What if No One's Watching?

Jess asked:

What is your number one favorite blog to read and/or what blog do you check most often?

You'd think this would be a fairly straightforward question, but it isn't. There are about 50 blogs I "check" daily using my feed reader. The photo blog Chookooloonks is a favorite. I read anything new at The Adventures of Leelo and his Potty-Mouthed Mom with great joy. I love it when Krup has a new post up at The Edit Barn.

What are you? (I.e. how do you primarily identify? What pops into your head as the first answer to that question?)

This has changed as I've aged. At one time I would have used words including "feminist" and "bisexual." Now the first things that come to mind are geography ("Pacific Northwestern" or "Oregonian") and class ("class straddler, " maybe). Then I think of relationships--"daughter," "sister," "partner," "friend." It's not that I've gotten less political as a person, but as I've gotten older I have realized that my true core identity is often about things that came before politics in my life.

What one thing are you most proud of?

Wow, that's a huge question. The first thing that comes to mind is my educational attainment, but really, I think I'm more proud of the dog rescue work we've done.

Jenny asked:

1. In general (or personally), what do you think the connection is between body image and tattoos is? I mean, I feel like part of not getting tattoos personally is not wanting them to get messed up when my body changes, so the confluence of body image/tattoo posts made me think of this....

Hrm...I'm not sure about a general answer, but I can try to answer personally. Changes in my tats as my body changes isn't something I've really worried about so far, though the ones I have are mostly in places where they're not likely to change much. I think of them as markers of time and history, though, so I think that I'd really be OK with them changing as I age.

On the broader subject of body image, I am finding that using tats to highlight areas of my body I'm not comfortable with is oddly making me more comfortable with them. I have an ankle tat and an upper arm tat, and my ankles and arms are two of my "fat" areas. If I love the tats on them, though, I still want to show them off. So that's nice.

2. You mentioned potentially leaving Austin, and something that has always personally been an issue for me re: moving is "moving for someone." Even in the best of relationships, I have now broken it off because I cannot move for an SO. It is totally a repulsive idea to me even if I could potentially be reasonably employed/have my own life. Even though this is not your situation necessarily, my question is, how can any woman rectify moving with a partner somewhere (because of their partner's job/their life) and yet also not feel like a big ass old tymey follower? I ask you particularly because you identify way more (or say, at all) with feminism and I do not, and yet pretty much every self-described feminist I know (broad, but true generalization) is totally okay with this moving for people thing when I have this ridiculously adverse reaction to it.

Well, I think moving to a place you know you don't want to live "for" someone would be pretty rough to reconcile, especially long-term. For Mark and I, it's more of a collaborative effort. For example, though we narrowed down the list of possibilities together, I ultimately chose to move here--it wasn't Mark's first choice. Where we end up next will be in large part determined by his post-doc, but there are a list of places that aren't under consideration at all because I simply won't live there. So you have to decide together.

As far as feminism is concerned...any time a woman makes a decision based on what is best for the man in her life rather than what is best for her, it makes me twitchy. However, I don't think "following" someone to a different geographic location is necessarily that type of decision--it really depends on context. And other decisions that may not seem so self-sacrificing at face value can end up being even more so, too.

3. How can some animals lives be totally important and worth fighting for (i.e. dogs) and yet others (i.e. rats, chickens, insects, cows) not? What is the difference between them? And if the difference is say, some species cause harm, then why isn't it justified to kill all animals that harm people including, say, dogs that bite kids.

Honestly, I think the major difference is human design. We have designed some animals (chickens, cows) to be food sources, some to be pests (insects, rats) and some to be companions (dogs, cats). Ultimately, we make the rules. Which isn't to say it is "fair" or "right"--just that it is how things go. I think it's naive to argue that some animals have a greater inherent worth than others--they have the worth we've assigned them.

Coming up...my questions for Jess and Jenny!