Main

Other People's Blogs Archives


November 27, 2003

I am so thankful.

This has been an amazing Thanksgiving. Mark and I did a great job with the food and we've just had a wonderful day. I'm really really happy we decided to stay home and just have it be us. We even gave Chancey a big plate of food, which he demolished in 30 seconds or so. It was hysterical. And Mark and I both conked out for like two hours after dinner. We're going to be eating leftovers for a month.

In a more general way, though, I am very thankful for my life. Things are going well. In general, I am happy and healthy and stable and secure. Mark and I are doing wonderfully and we feel permanent to me. I'm worried about my mom's back, but there is really nothing I can do about that from here, so I should try not to worry about it more than I have to. Hopefully she can have the surgery while I am in Oregon over Christmas. I want to be able to help her...

My presentations this week have stressed me out, but things are going very well. I am really happy with both of my groups. Group work experiences have been so up-and-down (mostly down) for me in the past, group work was something I was really worried about at LBJ, and I these experiences have made me feel much better about it. This is good.

I'm attempting to get my internship requirement for the summer waived. I'll try to do an internship anyway, but if I do it for credit, as is required, I have to pay out-of-state tuition on it, which amounts to about $2,000. That's a huge fucking waste. So hopefully they will waive me on the basis of the work I am doing at Texans Care now. I doubt they will, but it's worth a try. That will mean I have to take one more class next year, but that's really no big deal, especially since it won't change my tuition costs (and I get a waiver on the out-of-state portion for the academic year). If I get the waiver it will also allow me to be more creative in what I decide to do for the summer. So I'm going to finish the waiver app this weekend and hope for the best.

It's amazing how cold it feels in here when it's 53 degrees outside. My feet are like icecubes.

Mark is doing better this week with work/school stuff too, which is really nice. I worry that he'll resent me if he doesn't like it here. I know he likes Austin, but the school thing is so mixed. I have high hopes for Hitoshi's lab, though. Hitoshi came over the night for a few minutes. He's really funny. Japanese James Cagney is exactly the right way to describe him.

I haven't been writing in my blog as much lately because I have been busy, but there has been another reason as well. I have blog-envy. I read Flea's blog and it's so damn good--interesting, funny, well-written...makes me wonder why I bother with it when all I do is blab on and on about my not-very-interesting life. Then I feel really stupid for my envy, because honestly, I don't want a kid that puts shitty underwear in my coffee pot*. And if I had one, I don't think I'd find the energy to write about it like Flea does. I really admire her.

Anyways...blabber blabber blabber. Mark is on the phone with his parents. Chance is curled up on the floor. All is good.

But I need to go put some socks on.

* Actually, I just don't want a kid. The shitty underwear and the coffee pot are side issues. And I don't even have a coffee pot.


December 16, 2003

On the blog I post on with my group of college friends, we've begun to talk elections. The more I post and read their posts, the more concrete my position seems. I am still working it all out in my head, but the bottom line is that I don't really support the Democrats. That isn't exactly big news--I haven't been registered Dem for years--but I *really* don't support them. I'm not sure we'd be in a much better position than we are now if Gore had taken office three years ago. I'm not sure we'll be in a much better position a few years from now if Dean somehow manages to win. I'm not sure there is much difference whatsoever between the animated corpses on the "right" and those on the "left."

I sound so stupid when I get started on this, but sometimes I think we're on our way to the revolution, and the only way we're going to get there is with four or eight or twelve or sixteen more years of bad conservative government. We're so fat and lazy, so apathetic and uninformed, it is no wonder we are in this position. The question is what will it take to shake us out of it? What will it take before the people demand real choices, before we demand a return to our civil liberties, before we demand that this country become what it could be?

In some ways, I hope that things *will* get worse, so that they can get better. This particular equilibrium is just not OK with me.

But then I wonder how much worse, and I get scared just like everyone else. I wonder how willing I am to fight if things do get bad. If abortion is outlawed, will I work on the underground? Will the line I draw between peaceful protest and actual organized resistance blur? When? How can I call for revolution when I'm not sure that I myself am willing to come out of my complacency and help it happen? Given how complacent I am, why don't I just shut up and register Dem and vote the-lesser-of-two-evils like everyone else?


February 6, 2004

So I just made a couple of mistakes.

The first was to try the Teddy Grahams again.

The second was, as I was travelling through blogs and ljs I hadn't read in a while, go to the lj of this particularly vile little person whom I have encountered a bit online at a message board where I used to post. VLP (as I'll call her here) has made it clear on her lj that she reads the blogs of several of my online friends--she makes nasty and completely inappropriate comments about them on her lj. I was dimly aware of this, as it had been brought to my attention before, but hadn't given it a ton of thought.

However.

Her latest entry said something really fucking horrible about someone I really like, using information gleaned from an entry on the best blog I've ever read. Not only did she use the term "white trash," which is just fucking unacceptable in any context, but she took a really low shot at someone who is obviously doing the best she can, and the best she can seems to me to be a pretty damn good job.

I honestly don't get what's up with VLP. Why in the world would she waste her time and energy reading blogs of people she professes to hate (as much as you can "hate" anyone you are only acquainted with online) and then bashing them? Is she really that desperate for blog-fodder?

