Saturday, December 7, 2013

We Don't Just Make Cupcakes -- Girls In The Kitchen


It has long been a joke (and a harsh reality) that a woman’s place is in the kitchen, with cooking being just one of our “womanly duties”.  After years of slaving over the oven and gaining some real culinary skills, we’ve more recently decided to venture into the professional cooking world.  Yet despite our experience, as soon as we stepped foot into the professional kitchen, we were suddenly considered incapable of making fantastic food.  But somehow men, most of whom can’t even navigate their own home refrigerator,  have the had the ability to  rise to become masters of the trade.  Some of us women have cooking in our blood and have the earned the right to be acknowledged for our talent.


I take this issue very personally.  


I’ve always enjoyed cooking and baking.  As soon as I could walk, I was toiling around in the kitchen, so it wasn’t a surprise when I decided to make it a career of it.  What was a surprise (call me naïve) was how difficult it would be to thrive in the culinary industry as a female.  I subconsciously knew that it was a field dominated by men, but  I was more confident in my skills than I was concerned about sexism, so I didn’t expect it to be that much of a struggle.  But, sure as the sun rises, I was slapped with some unavoidable situations that many females meet when they decide to make cooking their career.  Here are just a few of the situations and stereotypes a female deals with in the culinary industry:


Being belittled.  For me personally, it’s a given that people are going see me as diminutive because I’m short girl who bakes cakes, so it was natural for the men around me to see me as the little kitchen sprite-- like a Keebler Elf  (I’ve been called that several time.  Offensive, yet still amusing to even me).  What I didn’t like was being treated like a frail, old lady.  This doesn’t only apply to me.  How many times have I seen a guy rush over to help a female co-worker lift a heavy pot or reach something way above her head when she is perfectly capable of doing so on her own.  We’re girls, not crippled.  

Yet once you prove you’re mentally and physically capable of holding your own, you risk being labeled as a bitch.


    “If they [female employees] acted too masculine, such as brusquely giving orders like men chefs, this could get them labeled ‘bitchy’ and undermine their authority.”  Feminist Kitchen

And if you’re a bitch, then you’re the enemy.  The concept of teamwork goes to hell, the kitchen falls apart and guess who’s to blame.


Sexual Harassment.  This one’s obvious.  Professional kitchens are almost completely devoid of appropriate professional behavior so sexual harassment is “tolerated” to some degree since everyone is harassing everyone-- all “in good humor”, of course.  So this blurs the line between the jokes and serious offenses.  If a woman really is offended, she could complain, but it’s likely that the higher ups are aware of the ways of the kitchen and don’t care so long as the food is good and customers are happy.

I recently found out a restaurant in my own neighborhood, Juventino (owned by Juventino Avila) has been facing its own sexual harassment scandal. Former female employees have claimed:
“The food is seductive, but behind this restaurant’s charming façade lies a toxic work environment where employees are publicly berated...and young women are subjected to unwanted sexual advances behind the closed and locked doors of Juventino’s office.  Juventino, however, has consistently refused to acknowledge or take responsibility for his actions.” Huffington Post
That’s pretty typical behavior for management.  
Underlying belief that female chefs aren’t creative or deserving of recognition.  This just doesn’t make any sense.  There is no scientific evidence that men have better culinary intuition or taste than women, so why do they get all the praise?  There’s a complete disconnect;  how can a women be an expert cook in her own kitchen but inept outside of it.  Consider this: At the 2009 James Beard Awards (arguably the industry's biggest night-- it’s like the Oscars of the culinary world), only 16 of the 96 nominees were women; 2 of the 16 women nominated actually won.  The theme of the night was “Women In Food”.  Ouch. Clatl.com
Side note: “Women account for approximately 20 percent of respondents to the American Culinary Federation's 2011 salary survey. Surveys in 2010 and 2011 by StarChefs reported similarly low numbers, with 396 female respondents in 2011 compared to 1,325 men”  The Nest
Clearly women need more of a presence in industry to prove that they’re every bit as, if not more, capable of thriving than men.

