Give What It Takes

A friend of mine named Brooke posted a quote on Twitter this morning that said “In this world of give and take, there aren’t enough people to give what it takes”. I am not sure if it is an original of hers or just one she liked, but it struck a chord with me. There aren’t enough people out there giving what it takes to create social change. With issues like Sexism, Racism, Poverty, Hate Crimes, Global Warming, Violence, etc. still dominating the social landscape, we have to take matters into our own hands to create change. So, I decided to do something about it. With almost no thought whatsoever I launched the “Give What It Takes Campaign”. It is a very simple idea. On the last day of each month pick a charity or non-profit organization or just a person that is doing some good in the world and give them a little bit of money to do what it takes to accomplish their goals. That’s it. You don’t have to give much. Give what yoiu can afford. But what you do have to do is take a moment to encourage your friends to Give What it Takes as well. If we all chip in, none of us as individuals have to bear the heavy burden of creating social change.

If you are on Twitter, tweet your donation like this:

I gave here today (URL of your charity). #givewhatittakes

You can also check out the other blog I just made. It is givewhatittakes.wordpress.com. I will try to use it to highlight some of the good work going on in the world. If you know of some and would like to see it featured, send me a URL and an explanination of why it’s important to you. I will post it on the blog.

I gave here today http://www.etcc.org/MenAgainstViolence.htm #givewhatittakes

Change just happened.

The Girl Effect

I ran across this on Twitter and had to spread the word. Please check out this video and share it with people in your sphere of influence. This is a great way to spread gender equality on a global level.

Chivalry is Not Dead!

Tonight I was on a radio show called Down Ballot.  It is a political talk show hosted by 3 students from the University of Texas – one Republican, one Democrat and one Independent.  I was invited to come in and talk about Responsible Men and our mission to promote gender equality.  It was a fun show and I thought the hosts asked some great questions.  I am very thankful to them for giving me the opportunity to come in and talk about RM and discuss gender inequality.

There was a point in the interview when Tony, the Republican of the group, stated that he didn’t feel that there was much gender inequality in our society today.  From his perspective, he stated that he sees treating women differently as chivalry.  I had honestly never heard anyone approach the topic from this angle.  I countered by saying that chivalry is a good thing, but that there is a difference between chivalry and male privilege.  He asked for clarification, but I wasn’t able to give much because the conversation was diverted by one of the other hosts.  However, I wanted to give an answer to his question because it was a good one.

The easiest way I can explain the difference between being chivalrous and exercising one’s privilege as a man is by looking at a man’s motivations.  Is the man being chivalrous because he is kind and thoughtful or is he chivalrous because he feels women are incapable of helping themselves and, therefore, need him?  More simply put, are you holding the door for a woman because you are being polite or is it because you think she can’t or shouldn’t do it herself?

It is a fine line.  I’d like to think that I am chivalrous.  I believe I am kind and thoughtful.  I hold doors for women (and men) and such.  However. I am also aware that my chivalry can come across as sexist if I am not careful.  Honestly, it is tough to walk this line as I am surrounded by very strong women (by choice) who may not appreciate the door being held for them.  My solution???  I am an equal opportunity door holder.  I hold doors for men and women alike. Not because I feel obligated, but because it is nice thing to do for someone.  Who doesn’t like having a door held for them every once in a while?

This might seem silly to some people, but it actually takes guts for a man to hold a door for another man.  Am I right men? Our socialization as men tells us that this activity is very un-masculine and will leave us open to judgment by other men.  It is small things like this that keep men bonded to society’s strict gender roles.  I say we should stop worrying about being judged and just be kind and thoughtful whenever the mood strikes us. It is fine to do something nice for someone, even if that someone is another man.  It doesn’t make us less manly.  In fact, I would argue that it make us more complete as men to develop that part of us.  It feels really good to do nice things for people.  We don’t have to live in a world where men can only be men if we are emotionless and silent and concerned about ourselves.  We are free to be ourselves.

Chivalry is not dead by any stretch of the imagination!  However, I suggest we tweak the definition to be more inclusive.  I say we add that to be chivalrous is to be thoughtful, friendly, kind and courteous to everyone – not just women.  And fellas – if another man holds a door for you, don’t look at him like he is a freak.  Tell him that you appreciate it and do the same for someone else.

