Murmuration: /merr'meuh ray"sheuhn/ n.
1. The act or instance of murmuring; a murmur.
2. The collective noun for a group of starlings: a flock.
Murmuration from Sophie Windsor Clive on Vimeo.
The video is by Sophie Windsor Clive and Liberty Smith -- a pure accident witnessed (and caught on film) as the women canoed across the River Shannon in Ireland.
Friday, November 4, 2011
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Tidbits from the world on gender inequality
Sometimes being a woman sucks. And I’m not talking about biology. I’m talking about sociology.
I’m talking about having to include in my thinking about what clothes to wear my willingness to endure catcalling and street harassment because of someone else’s decision to “comment” on my appearance. I’m talking about grown-ass people telling me that they feel sorry for me because I’m 30 and single, even when I don’t feel sorry for myself (and while simultaneously congratulating my 30 and single male friends for successfully remaining “unchained”). I’m talking about my sister having to file for disability leave when her “disability” is having become a mother.
Like I said, sometimes being a woman sucks. In that vein, I’ve run across a whole bunch of engaging, informative, depressing, and refreshing gender-related stuff as of late that I thought I’d share. Check it:
The female body
The female body is constantly under attack. We’re supposed to be young and skinny (aka scrawny) but also perky and curvaceous. It’s exhausting (whether you’re trying to abide or trying to resist). But, there are some folks trying to fight back.
Health care
Women’s health care has been all over the news as of late. Here’s a few things to ponder:
Economics and educational attainment
I’m talking about having to include in my thinking about what clothes to wear my willingness to endure catcalling and street harassment because of someone else’s decision to “comment” on my appearance. I’m talking about grown-ass people telling me that they feel sorry for me because I’m 30 and single, even when I don’t feel sorry for myself (and while simultaneously congratulating my 30 and single male friends for successfully remaining “unchained”). I’m talking about my sister having to file for disability leave when her “disability” is having become a mother.
Like I said, sometimes being a woman sucks. In that vein, I’ve run across a whole bunch of engaging, informative, depressing, and refreshing gender-related stuff as of late that I thought I’d share. Check it:
The female body
The female body is constantly under attack. We’re supposed to be young and skinny (aka scrawny) but also perky and curvaceous. It’s exhausting (whether you’re trying to abide or trying to resist). But, there are some folks trying to fight back.
- The folks over at My Body Gallery have created a user generated space where women can send in images of what real women – themselves – look like. The site is not without problematic elements, however. (I, for example, see little reason to categorize my body shape as an apple, pear, banana, or hourglass or to list my height, weight, and clothing sizes. Plus, they unfortunately have an advertising problem. All the ads I've seen are for things like Victoria's Secret and shapewear. Boo!) But I appreciate the site owners’ intention. It will be interesting to see how the site grows or is used over time.
- A friend recently created the website Evolve the Aesthetic (ETA) with the intention of engaging women in the reclamation of their own beauty and encouraging the capacity of women to define for themselves the concept of beauty. The project's objective is to shift cultural ideals of beauty increasingly towards how women really look in their amazingly diverse manifestations of beauty. I expect that exciting, innovative stuff will be coming out of ETA, so keep your eyes on it.
- Ovens, an illustrator (who authors the webcomic Effort Comics) offered this gem of a tutorial on how to draw boobs and ladybits in general. Based on the representations of women we see everywhere – be it comics, advertising, video games, etc. – a whole world of folks could benefit from her instruction.
- I watched this hard-hitting documentary last week called "America the Beautiful." It originally came out in 2007, but does a really heart-wrenching job at asking the question “Is America obsessed with beauty?” And it begs a response to “Who benefits when young girls and women feel ugly?” You can watch the movie in its entirety on Hulu (with an account), through this Love Isn’t Enough blog post (where you just have to enter your birth date), or right here.
Health care
Women’s health care has been all over the news as of late. Here’s a few things to ponder:
- Did you see Stephen Colbert's response to the Department of Health and Human Services's new policy that insurance companies must cover women’s birth control and preventative health care services (HPV vaccines, STI testing, etc.) without a co-pay? The Colbert Nation-provided tag reads: “Free birth control will wipe out the American race and instantly turn daughters into wanton harlots with insatiable sexual appetites.” I laughed. A lot.
