Disgusting Guinness Commercial

A facebook friend posted this video on his wall. He wrote "best. video. ever" next to the link. I strongly disagreed.



This ad is actually incredibly offensive. I'm all for sexy advertising but there's nothing sexy or appealing about a women being portrayed as a silent beer coasters while three men(?) drink off of her. I think what bothered me most, though was the text: "Share one with a friend"... seriously? That's such blatant objectification. It portrays women as no better than beer, serving the mere purpose of entertaining men as they bond while they fuck us. Eww. The supposed sex here bothers me, too. It's clearly not good sex (based on the woman's only slight movements) and portrays the woman as nothing more than a body for three others to fuck, which is disgusting and not sexually empowering whatsoever.

Sexism is alive and well in this ad. If nothing else we have to admit that advertisements serve to sell more than the product they are promoting. If that wasn't the case, why would they use hot, half naked women to get products noticed? Advertisements also sell concepts of normalcy, and in this case, create a culture where it's not only ok but sexy to objectify women, use them solely for the purpose of male bonding and beer drinking, and "share them" with their friends. Women (people in general) deserve better than this.

I objected to the link. I posted an explanation underneath it to which many people replied that i was being overly liberal, overly sensitive, and unable to take a joke. Then someone compared this commercial to this Calvin Kline ad of David Becham modeling underwear. The guy was clearly misunderstanding the definition of "objectification." The term is used to signify when a person is seen purely to serve a purpose and their attributes and appearance are separated from the rest of their worth to reduce that person to an instrument (or object) solely for the pleasure or use of another person. When men are photographed half naked (as in that ad) men aren't objectified in the same way women are everyday due to the social context. We live in a country where women are second class citizens and commercials like the Guinness one only serve to perpetuate and glamorize that status.

Research just this year found that men are more likely to think of women as objects if they viewed pictures of stereotypically sexy women beforehand. "Researchers used brain scans to show that when straight men looked at pictures of women in bikinis, areas of the brain that normally light up in anticipation of using tools, like spanners and screwdrivers, were activated. Scans of some of the men found that a part of the brain associated with empathy for other peoples' emotions and wishes shut down after looking at the pictures. Susan Fiske, a psychologist at Princeton University in New Jersey, said the changes in brain activity suggest sexy images can shift the way men perceive women, turning them from people to interact with, to objects to act upon."

Taking Up Space

I've always been really interested in the idea of space in relation to gender. What i mean by that is how much space men utilize daily versus how much space women use and how that plays a role in sexism and weight issues. A lot of this intersects with standards of beauty and our culture's drive for women's thinness but i have always been a bit paranoid that it goes beyond just that. When i started studying body image and eating disorders i thought i had uncovered the greatest conspiracy of our time: the more women are pushed to be preoccupied with their weight and appearance, the less they'll have time, energy, and money to succeed in anything else.

I strongly believe that women's preoccupation with weight goes far beyond fulfilling an impossible standard of beauty. Our obsession with thinness is largely intertwined with the amount of space women are expected and "allowed" to take up in society, both physically and mentally. I came back to this thought today as I waited for a client in the lobby the substance abuse clinic where i work. I sat on the end of the bench in the waiting area as three men walked into the clinic. They continued talking to each other and two sat on the bench next to me while one remained standing. I moved as far to the side of the bench as i could and sat with my legs crossed and arms to my sides. The man next to me sat down and stretched his arms up and placed them on the top of the bench, making himself as wide as possible. There were other dynamics at play here such as status for example, because i am staff and they are clients, but i felt uncomfortable because this man almost had his arm around me... so i moved. As i stood by the wall i thought about space and just how much of it women are expected to take up, and give up, based on the circumstance.

None of us are new to the idea that advertising sells more than the products illustrated. Advertising and media also sell values and ideals that we're expected to buy into. For women, there is no greater concept sold with products than thinness. The video below is a short segment from Jean Kilbourne's lecture series about advertising and the obsession with weight and dieting. What struck me most about it was her discussion of a Virginia Slims ad that reads: "if i ran the world calories wouldn't count." But of course she doesn't run the world, and calories "do" count so she should grab a cigarette instead of eating. This ad blatantly instructs women to SMOKE instead of EAT. Women shouldn't eat, they should diet, they should take up as little space as possible, the thinner the better... but what does "the thinner the better really mean?"