And it’s not false recognition or fame were after.  We don’t all aspire to be talking heads on The Food Network who have little to no culinary experience.



Or who have a decent amount of experience but are really only successful because they're easy on the eyes.



Or just teach people to half-ass a recipe because they’ve already knocked a few back and don’t feel like putting in the work.




It’s just about being exceptionally good at what you do and getting credit for it.

 



Posted by at 1 comment:

My Little Media Book: The ABC's of WWW for Children and Adults

Without a doubt, media and technology have transformed childhood. Today’s children are spending more time with more kinds of screens, at younger ages. A recent study found that children 0-8 years spent an average of 3 hours a day with screens. While video games and cartoons/movies are still uber-popular, Internet has played a major role in the digitalization of their free time. And it is the social aspect of the WWW that draws every young and young-at-heart to it.

Like us, internet-active children are focused on their friends. Among many others, Danah Boyd, a media professor at NYU and a principal researcher at Microsoft, suggests that they use social network websites to connect with people they already know from school, church, activities, etc. They mimic their “offline behavior” online and do the same childish things we used to do back in the days, just using a different platform. So instead of panicking about lost childhood years we, as educators, have a critical role to help them navigate social media safely and intelligently.

Rather than thinking about how we can protect children from the bad things on the Internet, we need to ensure that they are equipped with the tools they need to not only safely navigate the Internet but to benefit from the good it offers. That requires us to think in a different way than we are used to. It is no longer only about protecting them; it is about empowerment and lifelong education so that they can take full advantage of all the new media has to offer. So like we teach children about values like fairness, honesty, and integrity we need to provide them with similar values for the online world.

The media literacy book(let) I created as the final project  does exactly this – it offers a fun and simple way to begin the conversation about the rules of digital media, the benefits of WWW as well as the necessary precautions to ensure a safe environment online. My Little Media Book is intended for internet-active children (the younger the better) and their parents and educators. It covers topics such as online privacy and “netiquette” and provides months-worth of research and resources to further explore the issue. Resources for children include educational online games about social media, online marketing techniques used by advertisers, and online ethics.  Because of the nature of its subject, it is as interactive as a book can get – with a board game inside and a space for notes/drawings.


Selected Resources/Works Cited:
Posted by at No comments:

S.C.A.R Magazine.

Hello world! Welcome to S.C.A.R. magazine. This is the title I chose for this magazine not because the magazine will focus on gnarly scars, but because it’s an acronym. It’s an acronym for: Secretly Caring About Reactions. I chose this acronym for specific reasons. A scar is something visible that is left behind by past injuries. In most cases the scar eventually fades away, but traces of it will always remain. While most people might stay insecure about it, some will go on not caring. This way of thinking can be attributed to emotional scars as well, and like a cut we care or feel anything until we see it. This was my concept – most people don’t think about social issues until its right in front of their faces. We secretly care about reactions, and we don’t realize until it’s brought to our attention. This is the reasoning for the title. I ultimately decided to host the zine on tumblr. It provided a host that would be able to live on after the class. I originally wanted to exclusively include unisex content. I wanted to provide an alternative to publications that perpetuate gender roles - publications that dictated what’s acceptable for men and women to wear. However as I search for content I found other things I wanted to include, and the project evolved from that. I found that a lot of the things I originally intended to include didn’t make the cut, and new sections came to be. While it was initially a blow to my ego, since most of my own content didn’t fit into the new direction. (At least for the time being.) That being said S.C.A.R eventually evolved into a space where I can share content (activism, information, video, articles, art projects, etc) that present ways to dispel social norms.



 Without further adieu...
Posted by at No comments:

Project Feminist Masculinity




For my final project, I chose to create a short video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eD4ne5fUO0M&feature=youtu.be (the first I've ever made, so forgive the quality) to get a discussion started about masculinity, patriarchal manhood and what it is doing to our boys and men. Furthermore, I would like for this video to be a call for change from both men and women regarding this very rigidly and statically defined, patriarchal notion of manhood.

