Contributed by Kate

Appalled, shocked, and disheartened. I suppose those are the three main words, among many others, that I keep feeling when I read any story regarding Terry Jones and the media frenzy he has created around “International Burn a Koran Day.” Just typing those words gives me the absolute chills and angers me that this has become such a wide spread topic within our country and around the world. At the DF, we are constantly pushing members of the media to realize the ways in which their pieces affect women and other marginalized populations, thus after reading about Jones and his discriminatory antics I’m stuck wondering how his story warrants so much attention.

Similarly to many pieces written in the New York Times, USA Today, and The Wall Street Journal, I could focus this post on the reasons why Jones has no right to declare such a day (even if he has allegedly canceled it) or make such blanket statements about Islam and its followers. On one hand I find myself wanting to echo these stories to bring to light the hypocrisy of the situation, while at the same time I am deeply frustrated that Jones, a man with zero credibility and a following of only 50 congregants (many of whom are family members), is constantly put in the lime light. Thus I ask the question as to what role the media (bloggers like myself included) play in this deeply frightening and offensive controversy.

As Ramadan–the month of fasting that all believers in Islam are required to undertake, is coming to an end and Muslims prepare to celebrate Eid al-Fitr (which means in Arabic the celebration of the end of fasting), why is public opinion on the state of Islam being shaped by a radical Christian pastor in Florida?  Instead shouldn’t we be focusing on the diversity of this country and the important contributions Muslim-Americans make to our nation’s well-being? Where is the media coverage on the positive impacts of Islam within America and why don’t journalists and editors find them compelling enough to print?  Have we truly come to the point in our society where radical Christian extremists are getting more attention and press time then an entire population of peaceful and moderate Muslim-Americans?

Not only has the media attention on Jones affected the court of public opinion, it has also forced high ranking government officials (including our own president!) to comment on the situation. I find myself wondering if nothing was ever written about Jones and his fanatical ideas, whether or not we would find ourselves in such a ridiculous debate over the burning of Korans.  Is this whole debacle just an act to win over the public and high government officials’ attention for Jones?  If the members of the media gave it no credibility, I’m sure there is a significant chance Jones would not have gone through with his plan. However, we now find ourselves clinging on to every move of Jones and his small, yet recently empowered, congregation.

Where does this leave us and what is the responsibility of social commentators in this current debate? Is it to continually point out the hypocrisy of the situation or is it to ignore Jones and work on creating a better understanding of the state of Islam within the United States? Can both of these tactics be combined or are journalists just adding fuel to Jones’ fire? I’m not sure where the answer lies, but I think asking these questions is a step in the right direction. I invite the DF readers to comment on this issue and think about the role the media plays in this disheartening, shocking and appalling situation.

Contributed by Meridith

The fact that women’s clothing choices are almost certainly subjected to public scrutiny, political hand-wringing, and personal debate is certainly not news. An article in the New York Times this week, though, did a great job of reminding the reader how complex and nuanced women’s clothing-related decisions can be. Interconnected with sets of symbols, associations, and aspirations, clothing can reflect allegiance to class, ethnic, or national traditions, serve as a means of severing ties with those traditions, reflect class mobility or aspirations to increased wealth and power, embrace or defy varying conceptions of femininity, and so on. The numerous examples in this article of the politics of women’s clothing around the world deserve more than a cursory summary; anyone interested in this kind of thing – or even those oblivious to fashion – would do well to read the article itself.

Another important reminder in this article is the fact that what appears to be one thing to a cultural outsider – slavish devotion to oppressing traditions, disenfranchisement symbolized by hijabs or saris – can mean something totally different to women who choose to wear certain “traditional” garments, even while other women may resent and reject those same items of clothing. Also, the article reminds the audience that much of the artisanry and craftsmanship that goes into many non-Western forms of dress may be obscured to a Western audience who sees only projections of their own oversimplified assumptions about “exotic” people when looking at a woman wearing a head scarf or anything but a power suit in corporate environments. I gave a sigh of relief when reading this article, and hope it will have the same effect on other readers, too.

New York Times: Mixing Trends and Traditions Where Fashions Can Convey Power

Contributed by Cherie

My eyes were assaulted the other day as I was flipping through a magazine that featured this ad promoting Van Gogh Blue Vodka with the slogan “Women Who Don’t Wear Underwear Never Get Their Panties In A Bunch.” At first, I thought it was tied to some article critiquing the offensive and sexist advertisements of the 1950s and 60s but quickly realized this was nothing more than an advertisement in 2010. After a mental vomit, I decided to check out this Van Gogh Blue Vodka and found that there were several more of these vintage inspired ads featuring other ridiculous catchphrases including “PMS Isn’t Anything a Good Vodka Cocktail and a Cupcake Can’t Cure” and “I like my vodka straight but my friends can go either way.” And as expected a sour taste filled my mouth yet again.

