trading places - an open writing exercise

i found this, for all practical purposes, on a blog called caferati (which i stumbled upon randomly as well), and i think it would be awesome to do on my blog. if you’re reading this, it would be fantastic if you could do this writing exercise either by commenting, writing on your blog, or doing it in a private diary or the like. hell, you could even vlog it, and i could post on here by request.

think about an issue that you are incredibly passionate about and have a very strong opinion on — and argue for the other side. no restrictions on genre, style, etc. do it.

HERE IS MY ARGUMENT FOR THE OTHER SIDE. THIS DOES NOT REPRESENT MY ACTUAL VIEWS:

John McCain is the president that the United States needs in 2008.

Why do I say this? The italicized note notwithstanding, John McCain is the candidate that will lead the country with a far more competent and experienced hand than Sen. Obama. McCain has served in Congress since 1982; Obama served in the Illinois State Senate from 1996 to 2004, and is currently serving his fourth term in the U.S. Senate. Also, John McCain is a moderate, neither completely right-wing nor completely left-wing. In fact, he is the sixth most liberal Republican in the Senate. He has a history of working across party lines, meaning he’s actually DONE some of the things that Obama keeps talking about. By contrast, Obama is a Democrat who staunchly toes the Democratic party line on almost all political issues.

Also, he recently gave a speech on climate change and is making a conscious effort to distance himself from the disastrous policies of the Bush administration.

Obama, on the other hand, keeps making pretty rockstar-esque speeches on “change we can believe in.” What is exactly is there to believe in? One of the best examples of damage control in American political history after Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s bitterly racist diatribes? (But remember kids, Obama “wasn’t in church.”) Quite frankly, we don’t know for sure if Obama holds the same incendiary views as Rev. Wright; after all, he did stay in that church for twenty years! He baptised his children there, he got married to his wife there . . . am I the only one who finds this slightly suspicious?

Now that another experienced, qualified candidate is slowly declining, we have to choose between the two presumptive candidates. I would much rather have a president with a proven track record and the ability to guide our country than ineffectual, weak, inexperienced leader who knows how to make pretty speeches.

update: my (underwhelming) support for obama

i did delete a post talking about switching my support over to barack obama. i’ve been thinking about it, and honestly, i’m not an enthusiastic supporter of him at all. but he’s better than john mccain, that’s for sure.

the fact of the matter is that i’m supporting him because he would be a much better leader than john mccain, though i honestly don’t believe that he is NEARLY qualified enough or shrewd enough to tackle tough foreign policies like the war in iraq, relations with iran, etc. he’s a pansy, quite frankly, and his feel-good lovey-dovey “yes we can let’s all sit around the campfire and sing kumbayah” rhetoric isn’t going to fix the country. it sounds nice, but i’m not convinced.

don’t get me wrong, i want to support obama and i want him to win the general election. but that’s only because he’s better than john mccain.

edit: oh, and i love the economist.

cheerleaders, objectification, and worship of womanhood

How did I know this was going to happen?

I knew that the importing of American culture would cause a maelstorm of “ve are Yindians — this is not DECENT.” I’m used to hearing politicians in India spewing crap like that, especially those BJP chutiyas. But this is quite possibly the best quote out of the entire article:

“We live in India where womanhood is worshipped. How can anything obscene like this be allowed?,” Siddharam Mehetre told the Press Trust of India news agency.

“This thing is meant for foreigners and not for us. Mothers and daughters watch these matches on television. It does not look nice.”

(Alluding to the bolded quote): Yes, womanhood in India has been worshipped for thousands of years. In fact, here are some of my favorites (again, just a few):

Chapter III

61. For if the wife is not radiant with beauty, she will not attract her husband; but if she has no attractions for him, no children will be born.

Chapter V

164. By violating her duty towards her husband, a wife is disgraced in this world, (after death) she enters the womb of a jackal, and is tormented by diseases (the punishment of) her sin.

165. She who, controlling her thoughts, words, and deeds, never slights her lord, resides (after death) with her husband (in heaven), and is called a virtuous (wife).

Chapter IX

2. Day and night woman must be kept in dependence by the males (of) their (families), and, if they attach themselves to sensual enjoyments, they must be kept under one’s control.

3. Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence.

Oh, and sex-selection abortion and son preference is totally not a problem in India. [/sarcasm] The only women who are truly “worshipped” in India are the statues in the temples.

Granted, the practice of cheerleading itself is inherently sexist in my opinion, and leering has been a problem about which the cheerleaders are complaining. Of course, sexual harrassment is a rampant problem in India as well, (way to worship women!) so it has deeper societal roots than just cheerleaders at cricket games (same with every other problem being addressed in this article.)

