Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Troy Davis Case Continues to Seek Clemency

This is a guest post from Monica on Transgriot


One of the major problems I have with the death penalty is not only is it being unequally applied, now that we have wider use of DNA evidence in criminal cases it has freed over 90 people from death rows around the nation who were sentenced to death for crimes they were eventually exonerated from.

And we may have had an instance here in Texas in which an innocent man was executed in 2004 by Gov. Rick Perry (R).

I have been keeping an eye on the Troy Anthony Davis case in Georgia since I became aware of it.. He was tried and convicted in August 1991 of murder in the August 19, 1989 death of Savannah, GA police office Mark McPhail, who was off duty working a second job as a Burger King security guard at the time.  He was sentenced to death in that case by a jury comprised of seven African-Americans and five whites, but doubts about Davis' guilt have lingered since then.

He's received three stays of execution because of those doubts about his guilt.   All but two of the witnesses have recanted testimony while others have in later hearings given testimony that didn't line up with what was said in the original 1991 trial. 

In addition, the NAACP, Amnesty International, the Council of Europe and the European Parliament are among the organizations and individuals pushing the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles to ask for clemency on Davis' behalf.    They are supported in the effort by a long list of people such as Pope Benedict XVI, former FBI director William Sessions, former congressman Bob Barr (R-GA), Rev. Al Sharpton, Rep John Lewis (D-GA), Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Rep Jesse Jackson, Jr (D-IL) and Nobel laureates Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former President Jimmy Carter and Jose Ramos Horta.

Can You Sit Like Spider Man's Girlfriend Mary Jane?

Often when women are drawn in comics, either their positions are absolutely ridiculous, or the way their body is built in no way resembles living breathing women. This is why when I saw a contest to replicate Mary Jane Watson's pose I was highly amused.  The following are some of the results.

I give them an A for effort because I am quite certain that I would have simply fallen over and bruised my arms trying to hold my boobs together that tightly.  I mean really, who sits like that to relax and manages not to spill a drop of coffee? I love that by simply replicating the pose that they prove exactly how ridiculous the drawing is. 

I know that comics spring from the imagination however, the depiction of women is too often highly sexist and reduces whatever power these characters are supposed to have.  No graphic artist would dream of posing a male character the way that women are often posed.  I hope that these recent efforts to expose sexism in comics will bear fruit. 

H/T The Awl via Jezebel

Negotiating A Slur

'My name is 
not NIGGER' photo (c) 2009, Quinn Dombrowski - license: 
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/

If you are marginalized person, there is a slur that is specifically designed to humiliate you and challenge your humanity directly.  When I hear a slur that is not directly targeted at me, it is easy for me empathize, because in that moment I know first hand the searing pain the second the slur is uttered. Nigger, faggot, spic, cunt, kike, slant eye, wet back, carpet muncher, wop, chink, sand nigger, rag head, retard, etc., (note: cracker and honkey were excluded because they are not slurs)  all exist to construct someone as 'other,' and there can be no doubt that their usage is anything but benign.

Everyone reacts to slurs differently.  I tend to see an instant vision of red, as my body becomes filled with rage.  My ability to think rationally is completely shut off, as I attempt to find a way to defend myself and attack back. My BFF, who is a Black male, completely shuts down and becomes instantly cold and withdrawn. Make no mistake about it, there is never a context when saying a slur is acceptable.  I know some feel that they can get away with saying a slur ironically, but trust me when I say that this is not the case.  It only makes the speaker seem that much more ignorant and hateful.

Time and time again, I have heard the argument that context of a slur matters, and the only time when this is true, is if it applies to someone who is a part of the marginalization that the slur is aimed at.  You cannot use a slur as an attempt to fight bigotry, as Louis C.K. does in the following video.

warning the video and transcript are filled with gay slurs

Now Vogue Is Attacking Asians

Most days I hate the fashion industry for it sizeism and absolute erasure of people of colour.  Today, I am once again in the position to wish that these magazines would just cease printing altogether.

In the above image, White, plus size model, Crystal Rennis is having her eyes taped back by a makeup artist, to create an Asian appearance for Japanese Vogue.  Not only did they decide to give this model a clearly offensive look, someone thought that it was a good idea to release a video of how it was done. Yeah, now White women all over the world can learn how to do this highly offensive supposedly fashionable look all on their own.



