Magazines and Me: A Love Story

For my entire life, I've had an addiction to magazines. It all started when I was a kid and subscribed to Kid City, Disney Adventures, and--most beloved of all--Nickelodeon Magazine. I loved Nickelodeon's wacky and kinda dark sense of humor and their articles on weird places in the world (I distinctly remember an article about cool hotels--like the ice hotel in Sweden) and other fun and interesting facts.

As I got older, I started subscribing to all the typical teen girl mags that were popular at the time: Teen, Seventeen, YM and my two favorites--Twist and Jump. Other women my age might remember Twist and Jump for their post-Sassy feminist content. I remember an article in Twist about birth control options, including how they worked and how reliable they were. Jump had a lot of articles about loving your body and also about sex (encouraging teen girls to wait, but not in a preachy way, more in a "you don't have to do anything you don't want to do" way).

Guy virgins! Street hockey! ... Silverchair? Ugh.

And now, at the age of 31, I subscribe to the following magazines:

Entertainment Weekly
Bitch
Bust
Real Simple
Cosmopolitan
Elle
Glamour
Marie Claire
Shape
Health
Women's Health
GQ 

...and I may have forgotten one or two. I used to subscribe to Self and Fitness as well until they both went under. And years ago I also subscribed to Premiere and Movieline, but movie magazines went the way of the dodo about 10 years ago.

You might ask, Jenny...why? Why magazines? Well, for one thing, it's nice to be able to read articles without comments sections...or the temptation of comments sections. They're also portable. Yeah, I know that iPads are portable too, but you know what iPads don't have? Perfume samples.

Check mate, bitches.

But seriously, reading a magazine on an iPad or phone is a total drag. Magazines are highly visual and tactile and a computer screen doesn't give you the same experience. Plus, I stare at a computer screen literally all day...do I really want to keep doing so in bed, or at breakfast, or on the can, or at the gym? No thanks! I'd like to rest my eyes a bit!

You might also ask But Jenny, aren't all those magazines like, totally anti-feminist and body shaming?! To which I answer: 10-20% that's a correct assumption, but 80-90% you're totally wrong. Firstly, Bust and Bitch are feminist mags and Entertainment Weekly and GQ are super pro-LGBTQ (actually, this week's issue of Entertainment Weekly is LGBTQ-themed with RuPaul on the cover).

Not all magazines are cesspools of internalized sexism!

But of course, you don't mean those mags, you mean the terrible, awful, no good, very bad women's magazines that tell you how to do weird stuff to "your man's" "junk" and those body-shaming health magazines that try to pretend like a "handful of almonds" is a satisfying snack.

Ok, ok. I take your point! Yes, the above health magazines do have articles that while not blatantly fat-shaming, are all about how to lose weight, so indeed, they are implicitly fat-shaming. I will not deny that. However, they are great to read while on the elliptical! And Women's Health is about waaaaay more than diet and fitness. I've read articles about doctors who have abused their patients and how to get help if you've been abused by a doctor. I've read articles about the newest sex toys, including the best ones to use by yourself and the best ones to use with a partner. I've read articles on mindfulness meditation. So, there's a lot more than meets the eye.

But what about the fashion magazines? Hmm, well consider that the latest issue of Elle has interviews with Roxane Gay, Kate McKinnon (it's the "women in comedy" issue) and New York Times journalist Maggie Haberman. Right alongside the couture.

Cosmo is a bit of a lost cause, I'll admit. But did you know that from 2012-2016, Joanna Coles was the Editor-in-Chief and during that time, Cosmo upped its coverage of LGBTQ issues (including an exclusive interview with none other than Chelsea fuckin' Manning when she was still in prison), sexual assault and abuse, abortion, and other relatively hard-hitting topics? Right alongside the blow job tips. (Coles left in 2016 and the new editor sucks and Cosmo is right back where it started...but, eh, it's good bathroom reading).

Hey look, a non-size-zero person on the cover!

So, while I will not deny that magazines are imperfect vessels of advice and culture, they are also a lot more than the haters would like you to think. And I should know because I've been subscribing to a minimum of 5 different magazines for two-thirds of my life. I'm kind of an expert, you guys.

You might also wonder if my time couldn't be spent more productively on reading actual, you know, books. You know, stuff that grown-ups read! Well...I average between 25-35 books a year so I'm not super worried.

Now that I've gone the full magazine-apologist route, what can I say that I've learned throughout my years of reading about how to create the perfect cat-eye makeup look and the hottest superfoods for summer and (in GQ) the difference between a handkerchief and a pocket square? Well, a few things:

1) It's ok to have fun. You don't need to read literature that "improves" or "elevates" you all the time. A guy my friend dated in college actually argued that point with me once, saying I was "wasting my time" reading women's magazines and romance novels. Well guess what? That guy turned out to be a physically abusive alcoholic, so fuck him! (also: a mansplainer. He can burn in hell).