Lastly, the guys hosting the show asked what is one thing men can do to start to change male culture to create gender equality?  I answered by saying that men need to start by looking at themselves (I know this is cliche – I am sure you can hear MJ singing Man in the Mirror in the background right now). Men have to try and understand how we fit into the puzzle of oppression.  What role do we personally play in sexism, racism, heterosexism, homophobia and other forms of oppression?  It is not enough for men to just be non-violent.  All men must dig a little deeper to understand that every time we laugh at a sexist joke, buy products from companies that objectify and sexualize women in their advertising or refer to sexism and violence against women as  “woman’s issues” we are contributing to the problem. Men must be intentional about checking ourselves and making the necessary changes to create gender equality.  Without equality, violence will always exist. Men must step up and be agents of change and allies to women.  As my friend Maria says “men and women must be co-creators of  non-violent culture.” Women have been doing their part for many years.  Now it is time for men to join them.

Observed and Reported

There has be a great deal of discussion of late regarding the movie Observe and Report starring Seth Rogen.  In particular there has been a huge debate over one particular scene in the movie where Rogen’s character has sex with a woman who is passed out from mixing pills and alcohol.  There are a couple of questions that have surfaced.  1) Is this scene portraying a rape or consensual sex? 2) Is this just  harmless fun because it is in a movie and not real life?

Honestly, I haven’t seen the film to be able to make a judgement.  However, I do know that by law a person cannot give consent while under the influence or drugs and/or alcohol.  Therefore, this scene is portraying a rape – period. While that is terrible, it is not the reason I am writing this post.  I am actually writing because of all of the reactions I have read in various “comment” sections and on message boards.  Many people are taking the “it’s just a movie, get over it” approach to people who are protesting it.  I am sad that more people don’t recognize that this scene is a reflection of our culture.  We live in a world where it has become acceptable for men to take advantage of women in this way.  Also, this film reinforces this behavior by normalizing and trivializing it.  The more sexism, sexualized violence and rape are trivialized by the media and entertainment industry, the more accepted and embedded they become in our culture. People are taking the “what’s the big deal?” approach because violence against women has become part of the fabric of our culture.  To them, it isn’t that big of a deal.  It is normal and seemingly harmless.

All of this got me thinking about a few other things as well.  First, how do all of the women who are survivors of acquaintance rape feel about this scene and about culture in general?  Second, I also wondered if this scene had been about a woman (or another man for that matter) sodomizing a man who had passed out from getting too drunk, would there be a similar reaction?  Would the public make statements like “that is what he gets for passing out” or “he should have known better that to put himself in that situation”? Would they even laugh? I don’t think so.  I think they would be too shocked to laugh.  It would be so out of the ordinary to see a man violated in that way that people would likely have very adverse reactions to it.  I would also bet that there would be a great deal of discussion about how wrong it is.  As it is, people aren’t shocked when they see a violent act against a woman.  They aren’t shocked because it has been normalized and accepted as part of culture.

I am also astonished by the amount ov victim blaming that has surfaced in response to this film.  I have heard and read a number of things that stated that any girl that drinks too much and passes out can expect bad things, like rape, to happen to her.  Others have said that “what did she expect would happen?”  To me, this implies that women are fair game and that men have permission to rape a women if she chose to over indulge.  It also implies that men do not need to be accountable for their actions and choices.  After all, rape is a choice not a foregone conclusion.  It is time for society to stop blaming victims and start holding men accountable for creating and reinforcing a sexually aggressive male culture.

Now that I have OBSERVED the public reaction to this film (and other media tidbits of a similar ilk) and REPORTED the damage they cause to you, it is up to you to use your voice to speak out against them.  It is easy to place blame on this film and its actors, writers, directors and producers.  We could boycott the film and protest theaters that show it.  We could vow to never see another Seth Rogen film.  But that would be like blaming Texas for being the sole cause of Global Warming.  What we really need to do is take a look at ourselves and the small ways in which all of us co-create a society that assigns women less value than men.  While we are at it, lets also take a look at the ways we co-create racism, homophobia and adultism.  If we ever hope to live in a peaceful world we have to address all forms of oppression.  If we expect to end domestic and sexual violence we must begin to treat them as human rights issues rather than women’s issues.  Most importantly, we must all work to change our culture. It starts with ourselves.