This is not about appealing to Asian audiences, because if that were truly the case -- they could have simply hired an Asian model for this shoot.  This was about affirming the dominance of Whiteness and the idea that White women are the standard for beauty.  A simple look at the following graph shows that in the 2010 New York fashion week that the models were overwhelmingly White.



As you can see, Asian women made up a scant six percent of the models employed that week. In 2011 they did slightly better, with a whopping 6.2%. Can I get a yeah for diversity?

Prior studies of portrayals of Asian Americans in advertising have found limited representation and portrayals that are skewed toward technology-based products, business and science magazines, and business settings and relationships. This article examines current Asian American portrayals. Findings indicate that, despite improved representation, stereotyped portrayals persist. The “model minority” stereotype, which suggests that Asian Americans are hardworking, technologically savvy, business oriented, successful, and well assimilated, is clearly reflected in advertising portrayals. Portrayals of Asian Americans in family and social contexts are seldom seen. Moreover, even magazines with high Asian American readership reflect the same stereotypes. (source)
When it comes to fashion, Whiteness has nothing to gain by equality between the races and this is specifically why Asian women, and in fact all women of colour, are decidedly erased. One or two tokens will always rise to the top in an attempt to deflect charges of racism, but their very tokenism only serves to highlight the complete lack of representation for WOC.

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

There is More to Women's Labour Than Rosie the Riveter

'1942_JHowardMiller_we_can_do_it' photo (c) 2009, Michal Hadassah - license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
In celebration of Labour Day, The Huffington Post decided to publish historical images of women working.  Clearly these photos were taken during WWII, when women were encouraged to leave the domestic life behind to work in factors because the war effort desperately needed labour.  Time and time again these images has appeared and every time I see them what instantly occurs to me is the whiteness of this experience.

There is never any discussion about the fact that for WOC, working outside of the home was standard due to racism and being historically constructed as unwomen.  During this time period because factors were so desperate for labour, Black women did manage to get good factory paying jobs, however they were often paid less than White women and were forced into the most difficult forms of manual labour and yet Rosie the Riveter is constantly thrust into our faces as though she is someone we WOC should identify with.  I cannot now or ever will view the figure of Rosie the Riveter as some kind of talisman to female agency.

Images of WOC working in this time period most certainly exist, and yet the selection that The Huffington Post chose to publish didn't include a single one.  This is absolutely erasure and helps to project the myth that White women's labour is special because they left their pedestal. I am in no way suggesting that benign sexism is a good thing but what I am suggesting is that White women have always had an advantage over WOC and even in situations where women were marginalized, White women have always been seen.

This is also commonly seen in discussions about the the 19th Amendment:
The Nineteenth Amendment to the US Constitution (ratified August 18, 1920), says, "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." 

Why Are Your Standards So Low?

 
This is a guest post from Sparky, of Spark in Darkness.  Many of you are  familiar with him from Livejournal, as well as from his insightful and often hilarious commentary here. Each Tuesday, Womanist Musings will be featuring a post from Sparky.
 
I have a huge list of pet hates because it's truly amazing how much privileged arseholery there is out there, but at the moment, swimming its way to the front of the list is:

“It's better than....”

“At least I'm not....”

For I tire of these excuses, I really do. I tire of the bare minimum being considered praiseworthy. And I tire of any prejudice short of the utter extreme being considered acceptable.

I tire of people saying “but it's worse in X country”

Because we're just whining if we're not being executed, right?

“Don't you know, some firms won't even hire gays!” 

Because condescending to give me a job makes you such a good person and makes treating me like shit totally ok?

“It's not like they're out gaybashing!” 

The MLK Memorial: A Misunderstood Quote is Not a Quote At All

Matt Kailey is a transman living in Denver, Colorado, and an author, public speaker, and trainer on transgender issues. He blogs at Tranifesto. In his ideal world, no one would be equal to anyone else – everyone would just be equal.
 
When I read Renee’s recent post about Maya Angelou and the paraphrasing of a quote from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., I was going to comment. Then I thought, “Hey, I can just write a guest post!” And so I shall.

Any talk of Dr. King reminds me of the night he was assassinated – because, truth be told, I knew little about him before that time. I had turned thirteen a month before Dr. King was killed, and I was a white female attending a predominantly white junior high school.

