Test, one two, Test, Test, Test.......

A Twitter feed Test.

At the risk of another rant about SYTYCD

Tonight i have decided to blog as I go along........watching So You Think You Can Dance Finale show. I was really hoping that this year's finale would be different. But, I'm afraid things are quite the same.........

Pausing at this point to watch the two girls dance together, and then I will provide my reactions to both homosex pairings........

Ahhhh, Mia Michaels - I love you. Your work is inspiring, moving, passionate, and it always makes me feel.....something. However, yes, however.

The two homosex (same sex paired) pieces tonight are, yet again, following the same pattern of gender stereotypes that almost every other season of SYTYCD has followed (the exception here being Travis and Benji, which is an entirely different blog entry). The "boys" compete in a testosterone driven competitive dance that inevitably pits them against one another while the "girls" once again are part of a dance that either celebrates "femininity" or demonstrates a comforting/supportive relationship among women.

Neil and Danny in the Throne Dance
Joshua and Twitch in the Russian Dance
compared to
Sabra and Lacey in The Foxes (weirdness)
Katee and Courtney in Clang Clang Clang Went the Trolley

The dances themselves are enough to demonstrate my point (you can find them all on YouTube). But, especially poignant are the "pre-dance rehearsal moments" when the choreographer and the dancers talk about the dances themselves - referring to the male dance as a testosterone-fest or as gritty, masculine, etc......while the female dance is commented on as "girly" and "feminine" or "soft" and "emotional."

This year is no exception - the women make an emotional journey together, not battling against one another to make their way in the world, but dancing along side one another. While the men once again battle and compete against each other (their own words) to Janet Jackson's "Nasty Boys."

Please don't interpret my critique as a desire to see these two women "duking it out" on stage. But, I wonder why this show, so innovative and so culturally aware, is still buying into the gender stereotypes that can keep dance so stagnant in today's world.

I ask again (as I have in papers and conversations of the past).....and perhaps more specifically....why couldn't the boys have danced the Mia Michaels number and the girls dance Laurieann's choreography?

One other problem I would like to address is the unfair advantage it seems to me has been given to Brandon this evening within the homosex pairing......why hasn't he ever been "forced" to dance in Evan's style? Why is Evan always having to work out of his comfort zone when competing against the other dancers, especially male dancers, but Brandon hasn't been asked to dance in the smooth, sauve, and debonair dance style of Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire? I would like to see Brandon stand out in the same way on the stage, paired against Evan in this style of dance. Instead we see Evan placed in a "Nasty Boys" situation where the judges continue to point out his inability to be "nasty" over and over and over and over again......why would you do that to a dancer in the finale?

It also does not help when Nigel and Mary discuss Evan in an infantilizing manner, pointing out his "choochee face" (reminding me of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang). How can one expect him to excel in this competition when he is constantly being treated like a child. My point is especially made as Nigel make his comments about Evan's solo (as I am typing). I feel like I'm watching an episode of Al Alberts Showcase (a nod to those from the Philadelphia area).

But, Evan's fans will persist. As is evidenced in the current audience reaction to his line dancing number with Kayla. Reacting in response to negative critiques, once again, from the judges.

This season would also be remiss if it didn't continue to feed into the sexual inuendo and commentary provided by not only Nigel, but Cat Deely, as well. Tonight "takes the cake" in many ways......first, shockingly, Adam Shankman comments about Jeanine's body, and then Nigel discusses his disappointment that Mia Michael's "layer-shedding" dance didn't go on long enough for him. I would have to go back and look at the show clips to point out the hundreds of inappropriate comments that have been made throughout this season......I thought comments in season 2 about Danyelle's "size" were bold, but it seems to have gotten worse season after season. I was especially shocked the week that Mia Michaels went on her diatribe about Kayla being the epitomy of "girl," continuing to feed into that sense of what a real "girl" should or should not be. If we simply looked at the women's costumes to decide what a "girl" should be one would have to think that her goal in life should be to be sexy, half-dressed, and sparkly :)

I also have a suggestion for the show's producers:
Why not bring homosex pairings into the competition earlier on in the season? If you can do it in the finale, why can't it be done throughout the season? Any dance style that is not traditional ballroom could surely be done in homosex pairs instead of heterosexual pairings.....even some of the ballroom dances could feasibly be done this way.

Also, I question the fact that voting is always done to eliminate one "boy" and one "girl" each week. Are we really keeping America's favorites or the best dancers by voting that way? Why couldn't two boys be eliminated if they are the ones with the lowest votes overall? Why should a girl who has more votes be sent home? I think the last two seasons have really demonstrated the fact that good dancers are going home before their time for this reason alone. It also makes me wonder why last year a new prize was instituted, so there would be a top "boy" and a top "girl." Isn't there just America's Favorite Dancer, regardless of gender? Continuing to reward the top person in each category does not make sense if the two females are actually the top-two vote-getters! Does it?