The message of "the thinner the better" is an extremely pervasive attempt for women to become as thin and small as possible and thus take up as little space in the world as they can. And this message isn't just taught to us by mainstream media. It's taught in etiquette classes across the country. Women are instructed to sit gracefully with their legs crossed while men are usually found sprawled out, taking up as much space as they can on the chair. Men even reach their arms out when sitting, and make their frame as large as they can to take up as much space as possible. Women keep their arms at their sides, or crossed on their lap. Again, women are supposed to take up as little space in the world as they possibly can, be it with actions or their physical appearance.

I have seen a trend recently in advertisements depicting women with muscle and strength. It's about time women are shown kicking ass, lifting weights, and using their bodies in ways we haven't seen in mainstream media in the past. The obsession with thinness goes beyond weight and extends to women's place in the world and women's right to use 50% of the space in our environment.

What do you do to take up space? To make sure you are a known force in the world? Is this something you've ever considered or acted on?

My example may not be life changing but it's one i'll share with you: I love fall for many reasons, but one of the biggest is because i get the chance to feel like i exist in the universe while i walk outside. When i was younger (ok who am i kidding, i do it now, too) i deliberately step on the dry leaves on the ground and celebrate internally as each one goes "CRUNCH." I feel like my presence was known in the world with each leaf i squash. The noiser the better. I love that CRUNCH feel and love putting a sound to my walking through the world.

UPDATE: I posted this in the Feministing Community section, where there is currently a lot of discussion, feel free to add to it there, or here in comments :)

And Now a Word from our Sponsors...

People always ask me how relevant i believe feminism to be: "haven't we come a long way since outwardly sexist discrimination?" Maybe. I will agree that in a lot of ways sexism (as well as other forms of oppression) are a lot more subtle and insidious than they used to be. However, even though we have come far we aren't even close to there yet. Women continue to make less than men, women continue to fight for reproductive rights and control of their own bodies, and women remain out-numbered in politics, economy, and other positions of power.

One arena in which sexism never ceases is the media. Commercials continue to use tired gender stereotypes in their advertising believing people react positively to this, and maybe they do, because if they didn't market researchers would need to come up with different strategies.

I came across a video yesterday that put together sexist commercials from the 1950's, 60's and 70's. These commercials are clearly sexist, one voice over states, "every woman needs to be herself at times, and that means baking!" The commercials start about 1:00 min into the video.



But then i remembered commercials i saw just this past month during the Super Bowl that were just as bad!



and:



and then earlier this year the commercial that made me want to hurl my TV out the window, never have children for fear of ruining them, and write many angry letters to Playskool:



I wrote more about this disturbing commercial last year and there was some controversy in the comment section. Playskool is advertising a "place where she can entertain her imagination!" as the little girl is shown with the washer and drying saying, "let's do laundry!"

So sure, maybe we have "come a long way" since women were denied the right to vote but we certainly aren't there yet.

Meet Dov Charney.

Yes. Please. Let's meet the asshole.

Dov Charney is the CEO of American Apparel. He has also had three sexual harassment lawsuits filed against him just in one year by employees. He also frequently walks around the office in his underwear and makes a habit of calling his female employees, "sluts," because he considers the term to be endearing and a normal part of "welcomed conversation."

I get it, companies need to be edgy to make it these days. But that edge doesn't have to come at the expense of objectifying women. When questioned on it, Charney claims his style isn't a shtik but rather a business model. He urges that, "the financial guys will miss an opportunity if they are offended by superficialities." Superficialities? Hmm, not so much. Putting up a billboard in the middle of Manhattan with an almost nude model bent over, facing the other direction is objectifying. No doubt about it and no superficialities either. And if the billboard itself doesn't bother you, maybe the fact that it was spray painted with, "GEE, I WONDER WHY WOMEN GET RAPED," will. Not that Charney can control what people tag his billboards with but he should hear the message loud and clear. Advertising like his perpetuates a culture of rape and victimization.

So, let's "Meet Dov Charney," the CEO of American Apparel.

The text on his advertisement (top of page) acquainting us reads, "Women initiate most domestic violence, yet out of a thousand cases of domestic violence, maybe one is involving a man. And this has made a victim culture out of women.” Wait, what? Where the hell is he getting his information? Because that's clearly not the case.