(Here you might ask if *I* am really that desperate for blog-fodder, but I do actually have a point in recounting this, so be patient--I'll get there.)

So, in my infinite sick-person rationality, I start yeling at VLP when I read this. Really yelling--top of my lungs and all that.

And then it hits me.

She isn't here. I don't *know* her. I'm screaming at a goddamn computer screen. This is just as ineffectual as it is when I watch Shrub on TV and scream at him. All it does is make my throat sore and scare the dog.

At what point in our development as cyber-people, or at least in my personal development (not that I believe for a second that nobody else does this...) did shit that happens online take on this reallife quality? I remember when I first started posting at my first message board, quite some time ago--it was fun precisely because it had nothing to do with my real life. It was something invented, like a story or (I can't believe I'm about to admit this) like playing an RPG. It was completely seperate from reality, and I could and did turn it off whenever I chose. I certainly didn't think I had personal relationships with any of the other posters, good or bad. Good ones amused me the same way characters I like on a TV show might, and bad ones irritated me like Raymond (yes, I hate Raymond--everybody may love Raymond, but I hate him. OK?). It was simpler.

Now, however, there are people I know from online to whom I have real-world attachments. Amd I'm not just talking about speaking to them on the phone or sending them packages through the real-world slow-ass snail mail. I'm talking about people whose lives I care about, who I think about not as sympathetic characters, but as friends. Conversely, things that make me mad "online" or people like VLP who are obviously just shit-spewers affect me in a way they wouldn't have previously. They aren't something I'm watching--they are part of my life.

Ultimately I think this is a good thing. I was never 100% comfortable with the role-playing version, and I like the opportunity the Internet affords us to build relationships beyond geographic contraints. I think it helps with making friends of a greater variety of ages, backgrounds, etc. But I'd be lying if I said it didn't come with a price, and the price, for me, has recently been sleepless nights and more immediately been the feeling of futility one experiences when one realizes she is yelling at a goddamn electrical box (which she herself bought, paid for, and put together, so she ought to know it's limited capacity for yelling back).


February 13, 2004

My friend Emilin lost her mom today. I know there is nothing I can say, here or anywhere else, that is going to make that any better. I don't know anything about loss that hasn't already been said elsewhere--I have no advice, no words of wisdom--just my whole heart going out to you and your family today, Em.

If you haven't already done so, go read Emilin's blog. It's one of the most beautiful, terrible, inspiring things I've ever read.


March 22, 2004

Once again I am forced to justify bisexuality. Or not forced, really--it's just that I happened upon Tiffany's (See, I use actual names when I call people out, rather than woman-hating slang! You should try it some time, Tiffany!) little rant about my selfish, fake, cake-eating bisexuality. Yes, I know that responding is the last thing I should do, and maybe if Tiffany were the only one to feel that way I'd just let it go, but she's not and so I feel the need to try one more time to explain it.

The really funny part about what Tiffany wrote on her blog was the bit about "didn't your mother ever tell you that you can't have your cake and eat it too?" Strangely, she did. My mother also told me that she could totally understand being gay, but being bisexual is just "greedy." So it looks like mum is on your side for this one, Tiff. Good for you.

But being bisexual is not about being greedy. And it's not about double standards. And it's not about wanting to fuck women or objectify women "on the side" while remaining attached to what Tiffany so charmingly refers to as "the three-leggers." Being bisexual isn't about being confused, it's not about experimenting. It's not that much different than being heterosexual or homosexual, I wouldn't think. It's part what you choose and part the way you were born, or at least that's what it is for me. I believe I was born with the capacity to be attracted to people of either gender. I choose to embrace that capacity and not try to restrict my attraction to one gender or the other. When I was single, I chose not to restrict the possibility of getting into a relationship to those of one gender or another. And now that I am monogamously partnered with a man, I choose not to deny that I have silly little crushes on people of both genders. That's all there is to it. I could pretend that because I am in a relationship I'm never attracted to anyone outside of that relationship, but what would be the point of that? I would know I was lying, Mark would know I was lying, and things would feel secretive and dirty. I have absolutely no intention of acting on any attractions--I'm in a relationship, and being bisexual doesn't change how I feel about monogamy. But I get crushes on women as well as men.

And yes, I will even cop to getting more crushes on women than I do on men. And if I really look hard I can maybe even admit that could have something to do with my being culturally inundated with messages telling me women are beautiful and are to be looked at, etc. But I honestly don't think it's because I respect women or relationships between women less than I do men. Quite the contrary, actually--in many ways I am very sorry to have found the right man when I did, because I think I could find something totally different and in many ways "deeper" with a woman. But that's not what happened. I fell in love with a man, and that's that. Luck of the draw. I fell in love with a man--this particular man--even though I am probably more often attracted to women. Why is that so fucking hard to understand? I also fell in love with someone short even though I am usually attracted to tall folks--does that make me fake and greedy as well?

How would you like it if your every attraction was accused of being "trendy" or "greedy"? Why is my being attracted to men and women any more greedy than your being attracted to only men or only women? Is there some magic number of attractions we are allotted per lifetime and I have already used mine up?