Now, I must say that I love So You Think You Can Dance. I will not stop watching this show. I will always love the dancing on this show. I just wish that they would recognize their continued reliance on gender norms AND heteronormative relationships in order to "sell" their message. Some of the most amazing pieces have been, admittedly, heterosex pairings. But, some of my favorite dances have also been the group numbers where gender didn't seem to make a difference. Or heterosex pairings that did not rely on heteronormative relationships (like Sara and Jesus' vaudeville-style number with the newspaper rattlings) or Neil and Lacey's Mia Michael's routine with all of the flowers on the floor.

I have written a paper and presented at conferences on this topic, and I hope that those who were present are seeing the repeat in certain trends once again this season.

An Amazing Paso Doble between Brandon and Jeanine finishes off the evening - truly stunning and absolutely well-danced. These two are the two top contenders for this season's winning position. Their solos were beyond amazing......Jeanine's especially controlled and stunning. And of course Nigel has to ruin it with another sexual inuendo ("I wanted to do it to her too?????").

I would like to go on record as saying that I believe Jeanine will win because Evan will be successful in capturing enough of the female votes to keep Brandon from winning entirely. Ia lso believe that she should win, as she is My Favorite Dancer, and has been from the start :)

Until we meet again for Season Six this Fall.

Hail, Hail, The Gang's All Here!

Back at the Caribou today, writing my final papers for the semester. Not surprised to see the regulars, as well. Yes, Skype-guy is here and today "Mr. I Work From the Coffee Shop and Have to Tell Everyone About It" is here today, as well. No German couple, and no veterinary friend :( While I sit and ponder readings about FGM, FGS, veiling, feminist nationalism, and global health issues that concern women, I am distracted by my recent irritating experiences in dating.
After two recent conversations with female colleagues and friends, I have come to the conclusion that the only way men are ever successful at dating is because women keep compromising themselves. Considering the fact that my colleagues are Women's Studies scholars and graduate students who write about women's issues, I thought that I would find solace in their words of wisdom regarding the topic. Unfortunately, some are as frustrated as I am, while others appear to be making excuses for men's behavior....still.
Point in case.....I have a date with a man (fix up orchestrated by a colleague) and the date goes very well. We both give positive feedback to our friend and I expect a timely response to my "follow up" email. Granted, he is traveling to a conference for the weekend and we are both in grad school doing classwork and preparing for finals, but I don't think an email is too much to ask, a text even? 5 days pass, and I finally receive an email that provides the obligatory apology for taking so long to get back to me and then procedes to itemize all of the things that he has on his plate right now - as if I don't have just as much going on! I respond, telling him I understand his busy schedule and enumerating my own "busy schedule" at this time of year. I am heading to NYC for the weekend and suggest making plans for the following week, as something definite is easy to plan my "work" schedule around, rather than leaving it up to the "let's see where the week takes us" perspective. I get no response. None. Meanwhile, I hear from my colleague that he keeps talking about getting back to me, but fails to ever do so. (Another pertinent piece of information here is that this man has also complained to my friend that he does a follow up email and fails to get a response from women and it irritates him). She is irked also, but cannot really say anything to him, and I understand that. After a follow up text wishing him a good week, and his "yeh, things are crazy" I have refused any more contact. Yesterday, I ran into him in my friend's office as we were headed to our final exam. I did acknowledge him and said hi when I walked in, but he had earphones on, listening to who knows what. His behavior was bizarre, if not outright assuming. He took off his earphones and acted as if he would naturally be included in our conversation, which we both were perplexed about. I will laugh if this incident propels him towards a 2-week later response, and I will not respond when and if it comes. Call me "bitchy" or difficult, but I am tired of the waiting game. If you're interested you should respond in a timely fashion. If you're not, then don't respond at all and leave me alone.
My second beef at this stage in the game is the man in the on-line dating circuit who feels the need to send nasty emails to women that have not "viewed" him nor contacted him in any manner. I'm tired of emails that tell me that men don't like strong women. I'm tired of emails that tell me I'm uptight. I'm tired of emails that assume things about me that someone could not and would not know if I've never even had contact with them. My most recent unwanted email came through a Christian dating site where I can now only assume the "traditional male" lay in wait for the woman who is going to fulfill all of his needs and desires and be at his beck and call. My profile expresses a desire for a man who can hold his own in an intellectual converastion and a man who has strong beliefs and is going to stand behind those beliefs "no mealy-mouthed man for me" is my follow up phrasing. I get an email that says simply, "Behind every mealy-mouthed man is a domineering woman. Just an observation." What kind of email is that to send to someone that has had no contact with you? What gives you the right to even send that email? What gives you the right to judge me via 3 photos and 7 short answer questions? Because the site would not let me use the word "asshole" in my response, I had to tone it down and simply call him a "jerk." It is at this point that I have decided that once the memberships are up, I am done with the online crap. While I have had some luck in the past, it is proving to be a feeding ground for men who feel the need to take their own anger and inadequacy out on women that they don't even know.