Also, since when do CEOs of companies make it a point to appear in the company advertising? And since when are they so creepy. He looks like a rapist and she looks like she's drugged. Not helping your point, Charney.

AA's clothing has gotten such mass approval for being made in "non-exploitative settings." In a way, that's true. Rather than being made in sweatshops overseas like so many other companies, AA clothes are made in an air-conditioned factory in LA and employees are paid a fair wage as well as receive full health benefits. I can't say anything bad about that, it's a shame more companies don't follow in AA's lead in terms of anti-sweatshop labor. But "exploitative" can mean other things, too. Like regularly being sexually harassed at work, being forced to laugh and cheer as your boss runs through the office in his underwear, and being called "slut" as a term of endearment at work.

More on Charney here...

Target Women: Sarah Haskins

If you hate Mondays as much as I do, then you can use a laugh today. Sarah Haskins is the most hilarious woman i have seen in a long long time! I tried to find all her Target Women episodes to post here so that i can make sure you get an lol today :)


Target Women: Birth Control



Target Women: Wedding Shows



Target Women: Suffrage



Target Women: Botox



Target Women: Feeding Your F--ing Family



Target Women: Yogurt Edition




Which one is your favorite?!

1930's Advertising

I got an email from my cousin today with several interesting ads from the 1930's. I thought ya'll would enjoy them as much as i did:

All the ads are excellent but the one above is my favorite! Want to stay thin? Do it with tape worms! They're "sanitized" and "easy to swallow!" Also, "No ill effects!" (Except the fact that you have a tape worm... riiiiiiight)

Here are some others :)

Above ad text reads:
Day after heartbreaking day i was held in an unyielding web... a web spun by my husband's indifference, i couldn't reach him any more! Was the fault mine? Well... thinking you know about feminine hygiene, yet trusting to now-and-then care, can make all the difference in married happiness, as my doctor pointed out. He said never to run such careless risks... prescribed "Lysol" brand disinfectant for douching-always.

"BUT I BROKE THROUGH IT!"

Oh, the joy of finding Tom's love and close companionship once more! Believe me, I follow to the letter my doctor's advice on feminine hygiene... always use "Lysol" for douching. I wouldn't be satisfied now with salt, soda or other homemade solutions! Not with "Lysol," a proved germ-killer that cleanses so gently yet so thoroughly. It's easy to use, too, and economical. The very best part is - "Lysol" really works!

Friday Feel Good

In celebration of my 100th post (yeay!!!) I am starting a new weekly column: Friday Feel Good. There's lots of bad stuff going on that we read/write about daily, sometimes it's important to focus on the good stuff...

Courtesy of Trailer Park Feminist, today's Friday Feel Good is the new Macy's ad, advertising wedding rings and same sex couples!!! :)



Text reads:

"And now it's a milestone every couple in California can celebrate.
Let Macy's Wedding Gift & Registry help you start your new life together.
With hundreds of great brands to register for, we'll make sure
you're happy with your choices every step of the way."

Yes, marriage is still an incredibly patriarchal institution but now we can all equally share in it, at least in California (and a few other states)...

:)

The Madonna "Diet"

My first interest in feminism and Women's Studies centered around body image, eating disorders, and social standards of "beauty." Jean Kilbourne's work propelled me into the field and focused both my activism and academic interests on the thinness, control, body image, and social influence. I attended a lecture by Kilbourne that taught me not only the importance of media literacy but also of the accessibility of social activism, cultural differences in beauty, and unconscious influence. In fact, when i started this blog i thought i'd be writing a lot more about body image and eating disorders than i have been, primarily because it's where i feel most comfortable and the area i know most about. In retrospect, i realize i haven't touched the subject all that much.

(check out About-Face and Jean Kilbourne's site for more negative advertising)

My undergraduate honors thesis examined body image satisfaction and thin-ideal internalization in relation to feminist identity. I hypothesized that feminists, or women with a stronger feminist consciousness, would be more satisfied with their bodies and would internalize thin-ideals less than women who did not relate to feminism. Some of my findings were inline with that: as feminist self-identification increased, body dissatisfaction decreased. Thin-ideal told a more complicated story. I measured two aspects of thin-ideal: awareness and internalization and found that although awareness of the thin-ideal was impacted by feminist identification, internalization of the thin-ideal was not. What this told me is that raising feminist identification in general may not be enough and although feminist identification raises awareness of negative stereotypes about women, it may not protect women from internalizing these stereotypes. Basically, social messages, images, stereotypes, advertising, etc. may effect us way more than we consciously know and realize.