(And if are looking for an additional reason to laugh, Colbert also offered a hysterical response to Summer’s Eve’s ridiculous (and racist) new ad campaign.)The Colbert Report Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c Women's Health-Nazi Plan www.colbertnation.com Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog Video Archive - There has also been word that women's health care costs are expensive. (Shocking, right?!) Looking at just the services that would be provided under the new legislation, here’s what we’ve got. This fabulous info graph is courtesy of the folks at Good. What gets me about all this political arguing is that men’s health care (to the best of my knowledge) is covered by insurance companies by default while women’s health care has always been an “add on,” considered non-essential. 51% of the population has non-essential health needs. Awesome.
![]() |
| Click to embiggen. (Yes, I know that is not a real word, but I like it.) |
Economics and educational attainment
- Some utterly depressed pay gap statistics were recently reported by the Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce in their report “The College Payoff: Education, Opportunity, Lifetime Earnings” (pdf). Here’s one of the key charts of findings.
And in case you’re worried that you misread the notes in red (or they're just too small to read), here’s what they say: “Women have to have a Ph.D. to make as much as men with a B.A.” and “Men with some college but no degree earn about the same as women with a Bachelor’s degree.” That makes me feel GREAT as I work to finish my Master’s. But, as you can guess, women aren’t the only one’s losing out. People of color, too, aren’t earning as much as their white peers. The study introduction summarizes things pretty well, saying: “The findings are stark: Women earn less at all degree levels, even when they work as much as men. On average, women who work full-time, full-year earn 25 percent less than men, even at similar education levels. At all levels of educational attainment, African Americans and Latinos earn less than Whites.”
Click to embiggen.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Writing about race (aka – How’s that thesis going?)
![]() |
| image courtesy of Racialicious |
Today I had a happy (and yet sad) moment reading the blog post "The People You Meet When You Write About Race" by Crommunist. He offers examples of language folks use when talking (or not talking) about race. Each example pinpoints a perspective that can present a real challenge to honest, productive anti-racist dialogue and work. Here are a few of the personalities/responses those who write or speak about race encounter:
Mr. History
“Black people were enslaved like a million years ago. They’ve had enough time to get their act together, but they’re still whining about their problems. I don’t want to hear about transgenerational wealth gaps and discriminatory hiring practices! Their problem is that they’re lazy! Case closed!”
Ms. Kumbayah
“We need to recognize that everyone is just the exact same on the inside. Why do we bother using labels like ‘black’ and ‘white’ anyway? Even though the way society treats people falls along racial lines to the detriment of some and benefit of others, we should ignore that! Aren’t we all just members of the human race?”
Mr. Hear No Evil
“It’s people like you that are the real racists! Most people don’t think twice about someone else’s race! Talking about race is what makes racism happen, not entrenched ideas that won’t change unless they’re discussed!”
Reading the entire list is definitely worthwhile. And it’s not all melancholy-inducing. Crommunist includes one personality that is a gift to anyone working to address issues of racism (and a gift to society). It reads:
Mr./Ms. Has Been Listening
“This topic made me really uncomfortable when I first started talking about it, but I’m glad I did. I’m not sure if I ‘get’ everything, but my thinking has definitely changed. Here are some reasonable objections and questions that I have, and I hope we can talk about them without offending each other.”
What was sad about reading the post is that I have met and spoken with people who align themselves with nearly all of the ideologies presented. In the process of pursuing racial justice, knowing that the diversity of ‘nah’s is so broad can be really overwhelming. On the flip side, what made me smile about reading the post was that I was reminded that I belong to a larger community of like-minded thinkers. And our experiences of resistance are not isolated. And having knowledge of that shared experience offers support and strength as we move forward.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
The Mike & Duane Show – not your typical school assembly
I work at a school that’s atypical in a number of ways. It’s a 110 year old, co-ed, private K-12 school (housed in one building) in the heart of Chicago, and our educational philosophy is based on progressive, constructivist, democratic ideals. We are pretty intentional about things like building a safe, productive community in which everyone’s voice is welcomed, in which challenging one another and challenging previously unquestioned ideas and assumptions is encouraged, and where differences are valued as strengths, especially when our differences challenge one another to be more knowledgeable, more thoughtful people. We have a common language and shared ideals with which everyone is familiar and by which everyone strives to abide, including:
A relatively new tradition at our school (ranging back to at least 2006) is the annual Mike and Duane Show – a production that essentially boils down to a comedy sketch show presented primarily by faculty and staff, with occasional student involvement. It includes comedy routines, dances, music videos, and always a princess number. It’s a pretty serious undertaking and a beloved piece of our school community.