May 3, 2004

Read Margaret Cho's 4/30/04 entry on the absurd genius that is Hedwig and John Cameron Mitchell. She makes me happy, in a sad way. I wonder how many of us there are around who feel that way about Hedwig?


May 13, 2004

(From Zoe.)

Grace is the #114 most common female name.
0.189% of females in the US are named Grace.
Around 240975 US females are named Grace!
source namestatistics.com

In other news, my middle name, which I have never heard of anyone having, is the 4232rd most common female name in the U.S. Apparently about 1275 people have it. My last name? 41st most common. There are around 400,000 of us in the U.S. alone.


May 19, 2004

Go to Margaret Cho's blog and watch her little film clip (top lefthand corner). It's good stuff.


July 21, 2004

You know, I complain a lot. But nothing shuts me up faster than a gander at my new favorite blog, Sweat Equity. I know the folks who are blogging on Sweat Equity in real life, and I know they have real, honest-to-God, hard-work type jobs. After which they come home and do things like refinish floors and strip wallpaper at their new house.

And it's all I can do to do the dishes after sitting at a desk job all day.


September 13, 2004

First, go here and read the last two posts (amazing) and the comments (infuriating). That is where I am coming from with this, and Narly writes about it way, way more effectively than I am going to be able to.

Now back to me.

I am bisexual. I am in a long-term partnership with a man. I have had relationships, including sexual relationships, with women, but not many and not recently. I am open about my bisexuality to my friends, etc., but I am not out to my family. Not being out to my family, particularly my mom, is one of the most painful things in my life, and probably the most painful part of my relationship with her. My mom and I are tight, and I feel like I am lying to her, which I don't like at all. But she has made disparaging comments about bisexuals in my presence for years (not lesbians or homosexuals, just bisexuals) and I don't have the guts (or something) to come out to her.

For me, being bisexual is more than a sexuality (and it's certainly more than a hypothetical sexuality!). My outlook, my politics, my spirituality, are all, in some ways, bi. What I mean is that bisexuality makes sense to me--basing who I love, or who I love in a certain way, on gender doesn't compute in my mind. Being bisexual is really basic to me. I don't think about it much in terms of choice, although I definitely think that on some level it is a concious choice. Mostly, it's deeper than that. Having it questioned does a weird number on me--it's as if someone is questioning my sex or the language I speak or something else that is simply a fact about me.

Which is why it burns me up to no end to see someone else going through one of my biggest fears (coming out as bi to her mom) and have it met with "what difference does it make". If one of your core identities is kept hidden from your closest relative for years and suddenly it comes to light, that's a big damn deal! And it doesn't matter in the least if it's something that is currently being "acted upon" or the rest of that garbage! It's not about what you are doing, it's about who you are. Why is that so hard to understand? And how is it that folks honestly believe it's OK to question someone else' identity like that, especially when it is already under attack?

Anyway, I guess my point is that I'm with you, Narly, and you are in my thoughts.


January 31, 2005

In the spirit of building my blog roll back up and giving me something new to read, if you are reading this, please drop into the comments and suggest a new blog I should check out. I will be eternally grateful.

Thanks.


March 24, 2005

I have to recommend Shannon's Palm Sunday entry over at The-Blog-Formerly-Known-As-Waiting-For-Nat (Peter's Cross Station now, I think). It is brilliant, much better than I could have written about being in church this past Sunday, but very close to how I felt.


May 23, 2005

So this has been bothering me. In fact, it's been bothering me so much that I've been trying to ignore it, in the hopes that if I pretended I didn't see it, it would just go away. But it hasn't, and I can ignore it no longer.

A tremendous number of folks have been led to my blog lately by searching for "anorexic celebrities" or "how to be anorexic" or similar. Y'all, this is so not the place where you should be if you are in the kind of headspace that leads to those searches. Seriously. I'm a terrible fucking example and reading my going on and on about my issues with my body cannot possibly be helping. So, if that's the search that led you here, please oh please do not hesitate to skip my blog altogether and mosey over to the blogs of some of my friends, especially those with healthy, inspirational body image. I'd suggest Frog and Scand for starters. If that doesn't appeal, maybe try Hugs International, who I hear good things about.

And remember you are beautiful. I know, 'cuz I am, too. :)


June 14, 2005

Jesus. This is incredible.


My opinion on Kos has never been high. In fact, I don't read it, cuz it pisses me off. But like other women in the Blosphere, I have to point you to this, if you haven't read it yet. Damn right.


September 8, 2005

Go read this. Then we'll talk about why people didn't just leave.

Thanks to Mayada for the link.


October 31, 2005

Today, a tribute to some of the blogs that I love, and read nearly every day, and why:

There are a number of blogs I read that are written by women I have never met and likely never will. I read these blogs because they give me joy, they give me something to think about, and they give me insight into lives that are very different from mine. Most of these are the blogs of parents, though they are not always "parenting blogs." My favorites are: The Adventures of Leelo and his Potty-Mouthed Mom, which is a brilliant recounting of the life of squid and her family, including her three kids, Iz, Leelo, and Mali; Chookooloonks, the Trinidadian tales of Karen, her husband, Marcus, and their beautiful daughter, Alex, which is definitely the most visually stunning blog on my list and gives me a feeling of great joy every time I go there; and Peter's Cross Station, the writings of Shannon about her life with her partner, Cole, and their daughter, Nat, whichI credit with not only entertaining me, but with teaching me a great deal about adoption, lesbian parenting, and being an at-home mom with a Ph.D..