What surprised me even more about this ridiculous campaign was the mention in a Times’ feature about it published last month that this brand of Vodka’s goal was to “aim its advertising and promotions at women in an effort to distinguish itself from the myriad brands aimed at male drinkers.”

Wait a min…the goal is to ATTRACT women? By reducing them to ridiculous stereotypes of panty-less pms-ing sex objects??? Are we sure this isn’t a campaign aimed at reminding men of the good ol’ pin up days when women “behaved” or “knew their place?”

Well according David Grzelak, executive director for behavioral brand planning at Engauge, Van Gogh Blue’s ad agency, the intent of this campaign “from a creative perspective is to constantly have an intelligence and a smile to the work…We’re being careful not to be crass.”

Well Mr. Grzelak, this portrait of women you have painted has ‘crass’ written all over it. If you really wanted to appeal to women, how about depicting them as strong minded and actually funny, or at least talking about something other than their panties? Clearly this campaign has some work to do before it effectively targets women.

NY Times: Vodka Brand Goes Edgy as It Reaches Out to Women

Contributed by Cristen

Next Friday, an historical handshake will take place between Pope Benedict XVI and Rev. Jane Hedges of Westminster Abbey. Never before has a pope made such physical contact with a clergywoman, and the event will take place only months after the Vatican declared the ordination of women a “crime against faith”, as the Guardian reports.

The Anglican and Catholic Churches have been at odds over the ordaining women and homosexuals for a while, and last year the Catholic Church even created a new way for Anglicans who disagreed with the denomination’s more liberal stance to enter the Catholic fold. Last year, the Vatican also cracked down on a Leadership Conference of Women Religious, a Catholic women’s organization, over concerns that members might be crossing the line toward exercising priestly authority.

Given the ecumenical infighting, it’s interesting that Pope Benedict has set up this meeting with Rev. Hedges who, the Guardian notes, is also the campaigner for women bishops in the Church of England. Perhaps, in light of the priest sex abuse scandal that threatened to creep its way to the papal ranks earlier this year, the Church is beginning to slowly back down from its fierce opposition against the ordination of women. After all, the sex abuse scandal also spotlighted the glaring gender gap in the Church’s leadership and questions of whether that all-male priesthood is really such a healthy model. Yes, Hedges is Anglican, but the handshake could nevertheless symbolize a small legitimization of female ordination in the eyes of the pope. Or, of course, it could just make a good photo op.

Regardless of the event’s outcome, it’s high time one of the most powerful religious denominations in the world finally opened its ranks to women. And while I doubt the handshake will make any headlines next Friday, I’m hoping that it’s a sign of things to come for the Catholic Church.

Contributed by Annamarya

Growing up, I was never really interested in the glitter and glam of “girl” toys (or, at least, what corporations thought girls would like in the ’80s). Granted, my older sister and I had a crap load of Barbies we played with but, personally, I was more interested in my He-Man, Transformers & WWF action figures (I had a sweet Hulk Hogan pillow that went with me nearly everywhere). I guess you can say I and other women who enjoyed the same type of “boy-sanctioned” toys defied gender-based product expectations as children but that would just be playing into the gender-normative stereotypes placed on our society. We just liked what we liked and we’re no less or no more of a woman because of that.

But that relative logic still seems to elude toy makers today. Just take a look at some of our picks below from the September 2 Huffington Post’s photo slide of The 14 WORST Toys for Girls. Apparently, little girls need to be prepped for a life of cleaning, baby making and staying pretty (BARF).

1. Girl Tech “Stylin’ Studio”

If you can’t make it out, the tagline for Girl Tech’s “Stylin’ Studio” is “The Ultimate Makeover.” If that isn’t bad enough, here is the product description from the Girl Tech website itself: “Hey girls, are you tired of the same old look? You need Girl Tech® Stylin’ Studio™ Welcome to a virtual world of makeup, accessories, and fashion…Take your picture, and then have fun with a digital makeover that includes different hairstyles, accessories, and apparel. Hook into your PC to print your makeover with different backgrounds and templates, and to email your makeovers to your friends. Get ready to discover a new you!” “Stylin’ Studio” is clearly sending a negative message to young girls – that instead of loving yourself inside and out for who you are and what you look like, you can just fix whatever you don’t like. I’ll say this: there’s nothing wrong with moderately changing your look when you’re younger if it’s something you want to do for you. I know when I hit junior high, I changed up my look to something I was more comfortable with. But I also had low self-esteem, and if I had the “Stylin’ Studio” during that time, it wouldn’t have been used to see what I would look with a different hair color for the fun of it – it would’ve been used to see how much better I would be if I wasn’t me. Is that something we want to teach young impressionable girls? I think not.