Last year I shared with you the “Bad” video that was a part of the 2010 Mike and Duane Show. (And it’s totally worth revisiting, or visiting for the first time if you’ve never seen it. How often have YOU watched your Assistant Principal dance Michael Jackson through the halls while being backed by a gang for faculty and staff?!)
This year, I thought I’d share a little more – both present and past. This year’s show was fun. It included lots of singing and dancing, a video/live performance of an original tune, a high school science teacher showing off his aerial acrobatic skills, and a crazy music video mash-up of Michael Jackson’s “Smooth Criminal,” Katy Perry’s “Firework,” Onyx’s “Slam,” and Ok Go’s “End Love.” (The links will show you video of these acts.)
But, to give you an idea of the tone in which the show is presented, here was this year’s introduction (inspired by The Electric Company, of course):
(And in case you want to know, Duane is a counselor in our Middle School, Mike works in our afterschool program for K – 5th graders, and Casey (Hudetz – thus “Chudetz”) teaches in the Middle School computer lab.)
Every year's show features a faculty number which typically recreates some pop culture dance from the previous year – ranging from the Jai Ho to the Sound of Music flash mob in Amsterdam to this year’s Double Dream Hands, of which I was a part. See if you can spot me:
And there is typically at least one performance by faculty and staff who actually live up to the title ‘dancer.’ This year, said talented folks did a remake of Janet Jackson’s "Rhythm Nation."
There are MANY a great Mike and Duane act from years past. Here are a few of my favorites:
2007:
(The prince is played by our assistant principal, the cop is our technology facilitator, and the cab driver is one of our high school science teachers.)
2008:
2010:
For us, part of being a community means making time to laugh together and making time to share our talents – both those of the students and those of faculty and staff. And we like to have fun. Isn't that how school should be?!
- Our motto: “Everything to help and nothing to hinder.” – Francis W. Parker (our founder)
- “A school should be a model home, a complete community, an embryonic democracy.” – Francis W. Parker
- “If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.” – 1 Corinthians 12:26 (We are not a religious school, but this biblical quotation is a guiding adage that has been part of our expectations for one another for generations.)
A relatively new tradition at our school (ranging back to at least 2006) is the annual Mike and Duane Show – a production that essentially boils down to a comedy sketch show presented primarily by faculty and staff, with occasional student involvement. It includes comedy routines, dances, music videos, and always a princess number. It’s a pretty serious undertaking and a beloved piece of our school community.
Last year I shared with you the “Bad” video that was a part of the 2010 Mike and Duane Show. (And it’s totally worth revisiting, or visiting for the first time if you’ve never seen it. How often have YOU watched your Assistant Principal dance Michael Jackson through the halls while being backed by a gang for faculty and staff?!)
This year, I thought I’d share a little more – both present and past. This year’s show was fun. It included lots of singing and dancing, a video/live performance of an original tune, a high school science teacher showing off his aerial acrobatic skills, and a crazy music video mash-up of Michael Jackson’s “Smooth Criminal,” Katy Perry’s “Firework,” Onyx’s “Slam,” and Ok Go’s “End Love.” (The links will show you video of these acts.)
But, to give you an idea of the tone in which the show is presented, here was this year’s introduction (inspired by The Electric Company, of course):
(And in case you want to know, Duane is a counselor in our Middle School, Mike works in our afterschool program for K – 5th graders, and Casey (Hudetz – thus “Chudetz”) teaches in the Middle School computer lab.)
Every year's show features a faculty number which typically recreates some pop culture dance from the previous year – ranging from the Jai Ho to the Sound of Music flash mob in Amsterdam to this year’s Double Dream Hands, of which I was a part. See if you can spot me:
And there is typically at least one performance by faculty and staff who actually live up to the title ‘dancer.’ This year, said talented folks did a remake of Janet Jackson’s "Rhythm Nation."
There are MANY a great Mike and Duane act from years past. Here are a few of my favorites:
2007:
(The prince is played by our assistant principal, the cop is our technology facilitator, and the cab driver is one of our high school science teachers.)
2008:
2010:
For us, part of being a community means making time to laugh together and making time to share our talents – both those of the students and those of faculty and staff. And we like to have fun. Isn't that how school should be?!
Saturday, May 21, 2011
TN SB49 “Don’t Say Gay” and George Takei
Yesterday the Tennessee State Senate passed Republican Senator Stacey Campfield's Senate Bill 49, the so-called "Don't Say Gay" bill, by a vote of 20-10. (Some are reporting the final vote as 19-11. I’m unsure of the official results. Either way, the bill passed.) The bill has received controversial attention over the past several weeks (months and years) over the appropriate place of government to limit dialogue in classrooms. The bill’s original language (pdf, one page – very short) stated that "No public elementary or middle school shall provide any instruction or material that discusses sexual orientation other than heterosexuality." The bill was then amended such that it could only be adopted after a review by the state board of education of "the current curriculum standards for the teaching of sex education or for the teaching of other subjects in which the discussion of human sexuality may occur incidental to the subject" (pdf, 1 page).