2) It's ok to also learn cool, random things *while* having fun. Because of magazines, I learned what a pocket square is and that a hotel made entirely out of ice (even the beds!!) exists. I learned where on the body the perineum is from Cosmo. I learned a lot about feminist horror movies from Bitch. I learned cool craft projects from Bust. I've learned all there is to know about high intensity interval training from all those fitness mags. And, occasionally, I've learned deeper, more complex things from mags. Bitch, GQ, and Elle are the best of the bunch I subscribe to at in-depth journalism and have published articles that legitimately changed the way I view politics, feminism, and culture.

3) It's ok to be retro, even if people laugh at you! Reading print magazines is old school, y'all. And I love it. Just imagine reading words and looking at pictures that are NOT ON A FUCKING COMPUTER SCREEN. It's truly life-changing. I feel like I can breathe when I read print material (and I read plenty of books and articles online/on e-readers, so I'm not dissing any of that). No scrolling...no finger prints on ya damn screen. Just me, my coffee, and my glossies.

4) It makes checking your mail a treat/"small pleasures". People always talk about how the key to happiness in life is enjoying the small pleasures. Well, with my magazine fetish, getting the mail becomes a daily pleasure. When I wake up on a work day, do I rush through my morning routine, getting to work already stressed out? Do I check Facebook upon waking and become angry at the world before the day even begins? No, I do not. I get up, I drink coffee, and I read "50 hot sex tips inspired by Fifty Shades of Grey", or an interview with Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson about how he is legitimately thinking of running for president, or a fashion spread inspired by Hamilton, and the day begins gently and pleasurably. (ok, I made the Hamilton one up, but the other two articles are real).

Magazines might not be your thing, and that's fine! But, you have your own version of magazines, whether it's your quest to try EVERY brand of mascara, or your love of watching Friends reruns, or your obsession with Buzzfeed quizzes. The point is, it's ok to enjoy "guilty" or "pointless" pleasures. It's ok to relax. And, by god, it's ok to be both a feminist and also want to read about fashion, fitness trends, and the Real Housewives of Orange County.

My first love.

Your Fave is Problematic

I'm currently reading Amy Schumer's memoir The Girl With the Lower Back Tattoo and I'm really enjoying it. It's the perfect mix of gabbing about the men she's slept with and talking about her own experiences with date rape, intimate partner violence, and her dad's Multiple sclerosis. So, you know, the bitter and the sweet.

I'm inspired to write about Schumer because I've loved her humor from the first sketch I saw on Inside Amy Schumer, which I believe was the O'Nutter's sketch. I could tell that this lady was going to capture what it's like to be a woman and also to satirize it...but not so much that you thought she was acting like she was above it all. So when she writes sketches where she plays a single lady sitting on her couch eating plain pasta out of a colander, the joke has layers: tee hee, single ladies be gross and slovenly...but also, tee hee, isn't a little fun to be so gross and slovenly? Schumer's humor is a great mix of self-deprecation, satire, and "fuck you".

She's also been criticized for having mildly racist jokes. One in particular I remember is her gag about sleeping with Hispanic guys until she realized she "preferred consensual". I could totally improve this joke: just change "Hispanic guys" to "white guys in fraternities" and the joke is 1) more accurate and 2) less offensive!

Anyway, the point is that Schumer's jokes are sometimes offensive (although, I'd argue, a WHOLE FUCKING LOT LESS offensive than the likes of, for example, Dane Cook). She's "problematic", as the kids like to say.

Another problematic hero I have is Dan Savage. Savage is a gay sex columnist whose column has run for two decades at this point. His original column was titled "Hey Faggot" and the gimmick was "gay guy gives sex advice to straight people". He expanded beyond that and his column "Savage Love", where he gives both sex and relationship advice to people of all gender and sexual identities, is one of my favorites. Savage has a knack for simultaneously providing tough love with open-hearted acceptance. Years ago, I remember a column where someone wrote to him "Am I a pervert?" and Savage responded, "Yes, you're a pervert--and that's alright by me!" As a budding pervert myself, Savage taught me to embrace my proclivities and that I actually wasn't that weird after all. And that I had a right to sexual pleasure and shouldn't settle for a partner I wasn't attracted to. Thank you, Dan. Sometimes it's hard for straight women to believe that sexual pleasure should matter to us like it does to LITERALLY ALL MALES.

Dan Savage has also been accused of being: bi-phobic, fat-phobic, trans-phobic, and also of mocking people with developmental disabilities. And some of what he has written in the past backs this up. But here's where Savage is different than others: he owns up to his mistakes. He explains what he meant. And he stops using offensive language. Let me explain:

Dan has been accused of being fat-phobic because he contends that if you get into a relationship and your partner gains a drastic amount of weight (or otherwise drastically changes their appearance), it's "ok" to become less attracted to them. I don't disagree. Dan explains that there are obvious exceptions: your partner got pregnant, your partner got sick, your partner grew older (as one does). He points out that expecting your partner's looks to remain the same forever as if they're some kind of vampire is dumb and unrealistic. But there's a limit. And there's a point where a loving partner might become concerned. Dan has explained his point of view many times and I think he's completely reasonable.