I don’t recall Dr. King ever being mentioned in any of my classes – but back then, we didn’t study current events in school, let alone any politically controversial figures, and Dr. King would certainly have been considered that. In addition, I was lost in my own little world of teenaged troubles – not enough boys and not enough clothes and not being rich and not being popular. I was about as far from politically conscious as anyone could get and still be breathing.

Dire Straits 'Money for Nothing' is Back on the Air in Canada

 The Atlantic regional panel of the The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) found on January 12, 2011, that the use of the word "faggot" three times in the Dire Straits song Money for Nothing was in violation of Human Rights and other clauses of the CAB Code of Ethics and the CAB Equitable Portrayal Code.  When this ruling was released to the public, I had a rare moment of national pride. There is no doubt in my mind that the particular slur in question is hate speech.


Monday, September 5, 2011

True Blood: Soul of Fire

I thought last night's episode wasn't bad, but it wasn't great either.  Just when we thought that all of the ties were wrapped up, Marnie invaded Layette's body. I guess with two more episodes still to go, it wouldn't do to have her so easily conquered.  So let's start at the beginning shall we?

When we last left off, Bill, Eric, Pam and Jessica had gathered in front of goddess emporium all dressed in black ready to finally kick some witch ass.  As they gear up to fire on the emporium, Jason jumps in front of them and tells them not to fire, which is met with a round of fucking Sookie from the vampires.  I found myself saying, finally and giggling out loud.  The writers have to know that Sookie's version of spunky agency is irritating at best; however, I didn't like the fact that Pam reduced her to a slit in a sun dress.  Just having the characters say fucking Sookie was enough, there was certainly no need to reduce her in this manner.

When Marnie demands a sacrifice to secure Sookies life, Pam disobeys both Bill and Eric and shoots off the RPG.  This  pisses Eric off, but Pam tells him that she is not worth his life.  I have to say that I agree with Pam.  I get that Sookie is fae, but is that really enough to have someone over a thousand years old happily give up his life for her?  I am tired of the men on this show fawning all over her.  At HBO in the inside the show section, the writers let us know that the rift between Eric and Pam will continue into the next season.  I simply do not understand Eric choosing Sookie over Pam.

Back inside, Marnie kills one of her captives, which allows Jesus and Laffyette the opportunity to drag  the body into the bathroom to plan a magical assault on Marnie.  While this is going on, Marnie looks into the blood and sees her own death.  She attempts to prevent this by having everyone form a circle. The complete circle causes the vamps to be drawn towards the force field ( couldn't they have spent some money on some kind of special effect? The scene itself looked ridiculous) but Sookie uses her mystical fae powers to bring an end to this.  Marnie rewards her by encircling her in fire.

Outside the emporium, Bill and Eric can feel Sookie's fear.  I for one didn't give a damn.  Sookie was in absolutely no danger, just as when Bill, Jessica, Eric and Pam were being drawn into the force field they were in no danger. Someone should send a note to the writers, to let them know that this does not build any tension on the show.  If they have to put someone at risk, they should choose someone the viewers will believe have the chance  of dying.

Jesus finally finishes his spell and forces Antonia out of Marnie's body and she quickly vanishes.  Sensing that the force field is down, Bill and Eric burst through the doors of the emporium and shoot Marnie in the head, but not before she can say, "everybody dies, including you." As they wrap up the dangling threads, Bill and Eric both make eye contact with Sookie.

Read more

Saturday, September 3, 2011

Drop It Like It's Hot

 Hey everyone, thanks for the great conversation this week.  I hope that all are having a lovely long weekend.  I for one am excited for Tuesday morning when my kids hop on the bus.  I have been walking around the house singing Freedom and It's the most wonderful time of the year.  The kids for their part are looking miserable and wondering how the summer came to an end so quickly.  I predict one or two more weeks of light posting, as we get adjusted to the new schedule, and so I thank you in advance for your continued patience.

Below you will find links to posts that I found interesting this week.  Please note, a link is not necessarily an agreement with the post itself, and the comment section is read at your own risk as always.  When you are finished showing these bloggers some love, don't forget to drop it like it's hot and leave your link behind in the comment section.