I also read and enjoy the blogs of parents and parents-to-be that I do know, at least as far as having communicated with them personally in the cyber-world. The best examples of this are: The Edit Barn, where I follow with awe the life of the brilliant and dedicated Krupskaya, her husband Matt, and their kids, John and Maia, who I periodically wish were my kids; Yeah, but Houdini didn't have these hips, where I keep up with Sarahlynn, who I miss from other aspects of my online life, and the amazingly adorable Ellie; and (Carl in) Casimirland, which keeps me up with Ms. Polkadot, another woman I miss from other venues, and her fantastic boys, Casimir and Carl.

Another category of blogs I read daily or near-daily are the blogs of my friends, both those I know "IRL" and those I know only from the online world. I read these blogs both to enjoy the writing of my friend and to keep up with their lives. The most prolific of these friends (as well as the farthest away) is the fantastic Sofiya, who writes At the Bay, a blog that makes me laugh and adds tons of titles to my book list, as well as making me miss Sofiya like crazy. The least prolific is my darling best friend Scand, who hasn't updated Sweat Equity since early August, damn her, but I keep checking nearly daily. A nearly-as-bad offender is my dear Melinda, who hasn't updated Drinking Coffee, Playing with Scissors in nearly as long, and who I miss desperately and wish was coming to visit for Thanksgiving. I also keep a near-constant eye on the Flooded Lizard Kingdom, which isn't updated often enough for me, and is written by the profoundly fabulous Princess, who I don't see often enough.

The category that is closest to my heart (and the one that has the most overlap with the others) are the blogs of women I admire. Reading these blogs often leaves me laughing, or crying, but it nearly always leaves me inspired to be a better person. Some of these are women I have met and some are not, but they are all women who give me hope. These blogs include some of the ones mentioned above, as well as the brilliant rantings of Bitch, Ph.D.; the insight and emotion of the Frogblog; the strength and grace of Girl in Black Carhartts; the amazing wisdom and righteous anger of I Blame the Patriarchy; and, of course, the humor and general fabulousness of nearly everyone's favorite blog, One Good Thing.

I am also deeply indebted to the blogs of women who dare to talk about their problems with depression, their health issues, their grief, and their general malaise. I wish I could let you know how much your words have meant to me, especially the painfully, bravely honest Dooce, who I think deserves a fucking Nobel prize. I also love to read Nyarlathotep's Miscellany, for insight into both the big stuff and the small stuff than never fails to amaze me, and have been profoundly impacted by the treatment of grief and loss, as well as the profound respect for life, found in Emilin's blog, Postcards of Grief.

From the bottom of my heart, I want to thank the women who write these blogs, and the others that I failed to mention here, for letting me share in their lives. I cannot adequately measure what I have learned from them over the past couple of years, nor can I measure the joy, laughter, and inspiration they have given me. I believe 100% in the blogsphere, not for the political or organizational reasons put forward by most people, but because it has provided me with this connection with the lives and experiences of other women. This is as close to conciousness-raising as I am afraid I'm every going to get, and I want to make sure that anyone who reads What If No One's Watching knows that I am here, I am reading, and I am learning. Thanks for writing.


November 3, 2005

(Sidenote: Do you pronounce it "ad-ver-tize-ment" or "ad-ver-tiz-ment"? I use the latter pronounciation, which makes no sense given my linguistic heritage. I dunno why.)

So several of my favorite blogs have recently started sporting ads. Bitch, Ph.D. is one. Dooce, who wrote a post about it the other day, is another. First, not that anyone needs my permission, but I'd like to go on record saying that I have absolutely no problem with that. I can ignore the ads, and I am all for these fantastic women being compensated for their writing. I am also firmly of the belief that since we're fucking surrounded by advertising anyway, whether we want to be or not, we may as well use it to our advantage whenever we can.

What I don't get, though, is how running these ads is helping the bloggers. Do y'all get paid just to have them up there? Is it based on hits? Do the ads actually have to be clicked on for your to get paid? Dooce says she's supporting her family with her blog--how is that possible? And, more importantly, how can I help? If I actually need to click on an ad every time I read a post in order for the blogger to get paid, I can certainly do that, but I need instructions!

I saw this on Emilin's blog the other day. Is it for real? Does it have something to do with this question?


My blog is worth $9,032.64.
How much is your blog worth?

I'm very confused.


November 7, 2005

I have been reading with great interest some conversations over at Dr. B's regarding her desire to purchase some very stylish, but expensive, boots. Many of the good doctor's readers felt that the boots were not a justifiable purchase, either because they high-heeled nature was not appropriate for snow, because they were too expensive, or both. Some readers even queried as to how she planned to pay for the boots, were she to buy them.

Y'all, this pissed me right off.