On Friday an amendment (for which I cannot find the official text) was submitted, and then adopted – leading to the passing of the bill – with at least two changes from the original. First, the phrasing "sexual orientation other than heterosexuality" was stricken and replaced by limiting discussions to only "natural human reproduction science." (This change was fine with Campfield who said, "There's more than one way to skin a cat.… I got what I wanted.… Homosexuals don't naturally reproduce.") In addition, the amendment loosened the scope of the bill such that educators could respond to student questions about homosexuality without punishment, but still cannot offer materials or engage curriculum or instruction inclusive of homosexuality.
According to the Asheville Citizen-Times, "Companion legislation in the state House of Representatives has not advanced out of committee, and supporters of the bill do not intend to bring it up again until 2012."
As a practicing teacher of Kindergarten students, my concerns and fears about this bill are stacking up. Limiting the possibility for discussion and dialogue on any subject typically has dangerous results. Even hypothesizing the consequences of this bill, the following are a few of my concerns. If I were teaching in Tennessee (which I am not):
In addition, the bill seems reliant on at least two faulty assumptions. First, the bill suggests that sexuality is a non-issue before ninth grade. As anyone who knows anything about human development can confirm, sexuality has a place in the lives of all people at all points in their life, both personally and contextually. This looks very different at different ages, but has a presence nonetheless. For example, my students are four and five. Generally, they are not dealing with issues of their own sexuality, but the sexuality of their parents, older siblings, extended family members, family friends, and so on, plays an important role in shaping the cultural and social contexts in which they live. I have a responsibility to help my students understand the world they see around them – a world in which diversity has an active presence (as relates to sexual orientation and a billion other identity markers). Sexuality has consequences for our social structures and the lives of my students. As such, sexuality is a relevant issue prior to ninth grade and being able to address it in age-appropriate ways is vital for supporting healthy students, families, and communities.
Second, the bill seems to suggest the idea that NOT talking about homosexuality means it doesn't exist or will disappear. Sorry to say, that’s not true. Campfield says his bill is morally and ethically neutral, but banning the discussion of one thing while allowing continued discussion of another is not neutrality. It is blatant bias. And, looking through the examples of history, intentionally creating silence around an issue won’t silence those fighting the injustice of hatred.
And in times of blatant hatred, sometimes a little tongue-in-cheek comedy is a helpful way to take action. Thus, props to George Takei. I’m on board. "It's OK to be Takei!"
Plus, as an ironic side note, yesterday (before I knew about SB49 passing) I read And Tango Makes Three with my students. It’s a children’s book that’s been banned all over the place because it “promotes the gay agenda.” It’s a true story about two male penguins in NYC's Central Park Zoo who adopt an egg in need of care and raise the resulting chick, Tango. We read the book because it integrated perfectly into our current curriculum. We’ve been talking for months about families – what a family is, who’s in a family, and really working to acknowledge the idea that no two families are the same, that all family compositions and identities are ‘real’ families, and that we can find similarities between ourselves and others, just as we can find differences. In addition, this week we were talking about zoos – as we focused on the letter Z, continued investigations about animals, and visited the zoo one block from our school. AND, we’ve been preparing the children for their eventual transition to the next grade level. We’ve been visiting the classrooms they may be in next year and the students in those rooms have been studying bird life cycles, so have been hatching chicken, duck, and quail eggs. My kids loved hanging with the baby birds. As such, And Tango Makes Three touches on all these curricular topics – families, zoos, animals, baby birds. How could I possibly have found a better curricular match?! “Gay themes” be damned. And what did the kids want to talk about when we finished the book? How cute penguins are and how parenting penguins prepare and then care for their baby chicks. Very controversial stuff.
For other (blatantly anti-SB49) videos, you can check out Jon Stewart and the folks at FCKH8.
On Friday an amendment (for which I cannot find the official text) was submitted, and then adopted – leading to the passing of the bill – with at least two changes from the original. First, the phrasing "sexual orientation other than heterosexuality" was stricken and replaced by limiting discussions to only "natural human reproduction science." (This change was fine with Campfield who said, "There's more than one way to skin a cat.… I got what I wanted.… Homosexuals don't naturally reproduce.") In addition, the amendment loosened the scope of the bill such that educators could respond to student questions about homosexuality without punishment, but still cannot offer materials or engage curriculum or instruction inclusive of homosexuality.