On Fat Hatred and Elimination
Stop Picking on the Black Middle Class
Exercise hurts! But Competing Doesn't 
Sexual Assault of Black Women: A Non-Issue for Black Organizations?
Dear Blogher: Transgender Is Not A Sexual Orientation
The $43 Million Islamophobia Machine
Arguing With Strawmen
Feminist Musings on Showing Up
"I'm Not Straight, I'm Not Gay, I'm With You: What Does Orientation Mean to YOU
Chaz Bono on TV: Explaining Heterosexual Dancing to Children
Upcoming Trans Day of Silence on DADT Repeal Day
Reasonable People Might Agree
Feminists Are Not Your Enemy

Disability's No Fairytale: Stop Treating Disabled People Like Sleeping Beauty
Kreayshawn & V-Nasty: The Unholy Thing Rap Created  
In Defense of Period Sex
Is Mad Men a "Soap Opera?"
Death Threats and Hate Crimes, Attacks on Women Bloggers Escalating
Are White Women Mutilating Themselves Trying to Look Black? An Analysis 
A Year of Biblical Womanhood
Racial Profiling First Hand
Non-Fiction
Ignoring the Epidemic: Contemporary Native American Issues Neglected


Friday, September 2, 2011

To Sparky With Love



This is what you get for all of those moose references.  I hope the tune stays in your head for days and days to come LOL.

It's Friday and The Question Is......


'Remnants' photo (c) 2009, David Goehring - license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/


As many of you are aware, we lost our beloved undog about 6 months ago.  As a family we recently decided that it was time to get a new undog.  We went to the humane society yesterday and this is the kitty that warmed our heart.


Isn't he just the prettiest undog evah?  We still have to have a talk with the kids about responsibility and the importance of helping our new undog adjust to our hectic schedule, but if everything goes well, we will bring him home next week.
Since we already have White Sheppard/Golden Lab named Sookie, I think it would be appropriate to name our undog Bill.  The unhusband and the kids however think that this is creepy and that I need to let go of my love for urban fantasy but I think he looks like a Bill.  At any rate, in the interest of fairness I thought I would open the blog up to name suggestions.  So this week's question is, What name do you think we should pick for our new undog?


What if we raised kids to care?


'Free all Political prisoners banner - Refugee Children in Immigration Detention Protest Broadmeadows' photo (c) 2011, Takver - license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/


Every time I write about my kids, a few people will show up to tell me that I am reading too much into things, or that I am destroying their childhood. They tell me that childhood is a time of innocence, and that kids shouldn't be burdened by having to think about social justice issues.  The problem with this approach is that childhood is not nearly as innocent as we have constructed it to be.  From the moment a newborn babe opens their eyes, they are sent various messages, which tell them where they rank on the scale of social hierarchy, and who they are to actively oppress.  Because we are immersed in this culture, it appears naturally occurring, rather than the systematic effort to dismantle innocence that it is.

Some have repeatedly told me that the project to raise critical children is in and of itself another form of indoctrination, and to some degree they have a point.  There is however a line between telling your children your moral positions, and asking them what they think and why.  Asking why, is one of the greatest tools a parent possesses, because it causes the child to interrogate the world around them, and when we consider that so much time is invested into teaching them to be automatons, this is a revolutionary act.

Why encourages them to engage with ideas and to decide for themselves if they are being sold a line of nonsense.  There should be nothing in their childhood that is above question, with the exception of rules for the purposes of safety and health.  Many parents see questions as threats to their authority, when what it really is, is a desire to understand the way the world is ordered.  Sometimes the questions will be painful because to answer, because a parent must confront their own unacknowledged privilege.  The temptation to say, you'll understand when you are older is great, because it gives us an easy exist from a subject matter that makes us uncomfortable. I have learned however, that with patience and speaking at their age level, there is little that they do not understand.

I talk to my kids about social justice issues because I love them, and because I view it as my responsibility as their mother to help them see the world as it really is, rather than the utopian post racial, post feminist, post sexuality, post gender identity universe that we are told that we live in.

When we talk about the rights of a child, much of the conversation centers around the right to food, shelter, education (limited to school) and of course, to be free of violence.  The right that we most often ignore is the right to be taught to think critically.  Children are born into a world where everything around them is already coded, and to burden them with our own prejudices, is to place undue hardship upon them. This childhood innocence that we supposedly seek to maintain is selfish, because it is simply a reflection of our own desire not to change the status quo, or at least not alter that which benefits us directly. The moment children begin to actively interact with the world around them, they are no longer innocent.