Dr. B. is a grown, self-supporting woman. And while she did ask for opinions on her possible sexy boot purchase, it seems to me like overkill that what she got back were several dozen judgemental busybodies, voicing their great concern over the practicality of her footware and her spending habits. As if Dr. B herself was not more in tune with both her checking account balance (or credit card balance, or whatever) and her ability to balance on high heels than her readers?

Does anybody do this to men? When a guy wants to buy something, do his family and friends pepper him with "Will you really use that?" and "Is that really practical?" and "Can't you get something similar for less?" When a guy says he is thinking of treating himself to something that may be not completely practical, but is certainly well-deserved, is it met with consternations about his financial responsibilities and how there are better uses for his money? Not in my experience.

Basically, it comes back to people thinking women are children who need to be instructed on proper use of their own funds and proper ways to clothe their own bodies, or thinking that women's assets don't really belong to them, and women shouldn't have any use for money or material things anyway, fueled as we are by our desire to have babies and take care of men. Dr. B. didn't ask her readers to take up a collection and buy her those boots (though let's be honest--we would have done it). She wasn't after any kind of handout. She was considering treating herself. But women aren't supposed to do that. Women--particulary women with children--aren't supposed to splurge on great boots for themselves, particularly fancy, high-heeled boots. It's not self-sacrificing enough.

In part, this is a personal issue to me--I like to buy nice things for myself, and I spend too much and save too little. My spending is, at times (and yeah, now is one of those times) , a problem. I know this, and it's something I am working on. However, I am totally adamant that those are decisions I get to make for myself, and I should get to make them without judgement coming from every corner. Whether or not you agree with my spending, I am a grown up, and I expect to be respected as one.

None of this is to say that I'm advocating mindless consumerism--I'm not. However, I've been reading Dr. B. for long enough to know that she does not spend her every waking moment thinking about what she's going to buy next (or if she does, then her blog has a ghost writer). She's a brilliant woman, she's teaching, she's raising her kid, and if she wants to buy herself some fancy-ass boots, more power to her. Furthermore, how she plans to walk in snow in them and how she plans to pay for them are both her business, and not something that she probably needs a chorus of naysayers about. I certainly wouldn't.


November 8, 2005

So that post I wrote down there about Dr. B.'s boots? I didn't get all of my reasons in for being pissed off. I have to add something:

It irritates me TO NO END that people think that because you have, at one time, be that time near or far from the present, been dead broke/complained about being dead broke/asked for financial help or advice that you are forevermore disallowed from spending any money in ways that other people have not approved of as "necessities." There are two reasons this bugs me:

#1: Being broke is a transitory state. Having been broke before does not mean I am broke now, and not being able to afford Thing X before does not mean that I can't afford Thing Y now.

#2: Splurges and treats should not only be morally OK for rich people. Those of us who have "better uses for our money" or even don't have the money at all, should not be looked down upon for purchasing the occaisonal treat. It's Puritanical. Yes, it would be great if nobody were driven by any material wants and we all spent only what was necessary for our organic food and our union-made clothes and our energy-efficient housing and gave everything else to charities, but people, we live in the consumerist capital of all time. It's going to effect us. Once in a while, we're going to want to buy something JUST BECAUSE WE WANT IT. Even if we're poor. This doesn't make us less worthy, it doesn't make us bad people, it makes us just like everyone fucking else. So get over it.

A commenter on my previous post said that she "felt swindled" by Dr. B.'s buying expensive boots, because Dr. B. has, in the past, asked for financial contributions on her blog. This bugs me for a couple of reasons. The first is that I think Dr. B. has every right to ask for financial contributions on her blog, regardless of her personal income. Her blog is a service, a piece of entertainment, and if she wants to ask people to pay for using it, that's her right. It's people's right to refuse, of course, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking. Especially when, if I am recalling correctly, the only occaison on which Dr. B. requested money for herself was when those funds were allocated to redesign the site. Secondly, this complaint once again ignores the temporality of being broke. Having been broke once does not make one broke now. It's that simple.

Another commenter suggests that judgements on other people's spending is not a problem that is limited to women. That's probably true, but I'd still argue that men are not generally treated like foolish, selfish children when they plan a purchase. Not to mention, excessive shopping (especially, good Lord, for shoes!) is a stereotype attributed to women. Women are the ones with the reputation for not being able to keep their wallets closed when faced with a great pair of shoes, or a great bag, or whatever. This dovetails nicely with another favorite stereotype, the one where women are too impulsive/weak/stupid to take care of themselves and really should be all too happy to accept "well-meaning" advice. And anybody who thinks they haven't internalized a little bit of those stereotypes when they are criticizing a woman's spending patterns should probably think again.


Sorry about the titles, y'all. I don't know what's getting into me.

I have a confession to make: I'm a horribly, horribly jealous.

Recently, I have been reading more "famous" blogs, and getting quite into them. I've read Flea since before she was famous, and have been following Bitch, Ph.D. for nearly as long. I've read Dooce and Finslippy for some time as well, but I've only recently added Fussy to my blog roll, and I'm sure there are others. And while I am enjoying the hell out of all of their blogs, my joy is too often overshadowed by my intense jealousy.

People read them.