Likewise, he's been accused of being bi-phobic because he has said that many young gay men have a "phase" where they identify as bi before they fully come out as gay. But in recent years, Dan has said that he believes 100% that male bisexuality exists and isn't a myth. Additionally, he used to, years ago, use the word "retarded" until readers told him to can it. He then started using the word "leotarded" since, in his snarky and totally-not-in-good-faith explanation, people who wear leotards tend to be strong (think: gymnasts), so you're not "punching down" with the word "leotarded". Not long after, Dan stopped using "leotarded" and "retarded" altogether. It would have been nice if he'd just immediately stopped with the offensive slur, but I'm glad that he actually changed his actions instead of doubling-down on them, which is super en vogue among assholes today.

Why do I talk about Dan Savage and Amy Schumer? To point out that, yes, they are problematic, and yes also they have done great work. There's a million other public figures like them who fail to live up to our (unreasonable) standards of perfection, yet offer so much good in addition to occasional shit.

I want to be careful here and point out: I'm not defending racist jokes or offensive slurs. They're wrong, they're not funny, and they're not helpful. But I also don't think that a person's weaknesses don't cancel out their strengths--especially in cases where the person *changes* their behavior.

I also want to admit that I'm focusing on two white people in this post, so these folks, despite being, respectively, a woman and a gay man, have a little more power and privilege than other people in our culture. But it's not as if black people or people of any race, gender identity, sexual identity, religion, or ability are free of problematic behavior or biases. I think that when white people, especially white heterosexual men, are problematic it's undeniably worse because it's "prejudice plus power" working there. But I also think that people of every walk of life are complex--a mixture of offensive bullshit and also, very likely, good qualities as well.

I am problematic. I used to use the words "retarded" and (a million fucking years ago, when I was 12) "gay" as slurs. I was told to put a fucking sock in it and I didn't like being told that, but then I realized I was wrong and annoying, so I stopped. But I'm still problematic. I'm very self-focused. Hell, I have a fucking blog for writing about myself! You're reading it! I have to FORCE MYSELF to put myself in others' shoes and to empathize. It truly does not come naturally to me. I'll catch myself making other people's stories and anecdotes about me. Also: I'm judgmental. I'm mistrustful. I'm, at times, dismissive. I can be blunt to the point where it's sometimes refreshingly honest and it's sometimes vaguely antisocial. Basically, I'm a classic Sagittarius y'all!

I have fucked up numerous times and, sadly, will never reach perfection. But here's the thing: neither will you. Neither will Amy Schumer or Dan Savage. Or fucking Barack Obama (he fucked up too, guys! Drones!). When we say "your fave is problematic", that is accurate because, guess what, EVERY HUMAN BEING EVER is problematic. Does that mean we're all on par with Hitler or Steven Bannon or that little fuckhead Richard Spencer? No, of course not---those guys aren't just "problematic", they're fucking psychopaths who literally deserve to burn in hell. I'm talking about the massive grey moral area most decent but not perfect people inhabit.

Again, I realize that there's a lot of complexity here. Some people's problematic behavior is worse than others. But what I hope what folks get out of reading this is the permission, if they need it, to forgive themselves for their failings and the courage to consider making some changes. It's difficult because smart people know they'll never be perfect so there's this temptation to never change because why bother? Well, like many things in life it's not about the destination, it's about the journey. No one reaches the destination of "perfection" or "living a life where you never hurt anyone". Sorry to burst your bubble. BUT, everyone is capable of learning. Everyone is capable of small changes. And that learning is what makes life worth living. The folks who never think about their actions or question their beliefs? You should pity them. They're living an unexamined life. And that's boring.

So, today, hold these two seemingly contradictory thoughts in your mind: I am not perfect. I can examine my life.

Your fave is problematic. You are problematic. I am problematic. And being "problematic" is a gift because it allows us the opportunity to change and to love other people more fully.

PS: Did you guys know that Rick-rolling is racist and transphobic? I had no idea until I read this really intriguing essay.

Try Less, Be More

A few months ago I was having a session with my therapist when I blurted out, "I just want to stop trying to be perfect." She had me repeat that sentiment out loud, and more slowly.

I just. want. to stop. trying. to be perfect. 

Perfectionism. Achievement. Reaching and struggling. It's the monkey on all of our backs, ain't it? Whether it comes to you in the form of an ache for a 4.0 GPA, or trying so hard to lose the last 10 pounds, or to just save a few more thousand dollars, or to be a great parent AND a top-notch employee, the feeling is there: you're not good enough. You're not ENOUGH enough. And it's your own fault for being lazy. 

Ironically, these feelings and desires we have to be more, be better, leave us further behind in the rat race, at least psychologically.

Take this study on self-control. Feeling that you need to simply exert more willpower to achieve [X] thing means you are more likely to be/feel out of control. It's not very fair, is it?