2. Girls Only “My Cleaning Trolley

I’m just dumbfound that this even exists. While there is nothing wrong with working in the janitorial profession, we shouldn’t be creating toys that prepare girls for a life of cleaning after other people’s messes. It sends the wrong message: That, because you’re a female, cleaning is all you’re good for. But maybe I’m reading too much into this. Maybe there are girls out there who actually like to clean around the house for no other reason than they just like to and not because someone is telling them that’s what they should be doing.

3. Pole Dance Doll

I’ll have to say this:  I find nothing wrong with stripping. If a woman decides that that’s the career she wants for no other reason than she likes it, than who am I to judge? But a pole dancing doll for young girls? I think that issue goes without saying.

4. Lil’ Monkey

Let’s just file this under “Racist.”

5. “Future Hooters Girl” T-Shirt

Because that’s what everyone young girl should aspire to.

6. Pregnant Barbie

The last thing young girls should be worrying about is pregnancy.

Contributed by Ashleigh

More and more research is coming out regarding the steamy sexcapades enjoyed by Baby Boomers. In fact, several surveys over the last couple of years demonstrate that baby boomers—the group born between 1946 and 1965, of which there are 10 million in Canada alone—are very sexually active. Nearly half of boomers reported shedding their sexual inhibitions since turning 50 and feeling sexually satisfied. In the U.S., 85 per cent of male boomers and 61 per cent of female boomers surveyed by a polling firm said that sexual satisfaction was “critical” to their relationships and quality of life.

There are a number of reasons for this, not the least of which is the increased availability of sexual enhancements for men (erectile dysfunction drugs) and women (lubricants to combat vaginal dryness).  And on the contrary, there are some changes that come with age that assist in the sex lives of both men and women. Some men say they no longer suffer from premature ejaculation, and the good news about menopause is that women no longer worry about getting pregnant. Also, as women age they usually become more “in touch with their bodies and comfortable explaining to their partner what works for them and what doesn’t.”

There are also lifestyle changes occurring among boomers that enable better sex lives including more free time and financial freedom, allowing for more romantic dinners, vacation and spontaneity. Boomers are also enjoying the freedom of an empty nest when their children move out. A recent influx of websites such as Lavalife Prime, Boomer Cupid, and Midlife Matchmaker all cater towards the boomer crowd who are looking for love and are tech-savvy.

And we all know sex can be good for your health (it’s like cardio, right?); apparently sex also boasts other benefits such as strengthening bones and muscles, boosting the immune system and preventing wrinkles around the eyes.

It’s not all roses though: studies show that boomers are being increasingly risky with their sex lives, using less protection than other groups. And a 2008 survey found that 37 per cent of single boomers would have sex on the first date—double the number for Generation X’ers. Still, the overall message that older folks are having plenty of great sex bodes well for all of us. Healthy, happy and horny after 55? Sign me up.

Maclean’s- baby boomers: are they more sexually adventurous?

Contributed by Meridith

Gender violence as a war crime has been often neglected and little understood. In recent years, more has been written about mass sexual assault and violence against women as weapons of war, and more and more authorities and diplomatic organizations are condemning violence against women as a heinous component of untold numbers of wars. I was horrified this week to read an article in the New York Times discussing the ongoing prevalence of silence surrounding mass rapes and violence against women in the 1971 war in which Bangladesh became a country after East and West Pakistan separated. Although there is no definite or even reasonably certain estimate of the number of women who were brutally raped during this war, estimates range from 200,000 to 400,000 women: about ten times the number of women raped during the Bosnian war, which had such abhorrently high rates of rape that the world was forced to recognize rape as an “instrument of terror” and a crime against humanity; after Bosnia, the Rome Statute officially denounced rape as a war crime punishable by the International Criminal Court. And yet, the enormous amount of gender-based violence in the war in Bangladesh almost 40 years ago has still failed to elicit any kind of widespread outcry.

In light of the approaching 40^th anniversary of the war, the Bangladeshi government has created an International Crimes Tribunal in order to examine the human rights violations and war crimes committed during the war. This tribunal has the potential to bring justice to victims of atrocities during the war, but many human rights activists and lawyers worry that crimes against women will not be adequately addressed through the tribunal. Nonetheless, these activists are working to ensure that the rapes and murders of untold numbers of women in Bangladesh be acknowledged, condemned, and atoned for, especially in the context of a conservative nation that has often devalued and disparaged women’s roles. As horrifying as this article was to read, it is my hope that it will further the invaluable work of bringing perpetrators of violence against women to justice and prohibiting these kinds of atrocities from happening in the future. These are voices that I can only hope will be heard across the world.

New York Times: Bangladesh War’s Toll on Women Still Undiscussed