I only wish this situation could have been handled better, since I think people are more miffed about American-style cultural imperialism rather than the objectification of girls and women. Honestly, the only reason right-wing cry “indecent!” is because they either want to draw attention away from the real problems that India is facing or they are truly afraid that control of women and their sexuality is slipping out of their hands. Perhaps it’s both.

20 april 2008

Note: This post was written on April 20, 2008 on my former blog at Blogger; I’m transferring old posts from there to here as a record.

this isn’t surprising, but still incredibly disturbing. i already distrust corporate media to a great degree, but i think the fact that the NYT had the balls to expose the government like this is just…wow. i know NYT = corporate media, but the fact that they were willing to run this story is amazing.

the bush administration has calculated this war and completely destroyed the meaning of the words “free press.” americans have a tendency to believe that government manipulation of the media could never happen to us because of the first amendment, but obviously this article proves that wrong.

i already think the american government and this country in general has been completely 100% ekdum messed up by the bush administration, but this is just government corruption at its highest level. this sounds like something that would happen in north korea or pakistan, not the united states.

i have lost all faith in the government in one click of a button.

20 april 2008

Note: This post was written on April 20, 2008 on my former blog at Blogger; I’m transferring old posts from there to here as a record.

sometimes i just want to run away from the world and all its evils. i don’t want to surround myself with all the rampant materialism, the drudgery of the rat race, and the general lack of purpose and happiness that characterizes people who work a 9-5, buy stuff and work even more so they can buy more stuff.

as crazy as it sounds, living on a commune sounds like an awesome thing to do at this point. (the “proper” term nowadays is “intentional community.”) granted, i still want an education and i want to go to college to open my eyes to different possibilities and everything that this world has to offer besides the evils i listed above. by going to college/university, maybe i can find little pockets of beauty in all of the chaos that exists in our world.

i know that communes are associated with rampant sex and drugs, but that’s not what i want. but before i go off and smoke some ganja to try to “free my mind” and whine about stickin’ it to the man (what a coincidence that i’m writing about weed on 4/20), you, my dear readers, need to know that i want to join a community that works towards social justice and believes in non-violence, love, equality, self-sufficiency, and living in harmony with the environment. (did i mention that i’m crazy?)

of course, this all may happen after i graduate high school, or it may not happen at all. life takes people in strange directions, and i just need to go with it and pursue peace, love, & happiness. this is my own weird way of attempting to do just that. life is so much more purposeful when you’re working towards a common goal of justice, peace, and love in this cruel world.

14 march 2008

Note: This post was written on March 14, 2008 on my former blog at Blogger; I’m transferring old posts from there to here as a record.

I don’t know how to write this entry, since it is so deeply personal and so deeply introspective, even though I feel OK sharing it on the Internet. (I’ve never shared these things with my family or close friends.) Looks like I know where I’ll be spending my Spring Break; I like doing absolutely nothing for a week. (Except blogging, of course!)

I’ve (literally) been talking to myself about how to write this, since the words only sound right when I say them. (It’s times like this when I really wish my laptop weren’t a hot ghetto mess and I actually had a webcam and could vlog.)

I’ve always been a very private, cloistered person when it comes to my deepest thoughts and feelings. The only people who know me the best are my mother and my sister. Even then, they don’t have an inkling about what I’m going to share.

Sometimes, I hate myself. Actually, it’s lots of times when I hate myself. I also hate sounding like a whiny, emo teenager, and I’ll try my damndest to avoid such a voice, however difficult it may be.

I’m extremely vulnerable and easily hurt. However, I try very hard to not let anyone see this side of me. I’ve showed it to (ex) close friends before, which is why there is an “ex” in parentheses next to the term “close friends.” I cover up my humiliation, disappointment and hurt with anger and bitterness.

I also try to channel my humiliation and pain into other, more worldly ideas and causes. My thinking is that there are people just like me who feel the pain and disillusion that I do every single day, but at a much greater magnitude. Perhaps if I can be an agent in alleviating their suffering, I can battle my own demons.

Combine my angry facade with my desire to help oppressed people, namely women, and what you do get? An angry feminist. Now, this is no reason to give up my feminism, since that would be silly, futile and completely against my principles. However, I think it’s time to peel away the angry mask and show people who I really am.