Anybody have any thoughts about this?

“Ad” Nauseum

OK – I have been thinking about the ads I saw during the Superbowl.  I have to admit that, for the most part, they avoided objectifying and sexualizing women.  Of course there was the dynamic duo from GoDaddy that feature Indy car driver Danica Patrick that portray her, and all women in the commercials as sex objects.  Those were horrific!!!  Outside of that…the rest were not too bad.  Nothing really jumped off the screen at me at screamed “WRITE A BLOG”.  That is the good news.

The bad news is that I did find a few that were damaging in a much more subtle way.  I am talking about the ones that reinforce notions about masculinity.  The one that really got me was for Diet Pepsi Max called “I’m Good.”  Check it out…

Funny, right?  I mean who doesn’t love watching dim-witted men hurt themselves and each other?  Honestly, I find it entertaining.  However, I also realize that commercials like this one have a sinister side to them.  Commercials like this one reinforce and further normalize the notion that men are not allowed to show weakness.  To show pain or reveal the severity of an injury is to compromise your masculinity. 

Of course, we do feel pain.  We all have nerve endings and pain receptors that tell us when something is painful (like having a bowling ball dropped on our head).  It is society that says men must hide their pain (both physical and emotional) in order to retain their masculinity.  Showing emotion or pain, is considered to be feminine in our culture and therefore a threat to our patriarchal society and male privilege.  To combat this, men in powerful and influential positions (CEOs, politicians, clergy, etc.) have developed a very sofisticated an interconnected mechanism to perpetuate male power, strength, toughness, and control. 

One vital part of this mechanism is what some refer to as the “fake it until you make it” approach.  Men in power postitions look for ways to portray men as tough, strong, unfeeling and powerful beings.  The easiest place to find examples of this are in the media.  In my opinion it is not a coincidence that mega corporations like Pepsi work with media giants like NBC – Universal to create commercials that portray men who never show one ounce of pain or weakness.  We see these messages by the thousands on a daily basis.  Can you name the last time you saw a male character in the media that did show pain or weakness?  I can’t – at least not one that wasn’t making fun of that character for showing pain or weakness.  When you do see a male character that shows emotions (other than anger) or that is sensitive or talks about his problems, he is either ridiculed or feminized (ex. a character that is a stereotypical or “flaming” gay man).

Seeing these messages over and over keeps men from wandering outside the social definition of normal masculinity.  The men that are in power positions in society continually introduce these images of masculinity into the media as a means of maintaining the patriarchy their forefathers built.  These images are intended to teach men and women that men are strong

The Cost of Consumption

*Taken from the Spring 2009 TAASA Revolution Newsletter*

Since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, the urge to “keep up with the Joneses” has been driving the American economy. For the first time, many average American families were able to not only accumulate wealth but spend money on things that had been previously considered out of reach. Obviously poverty still existed, but there was a large increase in the number of people enjoying economic prosperity. With consumers spending like they never had before, it didn’t take long for people to become accustomed to buying and owning whatever they wanted or needed. People also began to equate social status with possessions. In other words, buying things demonstrated social importance. This was very satisfying to these people because for so long they had to do without.

In addition, the Industrial Revolution opened the door for competition in the marketplace. Falling manufacturing costs and increased demand allowed entrepreneurs to claim their share of America’s newfound wealth. On the surface, competition seemed to be good thing for American consumers. When businesses were competing for customers, they did whatever it took to earn business. This meant companies offered high quality products at low prices and delivered top-notch customer service. However, businesses soon learned that there were limits on how inexpensive products could be made while maintaining quality and service to their customers. It also meant cutting wages or even jobs. Soon, manufacturers had to turn to other means of attracting new customers. Their preferred means of obtaining new customers quickly became advertising.