Desire for perfectionism is, of course, complex. It's both nature and nurture. We all know people who seem to have it all: a great job that they're excelling at, wonderful relationships, a beautiful home, a fulfilling social life...and yet, they feel that it's not enough. They feel that *they're* not enough. Maybe you are that person. Every time you reach a goal that should make you feel happy and satisfied, you're left feeling all the more empty.

I think there's a pretty good case for lowering the bar, and, in fact, caring less. Here's a fun article I read a while ago that makes the case for caring less about your job as a way to enjoy it more and do better at it. It makes a lot of sense actually. Have you ever been in a stressful situation and decided not to worry about the outcome, and end up with the exact outcome you wanted? Perhaps it was a first date and you decided to "just have fun"...and ended up on the greatest date of your life. Or maybe it was a job interview for a position you weren't too invested in--the fact that you didn't care so much about it made you relax and you came across as comfortable and confident. Maybe you even got a job offer?

I'm not making the argument that you should be apathetic. Not at all, quite the contrary actually. You *should* care--but you should care primarily about what is important to you, and you should care in a different way.

Caring doesn't mean controlling every aspect of a situation. You can care deeply about your kids while not hovering over them, micromanaging them constantly. You can care about finding a romantic partner without forcing yourself on dates with people you don't click with. You can care about your living space without vacuuming every day.

But most importantly, you can care about yourself while not holding yourself to an impossible standard. It's hard, I know. I was a straight-A student in high school and a nearly straight-A student in college. Do you know how hard it is to be a straight-A student for 22 years only to realize grades aren't a thing by which you're measured in adulthood?

Image credit: www.flickr.com/photos/wscullin/3948683457/

I was taught that I was overweight as a kid. I was taught that getting on a scale was a moment to feel shame and embarrassment. I lost weight in college while doing literally nothing. And then, over the next decade I gained it back. I'm like a size 10 now. Which is nothing. Who cares? A size 10 is normal. Smaller than average, actually. I might even be a size 8 on a good day. But do you think a day goes by where I don't monitor everything I eat? Where I don't sigh and think "If I just tried harder. If I just had more self-control. I could lose the weight." And what would losing 10 pounds get me? More dates? Hardly. The only thing losing weight would get me would be the stress and fear of gaining it back.

Thus, my statement to my therapist: I just want to stop trying to be perfect. Because there is no perfect. There is no weight goal or salary raise or relationship where you will be satisfied and happy forever more. You'll just be on to the next thing that's not going perfectly in your life.

There is actually a way to be satisfied and happy, but it takes some work. And that's figuring out how to be satisfied with your life, your weight, your job...right now, as it is. And in the next moment, as it is. And the moment after that, and every moment here on out. I know this sounds like woo-woo bullshit. It sounds like something Oprah would say: "be satisfied in the here and now". It sounds impossible! It sounds laughable. And yet, it exists. I know because I've experienced it. Not every day, but often enough. I had a moment last summer where I was thinking about how I was single and I felt genuine panic rising in my throat. And then I thought: I can panic right now, and nothing will change. Panic and fear won't find me the relationship I'm looking for. But if I don't panic and I decide that I will be ok, even if I'm single forever, then I won't have this bad, shitty, scary feeling anymore. So I--for once in my worrywart life--chose not to panic but to be calm. I released that fear--fear of the future and of the unknown. I released that sense that if I was prettier, skinnier, less opinionated, better...then I would be loved. And I accepted that I am loved already.

What's making you panic right now? What are you striving for and somehow not achieving? What's telling you that you're not good enough? Instead of fighting or striving or trying so hard, past the point where it feels good to try (because that's the good kind of striving--the kind that feels rewarding)--what if you...gave up? Surrendered? Stopped trying so hard? Stopped caring so much? What if you stopped running in circles and just sat down on the ground an enjoyed the many things you already have?

People invest a LOT in the "never give up, never stop trying" mindset. And in some cases, that's not a bad thing. Hard work on something you love is worth it. But is hard work on everything in life, where the goals have flown out the window and you're being driven not by love, but by fear and self-disgust...is that worth it? Is it getting you closer to who you want to be? Maybe it's time to admit that you're not perfect and never will be. No one is. And that you'll never "have it all", because there's always more to have. And when you give up that dream, you'll probably realize you've already achieved it...but were just to busy to notice.

Single and Happy (But Also Sometimes Not Happy!) About It!

So, I just started reading All the Single Ladies: Unmarried Women and the Rise of an Independent Nation, Rebecca Traister's excellent deep dive into the history of single women, particularly in the 20th-21st centuries, and their impact on social change and politics.

I love books about single women because I am one and all people--not just single ladies--enjoy reading about themselves, particularly if their identity is somewhat fraught or complicated.

I was reading the book on a long car ride with my parents, coming home from a funeral for my maternal grandfather. I started telling my parents a couple fascinating facts from the book: did you know that a 2011 survey found that for adults under the age of 34, 46% have never married? 46%!! That's one in two! I'm NORMAL.