I am a victim of childhood sexual abuse at the hands of a man. This man too was a victim of childhood sexual abuse at the hands of another man. And the cycle probably goes back and has been perpetuated for too long now. I am also a child who grew up in a physically violent household, one in which emotional terrorism was such a constant that when I finally became an adult and didn't experience it on a daily basis from my partner, I rejected him. He was not "man enough" for me. He was too emotional and sensitive for me and that is exactly what I told my patriarchal female friends who quickly understood my dilemma and agreed that it was for the best.
What were the qualities deemed "not man enough"? Too emotional? Empathy. A desire to talk problems out rather than subject the other person to emotional terrorism, physical abuse and worse.
Why did I think this way and why did so many of my educated friends think so too?


"Man Up" defines patriarchal masculinity
bell Hooks in The Will to Change: Men Masculinity and Love, claims that the crisis facing men is "the crisis of patriarchal masculinity"  and that it is both men and women who "participate in this tortured value system (31, 33). She goes on to argue that "patriarchy is the single most life-threatening social disease assaulting the male body and spirit in our nation...yet, most men never think about patriarchy-what it means, how it is created and sustained...there is no mass concern for the plight of men" (hooks, 17, 30).
Meanwhile, everyday in the U.S., men are more and more violent (physically and sexually). They are the violent abusers of themselves and others. According to nomas.org, 90% of violent physical assault is by men. 95% of domestic violence and 90% of child sexual abuse is committed by men. They are too often also the killers of themselves and others: Over 85% of people who commit murder are men. Patriarchy has not yet satisfied, has not left them feeling whole and they've taken to committing suicide in record numbers or otherwise perpetuating and inflicting the pain they cannot express on those deemed weaker. And still, given our society's patriarchal definition of manhood, violence is equated with a natural will specific to men on the basis that there is a "biological connection between having a penis and the will to do violence" (55).
Terrence Real calls violence "boyhood socialization" and argues that the way we turn boys into men is through injury, by pulling them "away from their own expressiveness" (60). He goes on to argue that it is disconnection which defines masculinity. bell hooks argues this point further, stating that the "first act of violence that patriarchy demands of males is not violence towards women. Instead, patriarchy demands of all males that they engage in acts of psychic self mutilation, that they kill off the emotional parts of themselves" (66). For this reason it is essential that we STOP explaining away violence by insisting on a biological male instinct bent on abusing.
Tony Stark must always protect Pepper
In this sense, our current notion of patriarchal masculinity makes our men emotionless, violent dominators in a constant power struggle. Not adhering to these very static definitions of manhood would be shameful and embarrassing for men since other patriarchal men and women would quickly enact rituals of power that would make him get back in line. hooks tells us that "men simply do not get that love and abuse cannot go together" and then questions "why should they" since everywhere in our media and our popular culture, the message is the same, where there is intense passion, violence is almost inevitable (67).
In our top 20 movies of 2013, 14 had a singular male protagonist and most of those protagonists were men going on journeys that involved going to war, fighting a battle and appearing heroic by fighting alone and away from home.
Robin Thicke glorified for being a sexual predator
If men aren't angry and violent, then they are portrayed as men obsessed with sex and constantly on the prowl for the sexual object that is woman. See Robin Thicke's music video, Blurred Lines. OR any advertisement, billboard, tv show, etc. There is this perception prevalent in patriarchal culture that men NEED to have sex extremely frequently. If they don't, he will be led to sexual violence and misconduct. Because, in our media and our society, the notion that 'he's gotta have it' is so prevalent that we truly believe as hooks points out that "a man deprived of sexual access will ultimately be sexual with anybody" or he will "act out...go crazy" (78). In this way, we once again excuse away sexual violence. When in reality, sex is merely a way of reinforcing the patriarchal male dominator model and in doing so reaffirming male selfhood.
If we look at our movies, tv shows, ads, social media, etc. the messages are all the same. Man is expected to be a certain way and there is very little, if any, room for deviation of that patriarchal norm. When asked questions such as "what are the qualities of a real man," "how are men portrayed in the media," "when is it appropriate for a man to cry in public," and "have you ever told anyone to 'man up,'" the answers overwhelmingly align with the images we see in our mainstream media.
Meanwhile, our men are killing themselves, each other and women in alarming numbers. We can sit here and keep saying that 'real men' are supposed to be tough, strong, dependable, breadwinner, etc. We can keep telling them to 'man up' and negatively equate it to being the opposite of a woman. We can even tell them it is never appropriate for men to cry in public and that they shouldn't be victims. The fact of the matter is, they are. And we, as patriarchal men and women are helping to reinforce those notions when we should be embracing men. We should be helping them understand why 1 in 6 males are sexually abused before the age of 16. We should be telling them that over 70% of males don't report abuse at the time it occurs and that they should not be ashamed to. Instead of calling Ed (who told his story in Victims No Longer: Men Recovering from Incest and Other Sexual Child Abuse) gay for being forced to give his older brother blow jobs at the age of 10, we should be encouraging more men like Ed to come forward with their stories and do away with this notion that men aren't men if they are victimized. Instead of accepting Chris Brown's story that he lost his virginity at 8, we should be working towards a world in which Chris Brown doesn't need to make up stories about his sexual prowess and excessive manhood but instead would be talking about his rape openly with no negative ramifications.
I hope this will be a call for change. A call for Feminist Manhood over Patriarchal Masculinity. A call for a definition of man that does not abuse, hurt and kill men and the rest of us.
Works Cited:
  • hooks, Bell. The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity and Love.
         New York: Washington Square Press, 2004.