It is an act of love to deconstruct that which has been normalized, because it empowers children.  When we ask them why, not only do we encourage them to think about the world around them, we send them the message that they think matters.  This centers the child in a way that passively or actively teaching them to respect and respond to isms does not.  Asking why lets them know that they are valued and everyone, regardless of their size or age needs to know that they important to someone.  Why also opens the door to dialogue in a way that driving them to soccer games most certainly does not.  When they grow, kids will not remember the endless times you acted as a chauffeur, but they will remember that you took the time to listen when others were quick discard their speech and ideas as valuables.  I ask why because to me, my children matter.

As DADT Comes to an End, Please Remember the Trans Soldiers Past and Present

This is a guest post from the ever fabulous Monica of Transgriot


TransGriot Note: DADT goes bye bye this month.  But there's one segment of the community who once again will be Left Behind as the GL segment of the community gets civil rights that the trans community as Autumn Sandeen demonstrated helped them fight for.   TAVA President Monica Helms in this guest post talks about the moment of silence being organized to remind the GL community and our allies the fight for transpeople to serve openly in our military isn't over.  
September 20, 2011 will go down as one of the most pivotal days in LGB history. On that day, gay, lesbian and bisexual service members will no longer have to hide their sexual orientation from the US military. LGB people will be allowed to enlist (or reenlist) in the military, and those already serving will be able to openly say who they love if they wish to.


However, for the trans community, September 20 will be a bittersweet day. The “sweet” will be because we will all be thrilled to see another wall of discrimination crumble into history. We will celebrate along with our LGB brothers and sisters, and thank all of those who have served our country proudly. Our thanks will also go out to those who will step forward to join their ranks. Tears of joy will flow that day from all of us.

The “bitter” part comes when the celebration is over and trans people will still face discrimination from the US military. Trans service members will be ejected because the military says we have a “psychosexual condition,” which they put in the same category as “exhibitionism, transvestism, voyeurism, and other paraphilias.” No trans-identified person will be allowed to enlist for the same reason.

Do You Agree With Dr. Maya Angelou About the MLK Memorial?


'My Heroes - Maya Angelou connected with countless people through her powerful poetry' photo (c) 2009, Adria Richards - license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/
 

Maya Angelou will be remembered as one of the most profound women of our time.  Over the years she has shared many sage wisdom's that absolutely resonate with the soul. When someone with such an awesome track record speaks, I found that it is always wise to listen.

As many of you are already aware, the official dedication of the Matin Luther King Memorial was postponed due to hurricane Irene, however the monument on The National Mall is open for visitors.

Originally the memorial was intended to have the following quote:
“If you want to say that I was a drum major, say that I was a drum major for justice. Say that I was a drum major for peace. I was a drum major for righteousness. And all of the other shallow things will not matter.”
 Due to a change in the design plans the quote was turned into a paraphrase and it now reads:
I was a drum major for justice, peace and righteousness.
Speaking to the Washington Post, Dr. Angelou had some choice words to say about the changes.

Thursday, September 1, 2011

Cassandra Clare proves that all Inclusion isn't Good



There are two problems we see a lot in looking at Urban Fantasy from a social justice mindset. One is the defenders of books and series rushing in to decry any criticism of their precious - and I can understand that. We fanpoodle in Kevin Hearne’s name after all. But when fanpoodles deny that there are problematic and prejudiced elements in their favourite works, they diminish and demean the damage these portrayals can cause and internalise them without thinking

The second is the repeated acceptance of token characters - even high problematic token characters - as being proof of inclusivity. Just having a POC/GBLT/Disabled/Female character is proof that the book/programme is inclusive and wonderful. Would that it were true, but as we’ve discussed before sometimes erasure is better than some inclusion.

Which brings us to Cassandra Clare’s novels that are repeatedly hailed for their gay inclusion and any questioning of the portrayals has been vehemently opposed. And as we did with similar sentiments expressed about Laurell K. Hamilton’s Anita Blake, we have to speak on this. Because this inclusion? This is not all good.

Alec exists to serve the straight people around him. Despite being older, he has far less kills than Issy or Jace (and Clary mocks him about this about him being weaker) and it is said this is because he exists to protect them. There are at least 2 occasions in the books where he severely risks his own life to protect Jace. Alec being gay is used as a reason for him to fawn after Jace, jealous and desperate - it’s an old trope and it’s a dull one that needs to end.