My dad said, "Well, Jenny, do you want to get married?"

Boy, what a question. You think it would have an easy answer, right? Of course, it does not, as "getting married" is not something you put on a 5 year plan the way you might say "Someday, I want to travel to Japan", "Someday, I want to parachute out of a plane", "Someday, I want to run a marathon". Those are all things that you can personally plan for and carry out, whereas marriage involves--and this is crucial--another person.

And here's a little quirk I have: if I'm going to tie myself financially and domestically to another person for a really long time, I want it to be to someone I like. I know, I know. Single women always get accused of being "too picky", and here I am, demanding that I enjoy the company of the person I spend the rest of my life with. *Sigh* What a cliche.

Ok, I'm obviously being sarcastic. But finding someone you like, who also likes you, and having similar goals and values in life is hard! I would argue that I'm actually not all that picky. I have two baseline requirements to date someone: 1) I must be sexually attracted to them (scandalous!) and 2) I must enjoy just hanging out with them and talking to them. Maybe I'm a weirdo, but it's actually pretty challenging to find both of these qualities in another person. And, obviously, those are just the BASELINE qualities. If it turns out I'm sexually attracted to and enjoy hanging out with a heroin-addicted street gambler, I'm probably not going to marry them. I know! So picky.

But there's a deeper question to be asked here: why marriage? Seriously, I'm asking: what is the point? In the past, a lot of things were tied to marriage: sex, babies, security, and social status. Nowadays, none of that shit is tied to marriage. Sex outside of marriage, LOL. Even super religious people I know did the dirty deed (sometimes with more than one person!) before they got married. Babies? Ok, well admittedly that's more complicated and it probably does benefit kids to have parents that, if not married, are at least in a solid relationship and are working together to raise them. However, I know a couple single mothers by choice who decided to go ahead and adopt since they really wanted kids and didn't want to wait for Mr. Right. So it's totally possible, if not easy by any stretch.

Security. Well, two incomes are usually better than one. But I'd argue that unless you have a certain amount of wealth, no one is actually "secure". If you live near the poverty line, it doesn't matter if you're married or not, your life is probably VERY insecure and an injury or illness could ruin you. Politicians love to talk about bootstrapping, but if you're working a labor-intensive job and your partner is at home raising 3 kids and you put your back out? Marriage won't save you then. And politicians will just say you're a lazy freeloader.

Social status? Eh, maybe. It used to be that you weren't seen as a real adult until you married and had kids. But is that even a thing anymore? I know a lot of married people and a lot of single people, and they run the gamut hardcore between "mature" and "immature", regardless of their marital status. It really is quite subjective. I've always felt very behind my peers in the area of romance. I had my first kiss at age 20 (for most people it's around age, what? 13 or 14?). I lost what most people consider "virginity" at age 25 (for many people it's around age 18, give or take). Given this track record, I put myself at settling down with a partner around age 36. It would fit in perfectly with the rest of my timeline. Let's say I do marry or settle down or whatever in my late 30s--is that less adult than marrying at age 21?

Simply put, marriage is not what it used to be even one generation ago. It's not a requirement or a given anymore. That said, there is (ironically) a weird pressure on single people to be "happy" about it. Singleness is supposed to be empowering and sexy! Single people have an important job, and that is to regale our married friends with sexy tales of our depravity and Tinder dates (deep dark secret: most dates I go on are "ok" and then I never see the person again. HAWT). And this pressure to be happy in our singleness is just as annoying as I expect it is for married people to be SO IN LOVE with their spouse 100% of the time.

You know, I just think there's a lot of pressure on people--married or not, parents or not--to be fucking happy all the time and shut the fuck up about it. Right? No one likes a negative Nancy. No one likes sad Facebook posts. No one likes admitting that human beings literally can't be happy all the time because that is impossible since by definition the ability to experience joy only works when you've experienced its opposite.

Well, fuck. that. Here's a shocking revelation: sometimes I am very happy being single and sometimes I am very sad being single. Sometimes, I am lonely. Other times, I like being alone. Sometimes, I envy my married friends. Other times, I think marriage must be a drag. Sometimes, I see my friends' kids and think "OH MY GOD CHILDREN ARE LIFES GREATEST JOY" other times I see them and think "nope."

It's easier to go through life seeing things in black and white. It's easier when you see things as "right" and "wrong". I talked about religion in an earlier post and I think a lot of fundamentalist religious people are attracted to that way of living because it provides a clear set of answers. And it's not just religious people--anyone who subscribes to a certain way of thinking or living and holds tightly to those beliefs without ever challenging them is doing the same thing: making life easier to deal with at the expense of embracing life's complexity and the full extent of its beauty and messiness.

I've been trying in the past couple years to embrace the concept of "radical acceptance", which is where you accept ALL of your emotions, positive and negative, as they come and don't try to hold onto or push away any of them. It's really, really, really hard. Because we all want to push away sadness and cling to happiness. So many messages we get in our culture are about how happiness = good, sadness = bad...without acknowledging that you need one to experience the other. And that much of daily life falls somewhere in between.