Which is not to say that I am not extraordinarily grateful for the people who read What If No One's Watching?--I am. But there just aren't that many of you. The truth is that I get about 70 visits per day, and maybe an average of 2 comments per (substantive) post (if that). In comparison, Dr. B., Dooce, and Finslippy get enough readers to make having ads worthwhile, and the comments sections on blogs like Flea's, Dr. B.'s, and Twisty Faster's are entire conversations within themselves.

I know that this is partially because these blogs are simply higher quality than mine. The ratio of thought-provoking posts to drivel is much different in those places than it is here. I spend a lot of time doing stupid memes and talking about buying shoes, or whether to cut my hair. But still. I want that kind of love! Hell, I'd settle for a quarter of that love!

And so I am trying to think of ways to bring more readers to What If No One's Watching. I know there are tools out there to assist in this, though I've not really experimented much with them. My thought has been, I guess, that if I provided actual content, people would come. And I'm trying to do more of that, but if anything, readership seems to be decreasing. So it may be time for some help.

Or perhaps I should just go see someone about my inferiority complex.


November 14, 2005

I Have Chosen to Stay and FightTwisty has a brilliant review of Margaret Cho's new book-and-DVD combo on her site, and that is what got me thinking about writing this, though it has been in my head for some time. While I haven't read the book, I Have Chosen to Stay and Fight, I did see a live performance of Cho's Assasin tour (which is what the DVD is), so I am pretty familiar with what Twisty's talking about. And my reaction was very much like her's.

Continue reading "Thoughts on Margaret Cho (I Have Chosen to Stay and Fight)" »


November 15, 2005

First, let me come right out and admit that this post is my submission to the #3 Carnival of Feminists. The theme is 1970s feminist thought, or, more specifically, relating 1970s feminism to modern issues, "1970s into 2000s." Which, of course, made me think of my cervix. Because really, who were more into cervixes (cervi?) than 1970s feminists? With all of those hand mirrors and speculums, you'd think they'd invented the damn things. Plus, being born in 1979, my cervix was made in the 1970s, so what could be more appropriate?

In the 2000s, though, my 1970s cervix has been nothing but trouble.

It started in 2001, when I was very poor, having just graduated from Reed and not having any kind of job, or any real prospects for one. My poverty drew me to try to sign up for several medical research studies. I was hoping to get in on one of the ones where you spend a weekend there, they examine your sleeping patterns or whatever, and then they give you $500. What I got instead, though, was an afternoon in a well-appointed waiting room, answering a long list of questions about my pap smear history (I'd gotten one every year since I was 13 and they were all normal) and my number of sexual partners (I'm not going to tell you how many, but it was under the cut off for the study). After going over my questionnaire, a nurse practitioner informed me that I was eligible for the study. It would require a series of appointments, each with an injection, then monthly pap smears, then pap smears at 3 month intervals, then 6 months. With some stuff about taking my temperature every day and keeping records of it, and later on some "vaginal self swab samples." They'd pay me $50 for each appointment.

I agreed before I even knew what the study was for, or what they'd be injecting me with.

As it turns out, they were testing a vaccine for HPV. Something which, even three decades after my feminist foremothers sat in circles and looked at their cervixes with hand mirrors, I knew absolutely nothing about. Though I'd been getting annual exams with pap smears for eight years at that point, no doctor had even uttered the acronym in my presence. It never came up in a health class. I never discussed it with a friend.

And, I'm retrospectively ashamed to say, I went about my merry way and got my injections and my first few pap smears and collected my $50 checks without bothering to learn much. After all, this was just a way to buy groceries. I wasn't actually interested. Why should I be? Sexually transmitted viruses, after all, were something that happened to other people.

And then I got my first abnormal pap.

It was, the kind nurse on the phone explained, Class 2 atypical. This meant that the atypical reading could be caused by an infection or injury of some kind, but another pap would be required to make sure there wasn't something else going on, so I'd need to come back in. No problem, I said, not particularly worried, assuming I'd scratched myself or something. I went back in.

The next reading was clearer. This time, the nurse on the phone called it Class 3, or "low grade dysplasia." What that meant, she explained, was that there were changes on my cervix that were considered "pre-cancerous."

I freaked out. I'd already lost enough people in my life not to take the c-word too lightly.

The nurse calmly went on to explain that these kinds of changes are thought to be a direct result of one of the few "cancer causing" strains of HPV, the sexually transmitted virus the study was vaccinating against. These pre-cancerous changes on my cervix were, effectively, a positive test for HPV.

So I not only had cancer, I ranted, I had sexually transmitted cancer! I immediately gave my boyfriend the third degree. How had this happened? I'd been fine in previous months! What had changed? What did he bring home? He swore up and down that he'd done nothing, and finally talked me into calling the nurse back to get more information. When I did, she explained that HPV can live dormant in your body for years, and that there was no way to know if the virus was new or old. So Mark was off the hook.

But I was still faced with the frightening and oddly humiliating prospect of pre-cancerous cervical changes, caused by a sexually transmitted infection. And I was scared.

When I'm scared, I research. So that's what I did. I scoured websites, called the nurse back a couple of times, and bought a new version of Our Bodies, Ourselves. Over the course of the next few days, I became an expert in HPV, its transmission, and its treatment. Sadly, this makes me an unusually commodity among my peer group.