Feminism taught me the importance of maintaining a critical eye. Whether i was looking through fashion magazines, watching TV, or going about my daily business, applying the feminist tradition of not accepting things as they were totally changed my life (and annoyed lots and lots of people).

Dealing with my own stuff surrounding food I quickly became empowered by feminist theories of "normalcy" and beauty. I also finally understood that a woman's value is not defined by how she looks or how much she weighs. I'm not saying that feminism will cure an eating disorder, if i could prove that i'd be rich and lots of girls wouldn't be starving themselves. What i am saying is that feminism allows women to embrace themselves and their bodies, as they are, and recognize that their value, importance, and position in the world should not be a direct result of how they look. Also, i quickly realized the amount of time, money, and energy women spend on looking a certain way. The conspiracy theorist in me was convinced that this "standard of beauty" for women was nothing more than a way to keep women in their place and far away from equality. As long as there are impossible standards of beauty women will never be equal.

Moving on to what this post was supposed to be about: Madonna. I used to be all about Madonna. I recently had an incredibly interesting intergenerational conversation with an older feminist about Madonna's legacy and influence on women's sexuality. I think Madonna has done some amazing things for the women's movement (intentionally or just as career moves) especially surrounding women's power, sexuality, and freedom. These arguably progressive and positive influences on women's bodies and sense of self have undoubtedly left a mark in music, popculture, and society in general. In fact, Courtney (who ya'll know i love) featured Madonna today on her "Thank You Thursdays" column.

Like I said, used to be all about Madonna. Until this week that is. US Magazine did a piece on Madonna's new "diet." In quotes because it consists of her eating around 700 calories a day and exercising about 2hrs daily... If this isn't an eating disorder guide for girls i don't know what is.

Needless to say, it left me a bit disappointed in Madonna... I won't go on a tangent about the social responsibility celebrities should take for the younger generation that is looking up to them, but for real, come on! Cele/bitchy calculated the caloric intake for some of Madonna's meals that appear in the article. Here is an example of a day in the life of Madonna's diet:

Breakfast: 1 cup Kashi cereal, with ½ cup plain—or vanilla—nonfat rice milk [262 calories]
Lunch: 2 hardboiled eggs with ½ cup each of baby carrots and cherry tomatoes [194 calories]
Dinner: 3 to 5 oz grilled sea bass with ½ cup steamed spinach [240 calories]

[Total: 696 calories]

Combine that with 2 hours of exercise and you have a really unhealthy and dangerous lifestyle that no one would be able to maintain longer than one week. Madonna has a huge influence in both music and pop culture. It scares me to death that girls will be reading that article and replicating Madonna's extreme diet.

Race, Class and Gender - A Semester of Frustration

Below is a guest post from a co-worker and friend, Brandi. For me, one of the most interesting things to witness is the formation and development of feminist consciousness in another person. I experienced this in my first WS class during college, some stages that i went through to form my feminist identity included challenging my former beliefs, admitting my own privilege, realizing that indeed there is a problem, outrage, and recognizing the need for collective action. Feminist identity develops during different times in peoples lives and not always out of academic circumstances. Below is an example of a woman who is going through this now and would love feedback on other people's experiences and when to (and how to) speak up for what you believe in.

From Brandi:

Last summer, I had a chance to work closely with Galina. Galina was hired to work for the company I work at about a year and a half ago though we never actually worked together. Fortunately she had some down time in between research studies and she was able to help me out during a time of turnover/trainings, etc. I got to really know her and I’m so thankful for that time – even if it was difficult. I learned that she is strong-willed, is passionate about her views and sticks up for what is right. I don’t think I have ever met someone with such conviction before and it is so refreshing and inspiring.