So what does all this have to do with singleness? I reserve the right to be both frustrated with being single, but STILL hold to my standard of not settling until I meet "the right person", whoever and whenever that will be--IF it happens at all. I reserve the right to be seen as a full human being if I NEVER settle down and/or have kids. I reserve the right to not be pitied, but to be listened to. I reserve the right to NOT be Carrie from Sex and the City, who was upheld as a sexy singleton but was actually a selfish, boring person and not someone to admire.

And on behalf of my married and/or with kids friends, I reserve THEIR right to not always be thrilled in their marriage. To not have to pretend that when you meet the right person "it's soooo easy" for the rest of your life. Or that having kids is endless joy and that sleepless nights and constant worrying are really ok because yay kids! I may be single, but I'm not a fool: building your life with someone and raising children is difficult and sometimes you want to run away from it. Those normal feelings don't cancel out the joy it brings.

What I assume parenting is like

In either situation (or other situations not mentioned), the real pain comes from not being able to express our full range of emotions and the depth of our fears and desires. Putting a happy face on all of our choices and insinuating that if you're not fulfilled 100% of the time, YOU'RE the problem, is a total lie and you shouldn't buy it! Life is sometimes sad and scary and that's ok and normal.

So, my challenge to you all is to be a little more honest, and little more vulnerable, and a little more open-minded. Don't denigrate someone's life choices, but don't worship them either. Instead, listen to both the good and the bad. People want to be heard. They want to be seen. They want to be understood. Give them this, and you may find that your life becomes a little easier too.

#NotAllMen; or, How To Be a Good Guy in a Shitty World

I've joked in the past that I'm cursed with heterosexuality because it means I have to "sleep with the enemy"--the enemy being men.

I'm being a tad facetious when I say things like this...but only a tad facetious. Because it's true that there are a lot of men out there who range from boneheaded to apathetic to just plain cruel when it comes to caring about women's rights. As a liberal, feminist woman, you have to dig through that haystack to find the needle of a guy who cares.

There are a lot of little anecdotes I could tell you about Dating While Feminist that would hopefully make you understand the tightrope walk between not "offending" guys while also looking for a guy who won't offend me.

• My dad's suggestion that I tone down the feminist aspects of my dating profile so as not to "scare off" otherwise good guys. (Love you dad! And I think after Trump was elected even you don't believe I should tone myself down anymore).
• The guy I went out with who said that the all-female Ghostbusters remake was "pandering" to female audiences. When I asked if the all-male original was pandering to male audiences, he was curiously silent. WHO YA GONNA CALL, FUCKER?
• The guy I went out with who, after I mentioned I was a "young, budding feminist" in my teens asked, without skipping a beat, "But you grew out of that, right?" 
• The guy I went out with who saw some scantily clad young ladies at a bar we were at and said to me "Girls like that love to tell guys 'no'". Any guesses how he took being told "no" by me later on that night? (Not well)

BUT for all these incidences, there have been men in my life who have been absolutely lovely allies. To be a man who is an ally to women is actually quite simple. It takes three things: a brain, a heart, and courage.

No ruby slippers required.

A Brain

The first step to being a male ally is to simply look around you and acknowledge reality. Here's the thing: not all men are created equal. Plenty of men in our society and in other societies around the world have be systematically fucked over. So it's tempting to hear people talk about feminism or Black Lives Matter and say, "Sure, but what about me? I've struggled too!" Indeed! And your struggles are valid and if you date the right woman, she should and will care about your problems too. 

But feminism and anti-racism isn't a zero-sum game. By acknowledging, for example, the fact that more women are the victims of rape than men, you are not dishonoring the men who have been victims of rape. By acknowledging that historical and systemic racism contributes to more black people living in poverty, you are not dishonoring the white people who struggle to feed their children and make ends meet.

I know, I know. Yes, there are people out there (mostly on the Internet) who love to mock "poor little white men" and their so-called problems. These people are being jerks, but please realize they are saying these things out of a place of frustration. For centuries, women and vulnerable minorities have suffered at the hands of white men, so it's frustrating to try to bring up these inequalities only to be met with "b-b-b-but what about ME??" And that leads to all the memes about drinking male tears out of a teacup.

Dudes, I get it. Every person on the planet suffers to a greater or lesser extent. Whether your suffering comes from being a blind paraplegic begging for scraps in India or by getting snubbed at the country club, everyone faces challenges and cries themselves to sleep at night once in a while. But let's try to get some perspective. Take a step back from your struggles and consider what other people go through. I force myself to do this all the time. It's not that my emotions are invalid, it's just that comparatively, I was given a sweet-ass deal at birth: I'm white. I'm able-bodied. I was born into a comfortable, middle-class family. My parents weren't abusive. Etc, etc. So, while I have the right to feel down in the dumps every so often, I try to practice gratitude about the many things I do have that I didn't even do anything to earn! 