 
Posted by at No comments:

What's a "GIRL" on TV?

Overview:
For my final project, I examined what the female characters represent on three popular and similarly named television programs: CBS’s 2 Broke Girls, FOX’s New Girl,  and HBO's GIRLS.  I wrote an article to submit to various feminist publications.  I followed the guidelines of  BITCH Magazine's (http://bitchmagazine.org/writers-guidelines)  "front-of-book section features" which are "1000-1500-word columns on film, television, language, activism, advertising, publishing, and more, with pieces taking the form of reviews, critical essays, Q&As, and activist profiles,"  because BITCH would be my first choice for publication.  My article will also be published in the January/February issue of SPRED 'EM, the Feminist Collective of Detroit's (https://www.facebook.com/fcdetroit) Zine.

 Below you can read my full article and find links to my presentation and various video clips to support my claims.  Enjoy!



Article:


What’s a “GIRL” on TV?


What’s a “girl” on TV?  In the 2011-2012 television season, three shows with young women protagonists premiered: CBS’s 2 Broke Girls, FOX’s New Girl, and of course, the much discussed, HBO show GIRLS.  These shows, currently in their third seasons, or in the case of GIRLS entering its third season January 12, 2014, have been hailed for having female leads, as well as creators and writers, but what are these “girl” characters representing?

First of all, none of these “girls” are girls.  2 Broke Girls centers on Max Black, played by Kat Dennings – a struggling professional waitress/cupcake baker with a rough childhood – and Caroline Channing, played by Beth Behrs – a trust-fund baby who lost all her money when her father was locked up for a Ponzi scheme.  Although Max’s age is uncertain, Caroline has already graduated from Wharton Business School at the beginning of the series and is reportedly 26 years old.  In GIRLS, all four of the dysfunctional sisterhood of Hannah, Marnie, Jessa, and Shoshanna, are post-college age.  Creator/Writer Lena Dunham, plays Hannah Horvath, who in the pilot episode, while tripping on opium, yells at her father, “coffee is for grownups!” implying she is not one.  Her father responds, “you’re gonna drink a strong cup of coffee,” and Hannah snaps back, “I’m 24 years old, don’t tell me what to do!” claiming her independence.  (This comes directly after asking her parents to support her with $1100 per month, for the next two years.)  Leading the geriatric girl category is Jessica (Jess) Day, Zooey Deschanel’s character from New Girl, who has been a teacher for years already, and is supposed to be thirty!”  Webster Dictionary defines a ‘girl’ as “a young female child,” which is confusing considering these “girls” are all adults; it later defines a ‘girl’ as an “unmarried young women,” which could perhaps be what “girl” means in these titles.