Admittedly, prior to meeting her and reading her blog, I myself never understood what being a feminist means. Like many other (ignorant) people in this world, I too thought feminism was a “dirty” word and that feminists fit the following criteria: they are always women, are mean, mostly lesbians, have narrow views of the world, and are just out there to cause trouble. I understand now that this is all cultivated by the media. I now proudly claim to be a feminist – if ever I’m asked to describe myself, that is a word that I use.

This semester I enrolled in a class called Race, Class and Gender. Once the end of January rolled around I was excited about all the topics we would cover and the heated discussions that would transpire. I was fully expecting some people to be shocked and a little hurt. What has been happening in class; however, I was not prepared for.

There is a group of females that sit right in the front of the class in a gaggle. I hate to stereotype, but they are all carbon copies of each other – they go tanning, have manicured fingernails, expensive and trendy haircuts, carry Coach bags, etc. Often times in class they are giggling and distracting to both the original professor (we had to have a guest professor come in from now on since someone complained about the class and my professor’s accent – I have good reason to believe it was one of said girls) and the rest of the class.

One day we were discussing patriarchal societies and our professor asked, “Do you think we live in a patriarchy.” I nodded my head as did several other people in my class. The ringleader of the group of girls in the front (we’ll call her A.) said, “I don’t think we do.” My professor was curious as to why – she’s very good at letting us make a case for our opinions. A. said very surely, “Well, I’m ok with how things are so it’s ok.” Clearly, this is not a valid argument. Just because you yourself are ok with how our society is does not a non-patriarchal society make. Until we have equal pay for equal work, we are in a patriarchy. Until a day goes by where the media doesn’t comment on Hilary Clinton showing her emotions or tearing up during a speech, we are in a patriarchy. Until a woman CEO is not compared to her male colleagues, we live in a patriarchy.

Two weeks ago, one of A’s friends did a presentation on an article about teenage girls getting plastic surgery. This lead to a discussion about America’s Next Top Model which I admit I love to hate to watch. Another one of A’s friends mentioned that there is always a “bigger” girl on there but “they usually don’t make it far”. Our guest professor asked, “Oh, you mean she’s like the average woman in America, not just a size 0?” and the friend said, “No, they’re obese.” OBESE?? Whitney who is this season’s token “plus sized model”, if you could call her that, is a size 10! How is that obese? Seriously, look at her photos!

Then A. opened her mouth again and said that she didn’t believe that the teenage girls who get plastic surgery are doing it because of the media or society, they just, you know like want to look good. Well A., who makes them think a tiny waist, small thighs and big boobs make ya look good? SOCIETY.

Last week’s class was the icing on my cake. The same girl who thinks the “plus sized” models on ANTM are obese did her presentation on an article about a boy in middle school who was gay. She ended her presentation with a little gem that tied the article into her own life. She said, “I have a friend who is a lesbian and I just don’t understand how she knows she is a lesbian if she has never slept with a boy.” In her mind you need to at least sleep with one guy before you make a decision to be attracted to girls. Maybe the same should be true to be sure you aren’t gay? I don’t know. Our guest professor calmly turned the tables and asked her “Well, how did you know you were attracted to boys?” The girl turned her eyes upward and thought for a minute and then said, “Yeah, I guess I can see that.” I really hoped this was true and was satisfied with the discussion.

BUT THEN, my original professor said, “Well, there have been some studies to show that many people who are gay have been abused early on and that is why they are gay.” And of course that gaggle of girls in front all nod their heads. So now they are walking out the door of the class thinking that people they meet who are homosexual have been abused and poor them, they don’t know any better! I was seething in my seat and I looked around at my class but no one else had the reaction I had. How could she just make a statement like that without the exact statistics and source to show that?

So, I tried looking them up myself. I couldn’t find anything right away. But then I stumbled upon the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force website and did a keyword search of ‘sexual abuse’. What I came up with was a report called “Love Won Out: Addressing, Understanding, and Preventing Homosexuality”. Basically in 2004 there was a conference called Love Won Out which was sponsored by Focus on the Family (Feministgal interjection: they also promote creepy pro-life fetus comics such as Umbert!). There were several speakers who identified as “ex-gay” and “ex-lesbian” and the conference focused on the prevention of homosexuality and that both change and hope is possible.