So, back to having a brain. Intelligent men will look around them and see reality plainly: inequality exists and it usually falls harder on women than men, people of color than white people, queer people than straight people, etc. The first step is simply being willing to acknowledge reality. 

A Heart

The second step, once reality is acknowledged, is to give a shit. I dated a wonderful man (hi, Bob!) for 8 months when I lived in Nashville. I don't know if he would call himself a feminist, but his actions spoke louder than any words could: this guy gave a shit about people. He actually cared about his friends. And I saw this. I saw him. And I thought--I trust this man to be by my side when shit hits the fan.

Obviously, caring is easy on a personal level. You tend to care about the people you love in your life and want the best for them. It's harder to care on a bigger scale because it all seems so abstract. How does a man be an ally to women *in general*? Well, there are so many ways! Of course, you can donate to causes that support women's rights. You can volunteer. You can validate women's experiences. 

But probably the best and most amazing thing you can do is call out other men who don't give a shit about women. But, oh my god, does this take...

Courage

Courage is the final piece of the puzzle. To be a man who cares about women, or a white person who cares about black people...it takes fucking balls. We don't like to acknowledge this because we think that if we're good people it should be easy to stand up against wrong.

But it's not. It's not easy. What's easy is to stay silent. 

Men out there looking to be allies to women: if you are privy to conversations where you hear other men saying nasty shit about women and you have the big brass ones to say "That's not cool", I respect the goddamn hell out of you. To me, this is what it means to "be a man". You want to be a hero? You want to be a masculine as fuck cowboy? Then challenge your own beliefs about gender and challenge other people's beliefs about gender.

The act of men calling out other men on their bullshit has recently been labeled "white knighting", but I don't agree with that, especially when the calling out happens in private without women actually there. When it's just you and some asshole mocking women, there is no damsel to save or impress: there's just your own reputation on the line. And most guys won't risk it. 

What guy wants to be called a "pussy" or a "faggot" for the criminal act of giving a shit about half the world's population? I'll tell you what kind of guy: a strong, confident, courageous guy. In fact, scratch the word "guy": a man. A man sticks up for what's right. A man isn't afraid of what other, let's face it, lesser men think of him. A grown-ass man will laugh in the face of some stupid jerk calling him a "faggot" or a "pussy" because he knows he's better than that guy.

Yes, yes, I'm playing a bit to the masculine ego here, but why not? Many guys want to feel like quote "real men" unquote. There's nothing wrong with that! The trick is to acknowledge was a so-called real man does and is. And it's not being silent in the face of bullshit injustice. 

Morrissey is kind of a pill, but his lyrics ain't wrong!

***

The assholes of the world want to make it hard for men to stand up for women (but not in a way that puts women an a pedestal--that's benevolent sexism.) The bizarre irony we're encountering these days includes men taking the role of the victim--claiming that, in fact, women are the dominant sex and men are pawns to them. It's ironic because these same men hate it when women "play the victim", yet they're happy to play the vicim themselves in a world that caters to their every whim. Instead of acknowledging "Hey, we white men have it pretty good in general! Let's go out there and help others less fortunate than us!" they want the subjugate women and subjugate people of color. 

Instead of helping others achieve equality, they want to step on them on their way to getting more power. Why do you think Trump got elected? It's backlash against the push for/rise in equality among queer people and people of color over the past few decades. These kinds of people say to themselves: gay marriage was made legal, and now all these trans people want to be seen and acknowledged too? OMG, black people are filming the police beating the shit out of them and killing them for no reason?? We're about to potentially lose our place on the food chain and we have to push back! You know who the REAL victims are? White, heterosexual, Christian men!! 

C'mon guys. You're better than this. I KNOW you are because I've seen you be better than this with my own eyes. The hashtag #NotAllMen is fucking annoying, but it's not 100% inaccurate. In fact, "not all men" are terrible. But if you want the right to use that hashtag, you have to walk the walk. If for no other reason than to provide me with more feminist bachelors to go out with, mmmkay? 

Purity, and Other Lies My Church Told Me

I was raised in a relatively not crazy church. From birth to fifth grade, I attended a Methodist church in small town Ohio. Then, from 5th grade to 9th grade, I attended a Presbyterian church in suburban  Pennsylvania. Finally, from 10th grade to 12th grade, I attended yet another Methodist church in suburban Virginia.

None of these churches were particularly fire and brimstone, but that doesn't mean that the fire and brimstone didn't find its way to me.

My parents, not remotely religious fanatics, subscribed to magazines from Focus on the Family, an evangelical Christian publication that focuses on...well, the family. If you grew up in the late 90s and early 00s with religion in your life, you're probably familiar with this organization and its founder, James Dobson.

One of the magazines published by Focus on the Family was titled Brio and it was aimed at pre-teen and teen girls. I subscribed to and read this magazine for a couple years when I was a teenager.

