Don’t Hit Women. Thanks, Grey’s Anatomy.

I feel as if all of my posts have supremely obvious titles. Don’t Hit Women. Abercrombie Sucks. PornPornPorn. Sometimes, the world needs to be the point blank, black and white, throw it in your face kind of obvious.

Thursday, May 9th hosted the newest Grey’s Anatomy episode. Tonight will be the season finale. Last Thursday’s episode Readiness is All was emotional, dramatic, and fantastic. All are to be expected from a hit tv show that has stood up over nine seasons and has always been in the top 5 dramas currently on television.

Grey’s Anatomy has touched on many heart-wrenching and controversial issues over the years. It also plays host to a myriad of brilliant and admirable female character’s, including the woman that the show is named for, Dr. Meredith Grey. These women save lives and kick ass. They have fantastic, formidable careers and love passionately. They also sometimes make minor mistakes, make mistakes that can’t be condoned such as affairs, and deal with very real emotional issues.

They may be dramatic television characters that deal with horrific problems, but sometimes I wish that I was a Cardiothoracic surgeon surrounded by equally admirable, brilliant, studly men.

As the women of Grey’s would say, that sounds McDreamy. McSomething, I suppose.

Last week’s episode focused on a domestic violence situation between one doctor (Jo) and her doctor boyfriend (Jason). They had hit each other. She left the incident with facial bruising, and he left with brain trauma that nearly killed him. When he awoke, another doctor (Alex) blackmails Jason into not pressing charges. Alex tells Jason that is never acceptable to hit a girl. Jason protests, saying that Jo hit him as well. Alex responds with “don’t hit a girl; take it or walk away.”

I don’t agree. This type of situation isn’t to be excused. Take it? He should just take the violence? No, he should have walked away. I don’t think we should just excuse domestic violence when it is at the hands of a woman. Neither of them should be acting upon violent thoughts.

Instead of saying “don’t hit a girl,” we should be saying “don’t hit.” If we want equal treatment, we need to give it back to the men as well. I know that this common phrase, “don’t hit a woman,” is part gentlemanly ideals, part encouraging self restraint in men. This implys that men have lessened control over their violent thoughts; that they should restrain their self when these thoughts are towards women, but perhaps it is more ok for a man to hit a man. Men being manly, right? No. Just stop.

Men, don’t hit men. Women, don’t hit men. Men, don’t hit women. Women, don’t hit women! Don’t hurt each other! Walk away!

Don’t take it, and don’t give it back unless you really do have to defend yourself. If you really think that you will get hurt if you don’t fight back, and there is no way to leave the situation, then by any means possible, defend yourself. Defend yourself until you are able to leave the situation.

I worked at a suicide hotline for a notable duration, and I was amazed by what terrible situations people’s lives truly could be in. These calls were not from third world nations or slums, but from my backyard.

People face violence everywhere. Violence happens in every pay scale. Don’t be a part of it. Stand up for yourself without breaking someone’s face.



You Might Also Like ...

Where Is America’s Daddy Leave?

America is not so forward thinking as we would hope. Sure, occasionally gay people gain a few rights, and now we can reference those times we elected a half black President. This does not mean that America is any where near reaching the equality mark for any area of discrimination.

People don’t want to hear that we live in a discriminatory patriarchal world anymore, but the numbers don’t lie. Paternal leave is rarely offered in America. Women are in fact still penalized for maternity leave- after her fourth maternity leave, the CEO of Crest White Strips was asked to step down. Instead, she took her case to court.

In Sweden, the men are very much pushed into accepting their equal rights to a leave from work after a child is born. In 1995, Sweden introduced “daddy leave”. It had an immediate impact. No father was forced to stay home, but the family lost one month of subsidies if he did not. Soon more than 80% of men accepted paternal leave. Obviously, men could not as readily validate staying at work whilst losing money.

Money is a great motivator, but pride works even better. The pride that keeps these men at work when they have the paid option at to be at home with their lovely offspring is the same pride that makes them now accept parental leaves. Since the better option has now been normalized, men are capable of accepting their newfound equality.

This is not merely a fight for equal rights for women in the workplace, but also for equal rights for men in the home. The right to stay home with your child is not one afforded to most American men, and we are supposedly a superpower country.

Gender roles are so deeply, socially ingrained from birth that it seems we can do nothing to fight Sweden’s fight. Luckily, other countries are following suit: Germany, Portugal, and Iceland.

I take at this legislation as something that America is not good at: preventative measures. While this law has helped lower the divorce rate, raise women’s pay by seven percent, fight gender inequality, and probably more often raises strongly attached children, America can’t be interested in it because it is not a quick fix.

This isn’t just about parental leave, but gender equality in general. Only twelve of the five hundred CEOS of Fortune 500 companies are women. I know that national pride is important, but it is hard to be proud of my supposed super power homeland when they are not capable of doing so many things that a tiny, peaceful country of Sweden can do.