It’s the reputation of being crazy that’s ruined me. I guess that’s my own fault, but can’t people give me at least a sliver of credit? I’m a person, I have thoughts and feelings, hopes and dreams. I’m a vulnerable, stupid, impulsive teenage girl, too! I can relate! Except that I can’t talk about the latest issue of CosmoGirl! or wax poetic over the “hottest” new trend of impossibly high heels and polka-dot leggings. Neither does it help that I think Hannah Montana is a talentless, irritating twat who should give me all her money. (I guess all celebrities are like that. Especially with giving me their money. They should do that, no matter how talented everyone thinks they are.)

So, back to me being crazy. How did I earn this title? Well, let’s just say that fifth graders are a lot crueler than everyone thinks. (And everyone thinks they’re pretty cruel. Do the math.) By the sixth grade, I figured, “Hey, they want crazy? I’ll give ‘em crazy.” And boy, did I master the art. However, I’m guessing the people really didn’t want crazy and that they just called me that. It’s had me reeling for years, and people still think I enjoy treating people like crap (but only because they do the same to me) and telling the system/establishment/hegemony of the heteronormative patriarchy to do something to itself that would be inappropriate to write on a family blog. (which it should. Oh, and I do enjoy sticking it to the “Man.”)

Oh, and I’m completely nonathletic. Apparently, that’s crazy, too. My nonathleticism has made me the unthinkable in Western society: FAT.

All of this bothers me immensely. I have been in self-denial for the longest time, telling myself that high school kids are all idiots (except for the ones that I actually like) and that it doesn’t matter if they accept me or not, since they’re all going to vote for me someday anyway. Then I realized that people have to actually like you if they’re going to vote for you, since policy doesn’t matter anyway (coughbarackobamacough). So I guess deep down inside, it does matter whether or not people like me, since it’ll cost me crucial votes someday if they don’t. (I think I know what Machiavelli means now.)

And the biggest animal of them all: the opposite sex. This is so complicated for me, since the boys I know are icky jerks anyway, and the shit that many members of their gender do to mine is really messed up. Despite such idiocy on their part, there’s some of them that are actually tolerable, and some of them, dare I say . . . I actually like. *gasp* But as I already said, I’m an “angry feminist” who’s fat so I must “hate men” and so “everyone hates me” so I’m never gonna get any. Boohoo. I thought getting a man boy (since getting said ‘man’ is illegal at this point) was my only purpose in life high school! *sob*

In all seriousness though, I hate the longing, the sadness, the pain that I go through when dealing with my peers and myself. However, there is one thing that keeps me from crossing the line.

Surprisingly enough, I’m not that typical of a teenage girl, since I adore my mother. She keeps me alive. She is my Rock of Gibraltar. She is an AMAZING woman and the one who has loved me, cared about me, crusaded for me, when no one else would. She is the only person who truly knows how deeply I can love or hate someone or something, the only one who knows how my impulsive emotions have broken me down and the only one who has built me back up again.

This is a really long entry that’s going to have an extremely awkward ending. So, what have I ended up sharing? Well, I just want people to accept and like me because I’m an insecure teenager who has her own strange way of dealing with such a revelation. Oh, and I love my mommy.

9 february 2008

Note: This post was written on February 9, 2008 on my former blog at Blogger; I’m transferring old posts from there to here as a record.

I have identified myself as a feminist more than once on this blog, and I think it’s important to clear up the meaning of such words since anti-feminism is so popular in mainstream media these days.

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, the word feminism refers to “the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes” and “organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests.” The word “feminist” is a noun that refers to someone who believes in the theory of political, social and economic equality of the sexes. Patriarchy is defined as “social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male line.”The broad definition is “control by men of a disproportionately large share of power.”

Now, why is this important? Well, because women account for 70 percent of the world’s people who live in absolute poverty. Women work two-thirds of the world’s working hours, produce half of the world’s food, and yet earn only 10% of the world’s income and own less than 1% of the world’s property. Worldwide, a quarter of all women are raped during their lifetime. Depending on the country, 25 to 75 percent of women are regularly beaten at home. Between 10% and 50% of women report they have been physically abused by an intimate partner in their lifetime. Over 120 million women have undergone female genital mutilation. Women hold only 12% of parliamentary seats worldwide. Women account for 2/3rd’s of the world’s illiterate adults, and girls account for 2/3rd’s of the world’s children without access to education.

Also, domestic violence causes more deaths and disability among women aged 15-44 than cancer, malaria, traffic accidents or war. In the United States alone, 1 out of every 6 women have been the victims of an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime.