A few weeks later, I had a colposcopy and a cone biopsy. The biopsy itself removed the abnormal cells, so I didn't have to have a LEEP procedure. Since then, I haven't had more than one abnormal pap smear in a row, though I have had a couple of scares. My 1970s cervix has been behaving fairly well.

And now, I'm an advocate. I've been involved in more conversations than I can possibly count about pap smears. I know many feminist women who consider the requirement of an annual pap smear in order to get a prescription for birth control to be invasive and patriarchal. Frankly, I don't. While I understand that pap smears are unpleasant experiences (I've had over 30 of them by my count, and they don't get much easier with quantity), I still don't have much sympathy for women who don't want to have them done. The truth is that the great majority of us are at risk for HPV-caused cervical cancer, even when we think that, due to our monogamy, or our lesbianism, or our religious condom use, we're not. And serious consequences, or even death, from this affliction are almost completely preventable with regular pap smears. Yeah, having the colpo was unpleasant, and the cone biopsy hurt, and it bled, and I don't think LEEP, which I accept that I'll most likely eventually need, will be a picnic either. But it beats the hell out of the alternative.

In the 1970s, there were strong, brave, smart women who learned about their own bodies and took charge of their own health, and as a result of doing so, felt compelled to help other women do the same. These women did things like start the Boston Women's Health Book Collective, open women's clinics, lead workshops, and even learn to perform abortions. Intellectually, my feminism is deeply indebted to these women. I strongly believe in the sort of do-it-yourself ethic they exemplified, and I try to be a feminist who helps to create needed institutions where there weren't any before. I think there is a danger, however, in my generation of feminists misinterpreting the work that feminist women's health activists before us did. They advocated for increased knowledge about the female body, both by health practitioners and by patients, and for women demanding their own say in what happens to them when they are pregnant, birthing, or sick. They did not, however, advocate for ignoring the health of a body part because getting to it is unpleasant and uncomfortable, or ignoring sound reasons for tests. They did not advocate forgoing preventative care. Sadly, this is what I see too many women my age making of their work. Resisting the patriarchy means being proactive, insisting that your medical practitioner speak to you openly, insisting that you make your own medical decisions. It does not mean ignoring your need for medical care all together.

At the moment, my 1970s cervix seems more or less healthy. I went for my annual exam just two weeks ago, actually, and everything looked fine. It wasn't my ideal way to spend 15 minutes, but that was all it took, and I can rest assured that the three strains of HPV that were eventually identified in my body are not currently causing any problems. What's better, though, is that I am secure in the knowledge that if they do start to cause problems, I'll be ready to fight them. I am getting the preventative care I need to catch any new abnormalities early, and I am very well-educated as to what my options will be if and when that happens. In part, I think I have those 1970s feminists, with their mirrors and speculums, to thank for my being so educated. Because of them, at least in part, the information I needed is available, even if I never got it from the sources that maybe I should have. Moreover, because of them I feel comfortable sharing this story with other women. I may not be ready to hold the flashlight while another woman performs the speculum and mirror routine on herself, but I am more than ready to drive her to the doctor, hold her hand in the waiting room, and even sit with her during her colpo if she wants me to. I am ready to volunteer to be a patient teacher, helping medical students learn to do thorough, compassionate pap smears. I am ready to foist copies of Our Bodies, Ourselves off on any woman, of any age, who doesn't already have one. I am ready to speak out about HPV, how we don't need to be embarrassed about it, and how it kills women and it doesn't need to. I will do whatever I can to teach other women about HPV and cervical cancer, and to help them through it if they are in the same boat I've been in, or a worse one. We're all in this together, and we can help each other, teach each other, learn from each other. That's a message worth transcending generations.


November 17, 2005

Nyarly and Portia have both written excellent posts recently about the evil of Target, so I won't go into too much detail. Suffice it to say that they've proved themselves to be profoundly unwilling to protect the reproductive rights of women by allowing their pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions for Emergency Contraception. While this may not be unusual, it is completely unacceptable.

And so, Target and I are breaking up.

I've thought for several days about writing this post/making my commitment to stop shopping at Target public, because I am going to miss Target like I've never missed a lover or a friend. Target has been a constant part of my life for years, and I'm there at least weekly. I fucking love Target. Probably 80% of my discretionary spending is done at Target. Quitting Target cold-turkey is going to be really fucking hard.

But it has to be done. As a feminist, as a woman, and as someone who at least tries to be a concientious consumer, I cannot contribute my money to a corporation that refuses to defend my basic right to get the medicines prescribed to me. So I'm not going to. And I am going to write a letter to Target, detailing how much money I spend there and how I won't be doing so any longer because of this policy. If Target reverses this policy and issues a public apology, I'll reconsider. If not, I will find somewhere else to buy my worthless plastic crap. It's that simple.

This is the way in which the free market is democractic, folks. We vote with our dollars. I'm not personally a big fan of this system, and it would certainly be easier just to pretend it doesn't matter what Target's policies are--after all, I don't need EC. But it does matter, and taking a hit to the bottom line is the only way this or any other bullshit policy is ever going to be reconsidered by Target or any other bigass corporation. So we have to put our money where our mouths are and refuse to contribute to our own oppression. And, no matter how tough it is, that's exactly what I intend to do.