You Might Also Like ...

Disney Makeover

When Disney released “Brave” in 2012 I was so excited. First: she’s a red head, second: she’s sassy, third: she’s Scottish, fourth: she doesn’t need a man, fifth: she’s beautiful without being package. She didn’t look like the normal Disney princess.

HuffPost blogger Kristen Howerton put it best when she wrote, “‘Brave’ may be considered by many to be the first feminist princess movie. Merida does not pine for a prince to come to her rescue, and solves her own problems without the aid of a suitor.”

She was a healthy role model for girls. Her hair was frizzy, her body was more athletic than Barbie’s 34-18-32, she was tough and smart—she was perfect. When Disney announced they were formally making her the 11th princesses feminists of the world rejoiced!

But with her new role came a new look—her hair is smoother and the curls are more defined, she’s thinner with a more defined waist and hips, her eyes are more almond and cat like, her lips are fuller and she no longer has  that open smile it’s now merely a smirk.

In short they ruined her. They turned her into every other Disney princess. Her looks are more important than her mind or personality.  A Mighty Girl, a female empowerment website, has taken to Change.org to try and convince Disney to leave Merida alone.

The letter on Change.org reads, in part:

 

The redesign of Merida in advance of her official induction to the Disney Princess collection does a tremendous disservice to the millions of children for whom Merida is an empowering role model who speaks to girls’ capacity to be change agents in the world rather than just trophies to be admired. Moreover, by making her skinnier, sexier and more mature in appearance, you are sending a message to girls that the original, realistic, teenage-appearing version of Merida is inferior; that for girls and women to have value — to be recognized as true princesses — they must conform to a narrow definition of beauty.

The author of Cinderalla Ate My Daughter, Peggy Orenstein, wrote on her personal blog about Merida’s makeover: “In the end, it wasn’t about being brave after all. It was about being pretty.” I couldn’t agree more, I also think Sarah Gray of The Frisky also hit the nail on the head when she said: “If anything Disney should be looking to Merida’s example, and mold the other Princesses in her image: confident, strong and Brave.”

 



You Might Also Like ...

Abercrombie Is Against Large People, Which We Already Know

Abercrombie and Fitch doesn’t carry the sixes XL and XXL in their clothing store. They do carry those sizes in men’s clothing so that buff male athletes will also wear the brand.

Large people do not appeal to A&F’s marketing scheme. The CEO has made multiple public statements on the topic, including “It’s almost everything. That’s why we hire good-looking people in our stores. Because good-looking people attract other good-looking people, and we want to market to cool, good-looking people. We don’t market to anyone other than that.”

We know. We noticed that all of the preppy, popular kids in high school had wardrobes full of Abercrombie and Fitch apparel.

This marketing scheme makes logical sense. The popular teens see other beautiful teens wearing the brand and want to fit in. They see the advertisements full of impossibly beautiful people. Every year, the company comes out with a catalogue that has to be purchased from the store, chock full of pictures of naked, stereotypically attractive, predominately white people. Only people who deem themselves in the league of the attractiveness of the models should be wearing the clothes, as far as the brand is concerned.

Those less “attractive” may aspire to be one of the popular kids. They also shell out the money and don the clothing, on the off chance that this will make them as attactive and as cool as those they wish they were friends with.

Finally, there are those with larger body types who simply will not be able to fit into the clothing brand. This makes CEO Mike Jeffries very happy. Without his clothes being unobtainable by the truly “unattractive”, then his clothes would not be as cool. The core customers are to be stereotypically hot, youthful people.

For all of these reasons, the brand is able to overprice clothing that is marketed to teens. Teenagers are generally not able to pay the same clothing prices that adults do. Instead, they shop at cheaper outlets like Forever 21 and H&M. With this cool-ness branding, teenagers are willing to pay whatever it takes to make it. Massive amounts of buyers fly from Asian countries to large A&F stores in order to fulfill their client’s wishes and provide this elusive, cool clothing.

Not to mention that aspiring to these ideals can create eating disorders.

Legally, the brand must hire sales people as “models”. This way, they must be attractive and cool, personifying everything that Mike Jeffries wants. Potentially less attractive employees work in the back of the store, in the stock room.

I think that is a brilliant marketing scheme. I also think that it is disgusting.

Another CEO quote for your viewing pleasure:

“In every school there are the cool and popular kids, and then there are the not-so-cool kids. Candidly, we go after the cool kids. We go after the attractive all-American kid with a great attitude and a lot of friends. A lot of people don’t belong [in our clothes], and they can’t belong. Are we exclusionary? Absolutely. Those companies that are in trouble are trying to target everybody: young, old, fat, skinny. But then you become totally vanilla. You don’t alienate anybody, but you don’t excite anybody, either.”

Ugh. Makes sense, but no thank you. If purposeful discrimination is what it takes to be cool, then you get what you pay for.



You Might Also Like ...