“Speakers frequently claimed that childhood sexual abuse is a prominent cause of lesbian orientation” (p. 5). Also, on page 4, “Homosexual behavior is an attempt to “repair childhood emotional hurts” through same-sex sexuality. As such, homosexuality is a kind of reparative drive.” Here for more of these gems (click through some of their “resources”.)

Interestingly, I have not found any actual statistics on the rate of homosexuals being abused in their childhood, aside from a plethora of religious websites. Even the American Psychological Association website states: “There are numerous theories about the origins of a person's sexual orientation; most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation is shaped at an early age. There is also considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality. In summary, it is important to recognize that there are probably many reasons for a person's sexual orientation and the reasons may be different for different people.

Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?

"No, human beings cannot choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.”

This has been a difficult semester for me, and I know that I should feel free to stand up and say “This is ridiculous!” but I need some advice on how to handle this. I thought about emailing both the original professor and the guest professor and ask exactly where these statistics are and explain how I did some research and could not find anything other than Christian websites. You would think Sociology professors would know to question the source, but you never know.

What are your thoughts? Have you ever experienced anything like this?

(PS – don’t get me started on the day in class when A. did her presentation on Abercrombie & Fitch being sued for keeping minority and overweight employees off the sales floor. Guess what her sweatshirt proudly said across her chest. ABERCROMBIE).

Vaginas and Triathlons

Can you tell that coming up with blog titles is not one of my strengths?

Vaginas:
Over the weekend, Jenna and I went to see the Vagina Monologues. We thought they were pretty good minus the crowd participation (cunt monologue) and creepy old guy listening to us talk about sex (actual event rather than a monologue.) My favorites were The Moaner and My Angry Vagina. Jenna made a great observation about the Angry Vagina performance - she noticed that the woman performing was wearing a tie. Although it looked damn cool, we couldn't help but see the tie as a symbol of masculinity, thus power. This monologue was intended to be the most "in your face," bold, and forceful; so why did she need the symbol of masculinity to achieve that? Could she have gotten the same message and attitude across in a dress? Masculinity and symbols of masculinity represent power and control to this day. Suits, ties, sports cars, swords, anything remotely phallic are all examples. Even "successful" and "powerful" women are those things in masculine terms (think Hillary Clinton and her pant suits...) So... Although her vagina was angry and her monologue was powerful and bold, i wish her vagina could have been angry in a frilly pink dress with lace.

Triathlons:
Beans and I just got back from a 4-mile trail run, It was terrific :)
Now that the weather is warming up here in CT and i have two training partners (Jenna and Beans,) I don't have any more excuses for not completing a triathlon. I'm aiming for either July or Sept, depending on the tri we pick... My first race of the season is this weekend; Jenna and I are running the O'Niantic 5K in honor of St. Patty's Day :)

Sports, exercise, and staying active are incredibly important, especially for women and girls. Sports have been shown to help girls develop self-esteem and positive body image. I think it's crucial for girls to learn at a young age that their body is an entity of power and strength rather than sexuality and aesthetics. Yes, part of everyone's identity should absolutely be sexuality but girls and women are constantly hypersexualized in the media and when girls are bombarded with stereotypical images and nothing else, it's difficult to establish a balance. This is where staying active and participating in team sports comes in: teaches girls collaboration, competition, strength in their bodies, winning/losing, positive attitudes, etc. Smirking Cat posted about the benefits of sports for girls a while back, referencing the Women's Sports Foundation. Did you play sports as a kid? If so, how did they benefit you? How does staying active benefit you now, as an adult? ;)

Guest Post by Dave, Bah-Humbug Edition...

Merry Christmas, now show me the cash. I am accused of being "the grinch" every Christmas season, but for good reason. I can't speak for all the other Jews out there in the world, but I know that because I'm technically not allowed to celebrate that I have a certain passing fancy for this holiday explosion between Thanksgiving and New Years. What is all the fuss about? I even went so far as to see the mighty tree in NY, which is quite large and light encrusted. Good work citizens of NY. Navigating through the haze of shopping bags made me wonder, like I do every year, about the why of Christmas.