All of the characters have terrible luck with men.  The 2 Broke Girls pilot has Max discover her boyfriend in bed with another women, after Caroline tells Max her boyfriend had come on to her earlier.  The New Girl pilot opens with Jess trying to surprise her boyfriend by arriving early wearing nothing but a trench coat, only to discover he has another women over.  Cheating seems to be a common problem for these “girls.”  Luckily Hannah on GIRLS has a “non-boyfriend,” Adam, who she has demeaning sex with.  In the pilot , he calls her “kid,” and “slave,” before saying he’ll “consider” putting on a condom.  Hannah’s relationship with Adam is completely messed up – he wants to act out rape scenes, and turns into a bit of a stalker later in the series.

Apart from the scum that these “girls” date, they all deal with the male gaze.  Max and Caroline work with a cook, Oleg, at the dinner, on 2 Broke Girls; he is the King of Sexual Harassment!  He ogles the ladies and has no filter.  He greets Max with, “hey sexy women, you look so pretty today, you look so beautiful I forgot how bad your personality is,” and calls the thin, blonde Caroline, “Barbie.”  GIRLS has male gazing moments, like Adam criticizing Hannah’s tattoos when she is speaking of how she got them to embrace her body; or when Marnie decides to capitalize on the gaze by taking a job as a hostess at a swanky restaurant that caters to old men, where her new work uniform consists of hot-pants.

New Girl has an interesting dynamic regarding the male gaze because Jess lives with three men, Schmidt, Coach, and Nick, and she forms meaningful friendships with them quite quickly.  The men do see her as beautiful, when she dresses up, and she later ends up in a relationship with Nick.  It is Jess’ best friend Cece, who falls victim to Jess’ roommates’ gaze.  In the pilot, Cece is so uncomfortable sitting in the living room with the three men, she can only stand it until Schmidt admits, “I’m gonna be honest with you, I did not hear a word you just said, because I can kinda see your party hats right now,” and so she runs to Jess’ room.  Cece later ends up dating Schmidt, who screws up the relationship, and in the Season 3, Episode 9, Coach tries to lay clam and takes her on a date.

Female friendship is the most positive attribute any of these characters bring to the screen.  On 2 Broke Girls, Max began as a standoff loner, being she has not had people there for her growing up. Since Caroline has moved in, the two have decided to start a cupcake business together, and work as a pair towards joint goals.  Max took Caroline in when she had nowhere to live, and during Season 3, Episode11, she joined her at Caroline’s childhood nanny’s funeral for support.  They have a new friendship (since the start of the show) that has changed both characters for the better – Max has opened up, and Caroline has become more resourceful.  GIRLS centers around multiple female friendships.  Jessa and Shoshanna are cousins, and Marnie and Hannah have been friends for years.  Even though their personalities are so different, they get along well because of shared history.  All the “girls” have romantic relationships come and go on the show, Jessa even gets married, but the central relationship is the female friendship between them all.  The New Girl relationship between Jess and Cece has been since at least middle school as flashbacks show, but their friendship has something none of the others do – some color.

All of the “girl” main characters are white! Cece is Indian, but she is a supporting character.  2 Broke Girls has an Asian man, Han Lee, as the owner of the dinner, and a black man works as the cashier, but the two stars are both Caucasian Americans.  The show often makes offensive jokes towards Han and his race.  In the pilot, he is corrected on his English and says he wants to change his name to Bryce, making a cheap Bryce Lee/ Bruce Lee pun.  GIRLS has gotten a lot of flack for being so dominantly white.  In the beginning of the second season, Hannah sleeps with a black man, but it has been agued that it was merely to fight against the racist criticism.  GIRLS is the epitome of white privilege; all the “girls” are white, private college graduates who hardly work, are supported by their parents, and are spoiled brats.

