The Bro-ing of America

I know this isn't a new trend by any stretch of the imagination. Terms like bromance have long since entered our lexicon but I ask you: does everything that guys like to do have to be "bro"-ed out?

Because of our strictly defined gender roles, whenever men get interested in something that isn't deemed "masculine" we have to give it special name. It started out innocently enough with words like "metrosexual" (cause G-d forbid a man like to get the dirt from under his nails WHERE IT BELONGS!). Then the idea that two men might like to hang out with each other became a very affront to our sensibilities and the term "bromance" was coined. (No homo, though). Now because men are out of work, they've taken to doing the shopping and this becomes a phenomenon requiring special "man aisles" at the store. And heterosexual men have started to get botox to stave off aging and it's called "bro-tox" (see video below). Check out Urban Dictionary's extensive list of bro terminology to see how pervasive it's become.

A lot of this comes out of a need to constantly reinforce manhood in an era where men are moving into stereotypically feminine arenas. If we call if "bro-tox" it's not for women (though it's the same exact procedure). If I'm a "manny" or a "murse" I can retain my masculinity and earn a paycheck, which I couldn't do if I was a just nurse or a nanny. And some of it is borne out of our news media. In order to make things "newsworthy" and eye-catching, we have to dissect issues upon genderized (or racialized, or sexualized) lines because that's simple. And hey if we can come up with an all-encompassing terms that suits our needs even better.

I, for one, am rejecting the "bro-ing" of America. It's played, it's reductive and it pushes us further into boxes. Let it go, bro.

It's Different for Girls

Recently, there was an outrage over at Jezebel due to two of its editors. Tracie and Moe, appearing on a local show called Thinking & Drinking and, taking the latter part to heart, the former took a backseat to some questionable comments. The interview then caused a lot of lamentation about the editors letting down girls & women who saw them as their new "feminist heroes" and others wondering why anyone would see these women as such in the first place.

Moe has since moved from Jezebel to Gawker.com, although I believe she will still continue to do some of her regular Jezebel features. Tracie on her personal blog eventually posted this statement where she questioned the idea of whether there can be a "good" or "bad" feminist. Although I found her final post on the topic to be the most well-thought out and honest viewpoint of the situation, her blog was littered with comments such as:

You are putting women, not even feminists, to shame with your attitude, outlook, and disregard. You words are trash and shouldn't be taken with any more validity than a cheap add in a porno mag.

and:

You're not a "bad feminist"...you're just an immature, cold, insensitive, self-centered bitch

Now while I do believe everyone is entitled to their opinions, I find that when addressing the issue of feminism, many women seem to believe that they have the definitive or the authentic feminism locked up somewhere. And throwing around the words "bitch", "whore" and "slut" don't help anyone.

Am I not a feminist (or a "bad" feminist) because I haven't read the literature? Is my feminism less authentic because I believe that being a good mother is the best job a woman can do? (On an aside: I also believe that being a good father is the best job a man can do. When you work with children, you realize how important good parenting is.)

I'm just wondering because it seems as though feminism, the way it has been set up, is still largely about middle-upper class white women who have time to contemplate these issues and denounce other women who don't because they are trying to survive economically or a stay-at-home mom or a sex worker or something else that doesn't jibe with the idea of a woman throwing down her apron and entering the workforce.

As I see it, the truth is that it's different for girls. There's always going to be a barrier to breakdown, an image to overcome, a double standard to navigate. But lately it seems like women are throwing extra barriers at each other to further judge your authenticity. I believe that a women should be able to have responsible sex with as many people as she wants, but I don't think anyone should be running around putting their sexuality in people's faces (male or female). I think a woman can do any job a man can do if she puts her mind to it. I also think there is a certain grace and beauty that women have and that should never be lost in the attempt to "equal" men. I don't know what kind of feminist that makes me but I also believe that this whole thing is a process. And it's still happening everyday.

Full interview of Thinking & Drinking (I really suggest watching the entire thing as the clips are a bit taken out of context): Shoot the Messenger

Brothers & Sisters

This year marks the 100th anniversary of the longest running Black sorority Alpha Kappa Alpha, typically known as AKA. To celebrate this milestone, Mattel is releasing the AKA Barbie. After reading about this at Jezebel and reading some of the comments I started to really think about the history of Black organizations and some of the deep conflicts I have with them.

Black organizations in this country have an illustrious history in the United States, many forming at places and times when just the idea of creating spaces for Black people to excel and challenge the minority was nearly unheard of. But at the same time, so many organizations were preoccupied with the "image" that they were projecting to the same majority, which is why we have the prevalence of "paper-bag" tests and other standards which devalue Black beauty and traits. And I'm being completely open here. These practices were not limited to one specific organization or group. And this is not a condemnation of the AKAs. Some of the women I most admire are sisters of the organization. But ...

This is an issue that many Black organizations would like to sweep under the rug. And just as I believe we (Black people) will never be free until all people are free; I, too, believe that Black people will never be mentally and emotionally free until the -isms and schisms within our community are addressed. Every stage of the fight for civil rights and equality has been marred by colorism, sexism and homophobia and what most recent history books will tell us is that we, sometimes moreso than our oppressors, are good at covering up these injustices.

During my college career one of my best experiences was the Third World Transition Program (TWTP). What I loved about TWTP was that it was the first time I'd ever seen people openly and honestly admit to the various prejudices that exist among communities of color, without placing blame on White people. It wasn't just about acknowledging how we'd been oppressed by the majority but also coming to terms with how we continue to oppress ourselves and each other. Those are the types of discussions we need to be having. What's the point of gaining the power to oppress ourselves?