As a young nerd in high school, I was coerced into celebrating the ancestor of Christmas, called Saturnalia, which is the harvest holiday used to bring the pagans towards Christianity. In other words, if you call it Christmas but keep similarities like parties and such, people will transition to the new religion. It worked. Contributions to Christmas also came from the Scandinavian holiday of Yule, which also involved lots of drinking, carousing, and merry-making. Sounds like fun, I'll admit. But wait, I thought Christmas was about the gifts? Ok, so there was this fellow named Jesus and he was supposedly born around this time, but that is just a continuation of the myth surrounding this holiday and has little to do with gift giving other than the wise men. In no way am I questioning the validity of Christianity or the belief in the Jesus as messiah, but I am very positive that the birthdate of Jesus is not Christmas. Apparently no one knows the actual birthdate.

Anyway, my beef with Christmas is the economics of the season. Check this out: "On December 6, 1999, the verdict for Ganulin v. United States (1999) declared that "the establishment of Christmas Day as a legal public holiday does not violate the Establishment Clause because it has a valid secular purpose." This "valid secular purpose" is part of the economic boom created during the period between the end of November and the end of December. Maybe you are familiar with the "Black Friday" or "Cyber Monday" or whatever else is popularized by the media as part of the boom. A large chunk of the economic output of our nation is packed into roughly one month of the year, and the pressure to provide is outpacing itself annually, much to my chagrin and disgust.

I speak not as someone arguing for a return to the meaning of the season (although that argument is entirely justified for Christians in an effort to reclaim this holiday as something meaningful to their religious experience), but as someone who hates junk.

The effect of the acclimation of all this junk is catastrophic. In a country already over-invested in the credit system, I watch as the public puts even more harsh strain on their credit. Even worse, the environmental impact is significant. Americans demand goods, and demand those goods at the lowest possible price, which means importing goods from countries that will do anything to keep prices low. Want a really excellent example of this in action? Look at China. Their environmental issues make Al Gore look like an ant waving in a football field. People are protesting over issues like hazardous chemical dumps in their backyard, but business is protected in a large part through the government (similar to America, but the leeway is much greater). Workers are pushed to the breaking point for inconceivably low wages. I have also heard the argument that these wages are the best in the region, but the human rights issue goes far beyond the difference in wages between these workers and everyone else. I know that everyone has heard about this kind of behavior and it almost appears maudlin, but the problem is that still no one seems to care until their children are poisoned with lead paint. Even then, the influx of goods is hardly lessened.

One perfect example is the sock trade in North Carolina...ok, its a strange example, but pertinent. The socks made in NC are now too expensive to make because of the stitching in the toe, so most socks are imported from China at the expensive of fossil fuels, carbon emissions, and the previously mentioned abuse of the workers involved. The difference in cost between American made sock stitching and Chinese stitching is barely a penny, but that one difference has placed many many many American sock factories into ruin.

Bottom line: pricing has destroyed our world and subjugated thousands into slave-like working conditions. Christmas is the worst example of consumerism I can think of, and therefore needs discussion. How important is all that stuff really?? Does the things make us happy? Where do the things go when we become tired of them? There is a ridiculous amount of debt created every year because of this one holiday, and it has to stop. The baseline want will always exist despite one's income. No one is decreasing their "wants", only working like mad to put out the small fires of desire for the next best thing to come along this week.

When did it happen that so much clutter was required to make someone feel successful, popular, or loved? I worked in a school where kids used their DCF money to buy over-priced shoes because they needed a way to push status on others. Forget necessities, a new pair of Jordan's will make anyone feel great...right? Isn't that the message? Buy stuff and have an identity? Who are we without all the stuff? Putting the mental energy into this kind of work is easily shoved aside because the answer is so simple: buy things and get an identity. Bottom-line pricing doesn't help, because now we have really cheap ways of creating identity, at the expense of others and our world.

Here is my holiday suggestion: get to know people around you and stop buying them things. Furthermore, stop buying things for yourself. Find out who you are without the obscuring clutter. Remove the want and regain your sanity. It sounds easy, but it is hard in practice because the advertising is everywhere. Drink Pepsi and you are this person. Watch Nip/Tuck and you are this person. Drive a Volkswagen and you are this person. The advertising isn't always literal, but the combination of all these messages is a shiny, and ultimately empty, version of humanity.

My plea again: put down the credit card and pick your brain for a while. I have heard so many people claim they are looking for themselves, but if you are looking for yourself, who is the you?


Oh yea, and, Merry Christmas.