Whether supported by their parents or working hard themselves, all these “girls” are broke.  For 2 Broke Girls, being broke is kind of a given as it is in the title.  But they’re not really “girls,” so maybe they’re not really “broke?”  They are, but they do save and work towards their goal of a cupcake shop.  Max and Caroline even opened a shop, which fails, but they downsize the location and are currently successful.  These two “broke” “girls” are actually quite good financial role models.  They live thriftily – they shop at thrift stores and save everything they can.  New Girl’s Jess works hard for her money as well.  She is a teacher, which most people would agree is an underpaid position.  She does not have much extra spending cash; the audience learns this in the pilot when she needs to replace a television and cannot afford a pawnshop.  Jess also spends most of the second season unemployed and does whatever she can to survive.  She shares a loft with three other people and drives a beat up car.  Jessica Day could be viewed as a positive fiscal role model for young women watching her show.

That leaves the “girls” of GIRLS; the financial support of all the characters is uncertain, but Hannah is in favor of being supported by her parents for as long as possible.  The pilot starts with her being “cut-off” by her parents, where she counters for $1100 a week.  Hannah is unfortunately stuck in an un-paid internship like so many others of her generation.  She should be getting paid for her work, but that is a different battle.  When she does get an e-book advance, she fails to write fast enough, and needs her daddy to bail her out, once again.  She is the least independent character of the ones examined, and is a terrible role model for self-sufficient young women.

From looking at this evidence, a “girl” on TV seems to be a young woman in her mid-to-late twenties (even early thirties), college educated (for the most part,) white, an attractor of the male gaze, unlucky in love, and broke, but rich with female friendships.  I myself am every one of these characteristics; I’m just not on television, yet. But I would like to be seen as a young woman and not a girl. I believe referring to these women as girls is the juvenilization that allows Hannah’s character to be so popular, and makes young women believe they need outside support.  Even though all the characters analyzed have room for improvement, Hannah has the most to grow before becoming a functional adult.
Presentation:

Works Cited:


You Tube Clips:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZNDQ_yA4CI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51zk8BwwF8M 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yQULP-P5q8

Readings:
Daulerio, A.J. “I Am Trying To Break Your Heart: A Girls Recap.” Gawker. 1/21/2013. Web. 12/4/2013

Hogan, Victoria S.. (2013). Behind the Scenes: A Look at Socio-cultural Messages in Situation Comedies and their Effects on Gendered Messages. In BSU Honors Program Theses and Projects. Item 15. Available at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/honors_proj/15

McEwen, Lauren. ““Girls”: Taking a real step towards diversity or just answering critics?” Washington Post. 1/14/2013/ Web. 12/6/2013.
McNutt, Myles. “Review: The Disarming Appeal of HBO’s Girls”. Cultural Learnings. 4/12/2012. Web. 12/7/2013
Sisson, Gretchen. “The 99%. Fixing the 2 Broke Girls.” BITCH Magazine. Dec 12, 2011. Web. 12/1/2013.
Team TVLINE. “TV’s 15 Most Empowered Female Characters (and Their 10 Hapless Counterpars)”. TV Line. 3/20/2013. Web. 12/5/2013
West, Ella. “It Happened to Me: I Went to College with HBO’s New It Girl Lena Dunham, and I’m Seething Jealous.” XO Jane. 4/20/2012. Web. 12/5/2013
Wortham, Jenna. “Where My Girls At?” The Hairpin. April 16, 2012. Web. Dec 2, 2013.
http://2brokegirls.wikia.com/wiki/Caroline_Channing
http://newgirl.wikia.com/wiki/Jessica_Day

Episodes:
2 Broke Girls. Pilot. CBS. 9/19/2011. Web. 12/1/2013.
2 Brok Girls. CBS. Season3, Episode 11, “And Life After Death.”  12/2/2013. Web. 12/3/2013.
GIRLS.  Pilot. HBO. 4/15/2012. Web. 12/1/2013.
New Girl. Pilot. FOX. 9/20/2011. Web.12/1/2013.
New Girl. FOX. Season3, Episode 9. “Longest Night Ever.” 11/19/2013. Web. 11/24/2013.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)