Brio ruined religion for me in a number of ways.

Brio was anti-feminist, anti-homosexuality, and pro-"purity". I put "purity" in quotation marks because the concept of purity isn't real. It only exists in our minds.

What is purity culture? Well, it's the belief, usually tied to religion, that there is such a thing as sexual purity and that this is a good thing worth achieving. The idea is that only one form of sexuality that God approves of exists: heterosexual sex within the confines of marriage. Everything else is "impure".







What falls outside the confines of "pure" sexuality?

• All forms of sex outside of marriage
• Pornography
• Homosexual sex
• Anything too "weird" even inside a marriage
• Lustful thoughts, and possibly masturbation, depending on who you're asking

As you can seem, purity condemns the vast majority of human sexual experience and gives little room for sexual exploration unless you are a heterosexual married person. 

At the same time as I subscribed to Brio, I was also reading a little publication called Bust on the regular. Bust is a feminist magazine that delves into topics as varied as abortion, money, DIY crafts, political activism, and sexuality. Dear readers, which magazine do you think won out in my budding teenage brain?

Which mag looks more fun to you?

I feel as though I dodged a bullet because all this purity stuff never really stuck to me. For a few brief moments, I might have believed in it, but all that went out the window when I became sexually active in college. Well...it sort of went out the window. Instead of dropping the concept of purity like a lead ballon from my psyche, it became something for me to push against. I remember fooling around with my college boyfriend in my shitty little dorm room and thinking "Fuck you, James Dobson". Seriously.

Fuck. You. Fuck. You. Fuck. You.

Over the years, as I read--even sought out--fundamentalist evangelical perspectives on feminism and sexuality, my hatred towards these beliefs crystalized. Yes, true hatred. Blinding anger that people out there had the gall to believe homosexuality was a sin, that sex before marriage was wrong, and--worst of all--that women should be "submissive" to men, became a hard, black ball of coal in my heart. It has, for better or for worse, colored by view of religion here on out. It so deeply struck and wounded my feminist heart--my heart that is fiercely protective of other people and of myself--that I couldn't untangle it from more mainstream religious beliefs. 

Why wait?

By some magical stroke of luck, I have never attached shame to my sexuality. I have been fearful and cautious, yes. Open and vulnerable, yes. But ashamed? Never. Never once have I felt "impure" for any of my sexual behavior (which has entirely been outside the confines of marriage). In fact, my sexuality has felt quite the opposite: sacred, joyous, fun, playful, lovely, beautiful, safe. Pure. 

But I'm so, so lucky in this. For many people, women especially, and women raised in conservative religion especially especially, sexuality is not fun. It's not safe. It's not intuitive. How many women have I encountered who have felt disgusted by their own bodies? Who have been threatened by the existence of pornography? Who have been groped, catcalled, assaulted, and raped? Too many. Too many to count. 

And it's not just women. How many men have I known and/or dated who felt they had to prove their manhood by being sexual in a certain way? Who were told their bodies were gross? Who were shamed of their sexual desires? Too many. 

Our culture--American culture--influenced by both a strong Judeo-Christian history and by capitalism, is massively fucked up when it comes to sex. We are taught that sex is the end all be all of human existence and if you're not having it, you might as well die. And then we're told that gay people are sick sinners and don't deserve equal rights. That women's bodies are up for public consumption and commentary. That actually talking about sexual desires is weird and wrong. That enthusiastic consent is unromantic. That rape isn't real.

We are a fucked up society when it comes to sex. James Dobson is only partially to blame. 

But let me be the first to tell you: "purity" doesn't exist. Sexuality is as natural as a goddamn field of sunflowers. If you were raised to believe in sexual purity, it's your right to believe it. But keep in mind where it comes from: a long history of keeping women under men's control and tied to home and hearth. Celibacy, abstinence until marriage, etc are all choices one is allowed to make. But don't think that one choice makes you better or purer than anyone else. It does not. If you were a virgin at marriage, you are identical in worth to someone who slept with dozens of people before marriage.

You are not defined by what's between your legs. You are not defined by your sexual history. Virginity is not better than not-virginity. Don't be fooled into thinking it is, or that it has a weight and measurable worth. People use these measures to feel better about themselves but it's all an illusion. 

Brio fucked me up, but it also made me free. It gave me solid wall to push against. Like a swimmer in a pool, I kicked and struggled and pushed against the wall of conservative religion, of sexual purity, of anti-feminism, and I exploded into the open, blue bliss of finding myself, unashamed and imperfect.

And wonderfully, beautifully "impure". 

Welcome

Pussy got bank in her pockets
Before she got dick in her drawers
If brother didn't have good and plenty of his own
In love pussy never did fall


Welcome! Pussy Control is a blog about sex, religion, politics, and feminism. It's an outlet for me to express my thoughts on all things related to being a woman in this world, and specifically, being me in this world. Years ago, I vowed never to have a blog where I talk about my personal life because it seemed so navel gaze-y...but I guess I really like my navel or something.