And yet people ask if feminism is dead, if feminism is “unneeded,” and the media promotes the objectification of women and girls for the sole pleasure of men as “empowering” and “postfeminist.” (Girls Gone Wild, anyone?)I’ll consider myself “postfeminist” if I’ll ever live in a “post-patriarchy.” A question to my (few) readers: What do the words ‘feminism,’ ‘feminist,’ ‘patriarchy,’ and ‘women’s rights’ mean to you? Be honest with me and with the other commentors, but please keep it clean.

9 february 2008

Note as of May 8, 2008: I am no longer a Hillary Clinton supporter, unfortunately, because I do not believe she has a chance of winning the Democratic nomination. Although I believe Barack Obama is not qualified for the presidency, he would do far less damage than any Republican elected.

Note #2: Note: This post was written on February 9, 2008 on my former blog at Blogger; I’m transferring old posts from there to here as a record.

Me watching a Hindi movie: “What the hell? This is such a misogynistic portrayal of women! Why are we watching this tripe?”
My mother: *disgruntled* “Well, if you don’t like it, you don’t have to watch it.”You’re right; I don’t have to watch it. In fact, I don’t have to say anything about it and let the rampant sexism go by. YEAH RIGHT. I’m a feminist, it’s my job to call out sexism where I see it.

So, how does this relate to Hillary Clinton? Again, I’m calling sexist crap where I see it.

Because the media hates Hillary. Really, they do. Of course, Chris Matthews made a sorry excuse for an apology because of his misogynistic comments towards Hillary, but that doesn’t negate the fact that our country is afraid of a strong, intelligent, qualified woman president.

Of course, people accuse her of being calculating and cold. Because, y’know, other politicians aren’t that way AT ALL. Even Barack Obama is calculating. Like The Young Turks said, he wrote his autobiography when he was in his twenties! You don’t think the dude wants to be president? Of course he does, otherwise he wouldn’t be running. If Chris Matthews were pulling the race card with Obama, people would be up in arms about it because racism sucks. Well, so does sexism.

Many of you may say that I’m voting for Hillary Clinton because she’s a woman. I’m not voting for Hillary because she’s a woman; I’m voting for her because I think she’s the most qualified candidate!

That being said, I don’t think a vote for Barack Obama is a vote against women; that’s absolutely absurd. We should be judging presidential candidates based on their voting records and their policies, not the color of their skin or their gender. There are plenty of women (and plenty of feminists) I know that are voting for Obama because they believe he’s the best candidate. I respect that.

However, no one should be voting against Hillary because she’s not “likable.” If you’re going to be against Hillary Clinton, do it because you don’t like her policies or her voting record, not because of what Bill did or the kind of personality you think she has. You’re voting for the president of the United States, not Miss America.

6 february 2008

Note: This post was written on February 6, 2008 on my former blog at Blogger; I’m transferring old posts from there to here as a record.

Pregnancy Notification Policy Alarms Some Experts

A revised regulation that directs Howard County school officials to notify parents when students reveal they are pregnant has drawn criticism from health experts who say it violates a young woman’s right to privacy and jeopardizes health care.

The policy and accompanying procedures appear to be among the strictest in the region.

Health experts say that students’ willingness to seek care will decline.

“There’s no question this will have a chilling effect on kids coming forward,” said County Health Officer Peter Beilenson. “It’s going to slow down health care.”

That headline should really read “Pregnant Teens’ Rights Violated, Howard County School Board is Filled with Idiots.”

Oh wait, I forgot, teenagers don’t have rights once they walk into the hallowed halls of thisplaceisaprison High School! Especially not the ones that get knocked up! Actually, let’s just pin a big fat “P” on all the pregnant chicks, since slut-punishing is soooo popular these days! [/snark]

This is not only a violation of the right for ALL women to choose (not just the ones over 18), this is a violation of human rights.

3 february 2008

Note: This post was written on February 3, 2008 on my former blog at Blogger; I’m transferring old posts from there to here as a record.

I must say, I definitely recommend the book Gang Leader for a Day: A Rogue Sociologist Takes to the Streets. It’s a fascinating look at what happens when an Indian-American grad student at the University of Chicago explores the neighborhood around the university to conduct a survey on urban poverty.

I simply don’t know what to say about this book; it isn’t a dry, academic look at a community that has been shaped by racial tensions, crappy socioeconomic conditions, gang violence, and the like. What amazed me most were the interactions between gangs and non-gang members; with the lack of police around, the gangs not only sell drugs and engage in general racketeering, they are the government for the one that has failed.

Sudhir Venkatesh, the author of what really is a sociological research paper, (it certainly isn’t written that way) represents the inner suburban naïveté and general disregard and fear of poor people, particularly blacks.

I’m on page one hundred-something, so I’m not completely done with it. READ IT.