November 28, 2005

Not much with the writing lately, am I?

Until I get my wordiness back, here are some other blog entries I'm grooving on:

I will get my head together to write something soon. Until then, happy reading!


December 13, 2005

Karen, from Chookooloonks blogging and photography fame, has a new project. It's an online magazine, Indigo Leaf. The idea, as I understand it, is to give as-yet unpublished writers and artists a high-quality online venue for their work. I think it's a fanfuckingtastic idea and want to support the endeavor 100%, and I think you should too.

That being said, I am already having a panic attack about whether or not to submit anything, what to submit, etc. My writing is so fractured and scattered and all over the place these days, I don't know if I have the heart or the discipline to actually write anything publishable. Guess we'll see.


December 20, 2005

My thanks to the always amazing Karen for both of these things.

Thing the first: Mosey on over to the Best of Blog (BoB) Awards and nominate me nominate some of your fave blogs, or just check out the nominees that are already there and maybe find some new reading.

Thing the second, a cool meme:

7 Things Yet To Do With My Life

  1. Skydive (but I'm going in January!)
  2. Get a Ph.D.
  3. Visit a country that is not the U.S. and not connected to the U.S. by land
  4. Speak a second language
  5. Be succesfully self-employed
  6. Play a musical instrument
  7. See Klimt's and Kahlo's paintings
7 Things I Can't Do
  1. Sing
  2. Make things grow
  3. Draw
  4. Read Greek
  5. Skateboard
  6. Wiggle my nose
  7. Cry on command
7 Things I Admire About my Spouse Partner
  1. He's so, so smart
  2. He's a great cook
  3. He really loves his family
  4. He can save money like nobody's business
  5. He can play the guitar
  6. He's sure about his (lack of) faith in God
  7. He's a great driver
7 Things I Say Most Often
  1. "Damn!"
  2. "Atticus!"
  3. "I love you."
  4. "...darlin'."
  5. "You think so?"
  6. "Oh my God!"
  7. "Yeah?"
7 Books I Love

  1. The Clown of God by Tomie de Paola
  2. The World Split Open: How the Modern Women's Movement Changed America by Ruth Rosen
  3. The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton
  4. Our Bodies, Ourselves by the Boston Women's Health Book Collective
  5. Pack of Two: The Intricate Bond Between People and Dogs by Caroline Knapp
  6. Sometimes a Great Notion by Ken Kesey
  7. The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger
7 Movies I'd Watch Over and Over Again

  1. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
  2. Dazed and Confused
  3. The Princess Bride
  4. Edward Scissorhands
  5. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
  6. Goodfellas
  7. Barton Fink
7 Songs I Can't Get Enough Of
  1. "God Will" by Lyle Lovett
  2. "Pancho and Lefty" by Willie Nelson and Merle Haggard
  3. "Irresponsible Woman" by Mary Prankster
  4. "Some Girls" by Adam Brodsky
  5. "What If No One's Watching?" by Ani DiFranco
  6. "Man in Black" by Johnny Cash
  7. "Righteously" by Lucinda Williams


January 13, 2006

>The Best of Blog Awards voting is finally up! And two of my favorite blogs are in the running! So go vote! And then I'll stop using exclaimation points!

Seriously. Emily and Brooke over at Name that Mama were nominated by yours truly in the Best LGBT Blog category, and I think they deserve your vote for their ass-kicking tales of conception, pregnancy, and soon-to-be mamahood. If nothing else, you should at least check them out. And the amazing, fantastic, funny-as-hell Flea, of One Good Thing is up for Best Mommy Blogger (I nominated her as well, but so did a few other folks). I know you already read her and know how great she is, so get on over there and vote for her, too.

Then you can go through the other categories and find some new gems for your blogroll. That's what I'm gonna do. Wheee!


January 19, 2006

I am happy to report that one of my New Year's resolutions has already been accomplished, and the year is not yet 1/12 over!

I have a piece in the first edition of Indigo Leaf Magazine. Indigo Leaf is the work of Chookooloonks' Karen, who saw a need for a place for as-yet undiscovered writers and artists to have their work published and did something about it. I can't thank Karen enough for this opportunity, or for introducing me to the other fantastic work in the magazine. She rocks.

To check out my piece, as well as the rest of Indigo Leaf, go here.


February 6, 2006

I added it to my blog roll, but I neglected to mention the fantastic new project I'm taking part in. Avast! Feminist Conspiracy! is a new feminist group blog. The group gathered there is pretty fantastic, and we represent a number of different takes on feminist issues and sets of experiences, so I highly recommend taking a look.

Also, I posted the little mini-epitaph to Betty Friedan I wrote over there, rather than here, so if you want to read that, it's here: Epitaph for Betty Friedan.


February 23, 2006

The 9th Carnival of Feminists is up at Mind the Gap. It's completely worth your time to go through it (at least it's worth mine so far--I'm not finished yet). And I'm not just saying that because I have a post included, I swear.


March 9, 2006

Rosie the RiveterGo here and read Nyarly's fantastic post. Then praise her name, as I have learned to. She's a wise, wise woman.