According to the Asheville Citizen-Times, "Companion legislation in the state House of Representatives has not advanced out of committee, and supporters of the bill do not intend to bring it up again until 2012."
As a practicing teacher of Kindergarten students, my concerns and fears about this bill are stacking up. Limiting the possibility for discussion and dialogue on any subject typically has dangerous results. Even hypothesizing the consequences of this bill, the following are a few of my concerns. If I were teaching in Tennessee (which I am not):
- The bill would prohibit my inclusion of curriculum and dialogue that acknowledges the lived experiences of my current students who have gay parents or other gay family members or friends.
- The bill would prohibit my colleagues who work with older elementary and middle school students from including dialogue or curricular material that acknowledges and supports students who may be gay or questioning or who have gay family members or friends.
- The bill would limit our inclusion of curriculum in which sexual orientation or identity is relevant to understanding. For example, a discussion of race, ethnicity, and power is relevant to understanding slave narratives or narratives by native peoples (both of which are currently part of our third grade curriculum, by the way). This bill prohibits a similar discussion of sexuality and power as it relates to understanding historical and cultural events, social structures and consequences, literature, poetry, other creative works, and so on.
- The bill severely limits and/or prohibits teachers and counselors from sharing gay-positive materials with gay and questioning students (who do exist in middle school, and sometimes even late elementary school).
- The bill severely limits and/or prohibits both offensive and defensive efforts to address bullying around issues of sexuality or perceived sexuality.
In addition, the bill seems reliant on at least two faulty assumptions. First, the bill suggests that sexuality is a non-issue before ninth grade. As anyone who knows anything about human development can confirm, sexuality has a place in the lives of all people at all points in their life, both personally and contextually. This looks very different at different ages, but has a presence nonetheless. For example, my students are four and five. Generally, they are not dealing with issues of their own sexuality, but the sexuality of their parents, older siblings, extended family members, family friends, and so on, plays an important role in shaping the cultural and social contexts in which they live. I have a responsibility to help my students understand the world they see around them – a world in which diversity has an active presence (as relates to sexual orientation and a billion other identity markers). Sexuality has consequences for our social structures and the lives of my students. As such, sexuality is a relevant issue prior to ninth grade and being able to address it in age-appropriate ways is vital for supporting healthy students, families, and communities.
Second, the bill seems to suggest the idea that NOT talking about homosexuality means it doesn't exist or will disappear. Sorry to say, that’s not true. Campfield says his bill is morally and ethically neutral, but banning the discussion of one thing while allowing continued discussion of another is not neutrality. It is blatant bias. And, looking through the examples of history, intentionally creating silence around an issue won’t silence those fighting the injustice of hatred.
And in times of blatant hatred, sometimes a little tongue-in-cheek comedy is a helpful way to take action. Thus, props to George Takei. I’m on board. "It's OK to be Takei!"
Plus, as an ironic side note, yesterday (before I knew about SB49 passing) I read And Tango Makes Three with my students. It’s a children’s book that’s been banned all over the place because it “promotes the gay agenda.” It’s a true story about two male penguins in NYC's Central Park Zoo who adopt an egg in need of care and raise the resulting chick, Tango. We read the book because it integrated perfectly into our current curriculum. We’ve been talking for months about families – what a family is, who’s in a family, and really working to acknowledge the idea that no two families are the same, that all family compositions and identities are ‘real’ families, and that we can find similarities between ourselves and others, just as we can find differences. In addition, this week we were talking about zoos – as we focused on the letter Z, continued investigations about animals, and visited the zoo one block from our school. AND, we’ve been preparing the children for their eventual transition to the next grade level. We’ve been visiting the classrooms they may be in next year and the students in those rooms have been studying bird life cycles, so have been hatching chicken, duck, and quail eggs. My kids loved hanging with the baby birds. As such, And Tango Makes Three touches on all these curricular topics – families, zoos, animals, baby birds. How could I possibly have found a better curricular match?! “Gay themes” be damned. And what did the kids want to talk about when we finished the book? How cute penguins are and how parenting penguins prepare and then care for their baby chicks. Very controversial stuff.
For other (blatantly anti-SB49) videos, you can check out Jon Stewart and the folks at FCKH8.
Labels:
education,
politics,
sexuality,
social justice,
video
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