Public and Private

After many discussions of the separation of the public and the private in classes this year, today I am forced to wonder whether the "average" American even conceives of a difference between the two. Case in point:
This morning I am at the Caribou, ready to embark on the "journey of triage-reading" for classes this week. The usual suspects are here - my veterinary school friend who is here as often as I am, the German-born Conservative Republican couple who are always engaged in some kind of Rightist conversation with those around them, the Caribou worker who drives me to feel the need to drink, and, my personal favorite, the older gentleman who invariably feels the need to come to a very public coffee shop to have very private conversations with his family on Skype. Today, however, was a brand new day in "information sharing" at the coffee shop for this man - today he proceeded to have conversations that were so loud that he alienated 3 couples sitting nearby (including said German couple) to the point that they left the shop. My veterinarian friend, unfortunately, was at the table next to him and her earplugs (yes sometimes they are necessary) were unable to perform adequate duty today.
My personal favorite moment was when he told someone on the other end of his "conversation" that he wanted to show them something...yes, the infamous words. He then got up at his table and proceeded to detail the parts of his body, as he turned around, giving the other person a "show" on Skype of his newly acquired 40 pound thinner body....we were informed that he used to be 220 something and is now down to 186, and that he was, and I quote, "trying to be a good boy and eat better and be better." Further conversations, with children I assume, resulted in him making kissing sounds at his screen and blowing kisses to those on the opposite end of Skype.
Now, all of this may sound perfectly fine to some, but caused a lot of discomfort in a very public setting. Aren't these types of conversations generally private? Why would you come to a coffee shop to have this type of exchange? Somehow, I can't imagine myself getting up in the middle of a public space to declare my new "body" to someone on the other end of a video-conversation.
My veterinarian friend commented, "When he said 'I want to show you something' I was just hoping that his pants were staying on behind me." I, myself, was afraid to look in that direction after hearing him say this over and over again.....inevitably showing people his body over and over again in multiple "conversations."
So, I ask, what is public and what is private?

A List to Begin

Lately, I've been pondering the following:
1. The use of disability rhetoric in the Early Women's Movement - having just finished one paper on this topic, and moving to extend the argument into the "Second Wave" and the ramifications of the disability rhetoric, I've been reading about Margaret Sanger (very excited about her papers at the LoC), and the debates between the disability community and the feminist community regarding selective abortion and prenatal testing. Adrienne Asche will be at Temple University tomorrow speaking on the subject and I wish that I could be there.
2. How do my religious and academic beliefs align/disconnect? How much can I compromise? Why is feminism such a dirty word to Christian women? Why is it that single issues cause divides in a social movement but not a political party? (i.e. one can disagree with parts of a political platform and still call oneself a Republican, Democrat, etc...., but the single issues of abortion, divorce, and contraception can divide the Women's Movement, alienating two groups that are concerned about women's issues from one another). Why is it so difficult to find a Christian man who espouses liberal political philosophy? Will it always come down to the "submission" question?
3. How much of dating is really performance? Especially consider online dating as a performance of self. Why do people post pictures of themselves that are not truly representative, when they will eventually be found out in the first meeting? If they are willing to "lie" about things that are easily exposed, then how much more can you expect them to be dishonest in a relationship? Is it okay to walk out on a date if they have grossly misrepresented themselves?
4. After reading Charlotte Allen's blog: http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2009/03/the_latest_pc_fad_disability_s.html
I felt the need to respond to her obvious lack of knowledge and due diligence in representing the scope of Disability Studies, as well as her misinterpretation of the theory behind the social construction of disability as opposed to the pathological and medical models. I did write a comment in response and am waiting to see if it gets posted. Reading "MindingtheCampus.com" should be an eye-opening to experience for many of us in the academic world. I have subscribed to the page, out of curiosity, to see what other nonsense will be posted in the future. I encourage you to do the same, and respond when you feel you must.
A p.s. - I just checked her blog and my comment is listed, as well as the comments of 2 others, so at least she is willing to post criticism of her work. Enjoy :)
5. Finally succumbing to my desire to blog (I've been avoiding it for more than a year now), I am hoping to find this process a good place to work out what I'm thinking and get feedback from others that I hope will help my future work.