in the books.

Cinna:

"I'm taken aback by how normal he looks...But Cinna's close-cropped hair appears to be its natural shade of brown. He's in a simple black shirt and pants. The only concession to self-alteration seems to be metallic gold eyeliner that has been applied with a light hand. It brings out the flecks of gold in his green eyes" (Collins 63).

And yet people are AGHAST that Lenny Kravitz is cast as Cinna. The only contradictory detail I could find in the trailer vs the book's description was the color of his eyes, which are hard to tell exactly but look very much like they are brown.

Rue:

"...a twelve-year-old girl from District 11. She has dark brown skin and eyes, but other than that, she's very like Prim in size and demeanor" (Collins 45).

And again, Rue, since she is constantly described by Katniss as being very much like Prim, was assumed to be young, white, and blonde, though it is clearly stated in the book that she has "dark brown skin."

And to end this confusion all together, a little bit from an interview with the author of The Hunger Games, Suzanne Collins:

Some readers have expressed real frustration that white actors were cast in the roles of Katniss and Gale, who they felt were clearly described as biracial in the book. Do you understand or share any of that dismay Suzanne?
SC: They were not particularly intended to be biracial. It is a time period where hundreds of years have passed from now. There’s been a lot of ethnic mixing. But I think I describe them as having dark hair, grey eyes, and sort of olive skin. You know, we have hair and makeup. But then there are some characters in the book who are more specifically described.
GR: Thresh and Rue.
SC: They’re African-American.
So will those roles go to black actors?
GR: Thresh and Rue will be African-American. It’s a multi-racial culture and the film will reflect that. But I think Suzanne didn’t see a particular ethnicity to Gale and Katniss when she wrote it, and that’s something we’ve talked about a lot.

Why is it that many people assume neutral gender as being white? Even I, as a bi-racial person, assumed that both of these characters were white, even though it was contradicted in the text of the novel. I'd like to explore more on this subject, which I will do in future blog posts. I'd also like to hear your thoughts on this issue. How do you feel about these casting decisions? If you've read The Hunger Games, is this how you imagined Rue and Cinna? What are your thoughts on white being a "neutral race?" Leave any insight you have in the comments below, I'd love to hear what you have to say!

Fashion in Politics

Appearance is a huge part of politics. Voters will not elect or support someone that does not look a certain way, and especially for women this is a huge issue. A male politician has a neutral dress option: dark suit, white shirt, tie. What does a female politician have? Nothing of the sort. Women are constantly being judged based on what clothes they are wearing, not what new revolutionary or intellectual ideas that they have. Voters want someone that looks put together, that looks appropriate, and does not dress too "out there." Take Condollezza Rice for example, she wore a dark coat and heeled boots, and much of the American public was uncomfortable with her dressing "too sexy." This is an issue for female politicians in America. They are constantly judged based on what they wear.

Michelle Obama has worked hard on a national campaign to fight child obesity while serving as First Lady, but when she steps out most of the headlines about her are related to what she chose to wear. This is unfortunate for her because it shifts the focus of whatever she does to her attire, and if it is not deemed appropriate then it doesn't matter what she originally set out to do, because all eyes are on the clothes. To give Mrs. Obama quite a bit of credit, though, I think that she has done wonderful things to choose her clothing very wisely. She recognizes the position that she is in, and has not only showcased up and coming designers like Jason Wu, who designed her dress for the Inaugural Ball, but she has worn very affordable and modest clothing, so that a typical American woman has even a hope of being able to emulate her. This is a very smart move politically as well, because she seems much more relatable when you have the same cardigan in your closet that the First Lady is wearing to lunch.

And finally,what "fashion and politics" blog post would be complete without discussing Hillary Clinton? The current Secretary of State has come under probably the most fire than any other female politician about her attire. There are many a blog post on the internet bashing Hillary's fashion choices, regardless of what she may have been doing to better America. The critical language used is astonishing:

"Nice try with those chic shades, Hill but not even Jackie O could salvage this look from the depths of frumpiness. The retro braided headband is bad enough, but the boxy black jacket is not helping Hillary's cause. We just hope Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd was not as horrified by this look as we are." 

She really just can't catch a break, can she? No matter that she was conducting State business with Australia, she should be dressed perfectly as well. Even Tim Gunn, one of the very prominent (and genius) mouthpieces of American fashion had some very critical words about Hillary:

“All these big, baggy menswear-tailored pantsuits. No, I’m really serious. She wears pantsuits that are really unflattering.”