The first advertising agency in America opened in 1843 in Philadelphia. By 1882 Proctor and Gamble launched the first large scale advertising campaign for Ivory soap with an unprecedented budget of 11,000 dollars. In 1929 the American Tobacco Company topped the list by spending a staggering $12.3 million advertising Lucky Strikes brand cigarettes. In the same year, the collective advertising spending in the United States ballooned to $3.5 billion. The stock market crash in 1929 caused the industry to scale back it’s spending about $1.5 billion by 1933. Since then, spending has been on a steady and steep incline.

Today, the advertising industry spends roughly $200 billion annually and rising. That represents a more than 5,600 percent increase in the United States since the pre-depression peak in 1929. Of that $200 billion, about $12 billion is being spent on marketing to youth. On average, youth are exposed to about 3,000 advertisements every single day. In addition to this huge uptrend in spending, the advertising industry had invested a significant amount of money researching human behavior. Corporations want to know how consumers of all ages react and interact with products: what colors, shapes and textures elicit desired responses, and what is the magical combination that makes products irresistible. The industry employs everything from scientists to psychologists to identify the paths of least resistance for engaging consumers. One company, Sands Research of El Paso, Texas, uses electrodes and computers to record test subject’s cranial fluctuations – logical, emotional, auditory and visual – while they watch a potential or existing advertisement or during their interaction with a product. Sands Research calls this particular type of research neurological marketing or “neuromedia.” The data they collect helps advertisers create ads that maximize audience engagement in the short and long term. As you can see, corporations are fine tuning their marketing so that consumers are programmed to buy and to be life-long consumers. Advertising and products are crafted so that the frontal lobes of human brains light up like an Independence Day fireworks display. Consumption, it seems, is undeniable and unavoidable.

If resistance to consumption is futile, then it is important that we understand what we are consuming so that we can make informed decisions at the cash register. In addition to the actual products, we are also buying the social messages embedded in the marketing of the products. Take children’s bicycles for example. Bicycles are, by design, a gendered product (separate designs for males and females). Bicycles marketed to boys have aggressive styling with angular lines, bold colors and accessories like hand guards and water bottle holders. In contrast those targeting girls are designed with softer, curvilinear profiles, pastel colors (including white or pink tires) and accessories like baskets, handle bar bags and streamers. The underlying message is that boys are tough, adventurous and athletic while girls are soft, safe and pretty. Dynacraft, one of the nations largest bicycle manufacturers, offers a variety of bicycles that are classic examples of this dichotomy. One of their bicycle lines, Rhino, targets boys. The name Rhino conjures images of strength, power and domination – all traits that boys are taught to embody. Some of the bicycles in that line have names like Screamer, Troublemaker and Outcast, again reflecting and reinforcing male gender norms. Likewise, Dynacraft offers the Malibu line for girls. The Malibu name is reminiscent of shopping, fashion and beach life. This line features such bikes as the Gemstone, Sapphire and Bedazzled. Clearly these reinforce female gender stereotypes. In both examples, youth are being trained to adhere to existing gender norms.

This dynamic is found over and over in millions of products and advertisements. These messages, when repeated over an extended period, normalize gender differences at the societal level. If you look at the messages that are generated by the marketing industry over time, you will see a trend that clearly identifies men’s power being connected to their physical strength and intelligence and women’s power being connected to their sexuality and beauty. Also, these messages are increasingly becoming more overt, more sexualized and more violent. In a controversial print media campaign for Dolce & Gabbana, the creative team responsible for the campaign created a series of ads that show multiple muscular, shirtless men surrounding a lone, attractive woman in a submissive posture. In one ad in particular, one of the men is standing over the woman and he is holding her down against her will (or so it appears) while the other men watch in curiosity.

As these ads, and others like them, normalize sexualized violence, space is created in society for domestic and sexual violence to occur. These images ingrain in the collective consciousness of society from a very early age that gender inequality is normal and acceptable. They create an imbalance of power and portray women as sexual objects rather than human beings which allow men to treat women as something less than human. The fallout of gender inequality is a culture that allows sexual violence to exist. According to RAINN one in six women have been the victims of an attempted or completed rape in their lifetimes. This is the true cost of consumption.