If Magnus were portrayed as any more flamboyant he’d wear rainbows and shoot unicorns. Alec, similarly, is portrayed as self-effacing, whiny and weak - especially compared to Jace and Issy. Though we are told repeatedly that Magnus is an extremely powerful being when the straight people call (Read: Jace and Clary) he is quick to not only respond to their requests, but comply. Like Alec, he exists to serve the straight people even though he normally charges a considerable amount for his services. The only time he is portrayed as dominant is when he is juxtaposed to Alec, thus making him the top and Alec the bottom.

Alec & Magnus’ relationship has much of the “weak child/male parent” dynamic that is so common in slash circles (trying to clumsily impose clumsy gender dynamics or grossly offensive yaoi style “ukes” and “semes” into gay male relationships). Especially in the last book, Alec is whiny, childish, pettish and inclined to sulks and tantrums while Magnus chides him like a sulky child.
 

Culture Changes How Easy it is to be a Religious Muslim

WoodTurtle is a Canadian Muslim feminist currently using her extended maternity leave to explore developments of Islamic feminism in the Western and Muslim world.  As a woman who wears the hijab (owns several abayas and a niqab monogrammed with her initials in pink, sparkly sequins), she writes frequently on genderized Islamophobia. She also works toward dispelling myths and stereotypes about women in Islam for both Muslims and non.

"Yalla, yalla, what's the holdup?" There's a group of young Kuwaiti teens standing in the doorway to the movie theatre. Final Destination 5 has just started and I'm anxious to get to my seat and enjoy my caramel and salt popcorn. I can't understand why they're just standing there pointing to the screen and flashing their mobiles -- and just before I start pushing my way through the group, my sister-in-law holds my arm and says, "they're waiting for the usher."

The usher?!

We ordered our tickets online this afternoon, thankfully rejecting The Smurfs and unfortunately also saying no to Captain America (I like my superheroes). Once we decided on the movie, we chose our seats -- specifically opting for the mixed "family section" over splitting our group between the two gender segregated "male/female bachelor" sections. Then at the theatre, helpful ushers escorted everyone to their properly assigned seats without stepping on anyone's toes.

As action packed, gore-fests go, it was a pretty entertaining movie. I was a little surprised when a couple of youths cat-called and whistled when the sexy groupie character showed up in hot pants and fishnets, but was more surprised when none of the sexual innuendo or swear words were cut out of the film. To keep a level of public decency, almost every screened film is censored for physical intimacy -- including kissing, but excluding hand holding and "wink-wink-say-no-more" references. So I missed that one scene where the main couple kiss and perhaps even a sex scene or two, but I wouldn't know and it certainly didn't affect my enjoyment of the film. No one else seemed to care either.
Sex or no sex, we all cringed and yelled together with each horrific death scene.

As far as modern, first-world regions go, the constitutional monarchy of Kuwait is just like Canada... only Muslim. But flashier. With taller, more modern buildings. A massive disparity between the very rich and the extremely poor. Mosques and malls on every street corner. High-end fashion malls. Really expensive cars and ridiculously cheap gas. Overwhelmingly Arab and South East Asian. Really hot.
Okay, Kuwait is nothing like Canada.

In 'How to Love' Lil' Wayne Gets "the Stipper Life' Wrong


Eva Rivera is a proud lesbian Chicana, daughter, sister and sex worker who can walk in 6 inch heels and twirl naked on a pole in front of total strangers but is still viciously afraid of moths. You can catch her more of her here




Lil Wayne's newest song and video, How to Love, is essentially not any different from most of his other videos which objectify, vilify and degrade women. The tempo is slower, the mood intended to be an ominous setting for an important social message. I am sure most readers can expect this kind of video from him even as the mainstream media applauds him over this heart wrenching life lesson. I'd like to comment on how this video is merely an extension of patriarchal demands of female bodies and how patriarchy still has power over how female bodies are used and seen. Yes, there are some tired tropes here. It's obvious that he is portraying an inaccurate and popular stereotype of "stripper life" and reinforcing the image of the poor sex worker in need of someone to save her from a life of pain and contracting HIV.

The first half of the video portrays a girl growing up in a single parent home, being sexually abused and turning to a life of stripping and escorting. She looks miserable, lonely and pathetic and finally hits rock bottom when testing positive for HIV. The second half of the video is her alternate life. We get a tour of how her life is different when her mother marries instead of staying single, she stays in school, graduates from hair college and happily becomes pregnant.