Would the same be said if Barack Obama wore a poorly tailored suit? I doubt it.

And now I open it up to you, readers. What do you think about this? Is there a double standard surrounding fashion in politics in respect to gender? Is it fair to expect women to dress on a different standard than men? 

Islamic Dress

In my classes, we have been talking quite a bit about Islam, which prompted me to write a post about Islamic dress. Before I begin talking about anything, I want to clarify the different types of headscarves worn by Muslim women. Click here to be taken to a BBC page describing the different options for covering the head.

There have been moves in European nations (notably France) to ban the burka or niqab. Many people, when reading this news, assume that they are trying to ban headscarves all together. This is not the case: they are attempting to ban garments that completely obscure the face.

This seems to make sense, right? You would be hard pressed to be able to tell the difference between two women wearing a burka. These measures would be instituted for security reasons, you need to be able to see a person's face to identify them, which is important for public safety reasons.

But is this an issue of taking away someone's religious freedoms? Many people say no: they are freeing Islamic women from having to wear an oppressive garment. But there are Muslim women who disagree. Christina Michelmore, an associate professor of history at Chatham College said, "I think that for many young women, it's a symbol they are attached to their culture, they're proud of their religion, and they see it as part of their identity as separate from this globalized McDonald's world" (full article that this is from here). Those Muslim women in the United States who choose to wear a veil do it because they want to, not because they feel that they must. They view it as a pious act to sacrifice for their religion.

Some women like wearing the veil, they say it is actually MORE liberating than going without. They do not have to worry what they present like on the outside, when people get to know them they know their true selves instead of how well they dress or how nice their hair looks on that day.

Is it strange that much of the outcry against the head coverings come from Western feminists? Maybe it is that since the veil is strange to us, it is automatically viewed as foreign and oppressive, because we do not understand the reasons that many Muslim women choose to wear the veil. I now open these ideas to you, readers, and ask: what do you think about the attempted banning of niqabs and burqas in some Western nations? How about wearing a veil in general? Do you feel that it is oppressive? And if there are any Muslim women (or men) reading this, I'd love to hear your opinions on the issue as well.

Thanks again for reading, and until next time,
Meghana

Color-Blind Casting

Today I'd like to talk a little bit about color-blind casting in both Broadway plays and Hollywood movies. This is an issue for both nonwhite actors and those who study and percieve racial inequalities in the United States (I'm going to stick to just the US, because there are other racial issues when moving to other countries). To begin to address this issue, the root starts at the scripts for movies and plays. This chart shows the breakdown of casting calls between June 1-August 31, 2006 for roles (not extras or stunt people):

Not only do the vast majority of specified roles go to white people, but almost half of all of the roles are unspecified roles that by default go to white people.

It's pretty easy to see the inequality here, but let's play a little devil's advocate and move to the other side of the issue. There are movies and plays that REQUIRE specific genders to increase the plot's meaning. Take a play/movie like Hairspray, for example. The plot hinges upon there being black and white characters. If Penny and Seaweed weren't a black man and white woman, would the song "Without Love" make any sense at all?

Let's look at some recent examples of mixed-race casting. One movie that recently came under fire was M. Night Shyamalan's The Last Airbender. This movie is based on the children's show Avatar: The Last Airbender, an animated show in which all of the main characters were Asian.

But in the live action movie version, most of the actors playing these characters were white. 

Shyamalan's response? He actually WAS practicing color blind casting: he chose which actors he thought best for the main roles, regardless of their race. He claimed that the anime style of the original series left the race of the main characters open for interpretation, and he took the artistic interpretation he was allowed as director. 

And sometimes, white actors are chosen to play non-white characters. Angelina Jolie, who usually looks like this:

Played Marlane Pearl, a French reporter with Afro-Cuban and Dutch heritage in the film A Mighty Heart. Jolie's skin and hair were darkened for the role, so that she more resembled Pearl.

But Jolie was selected by Pearl herself, believing that Jolie would provide the most integrity to the role.

So my question to you, readers, is:
Should color-blind casting always be practiced? Sometimes? Never? When is it appropriate?
Feel free to leave your thoughts on color-blind casting vs traditional, race-specified casting in the comments.

As always, thanks for reading!!
Meghana