Odd Girls Out

Rachel Simmons writes: "There is a hidden culture of girls' aggression in which bullying is epidemic, distinctive, and destructive. It is not marked by the direct physical and verbal behavior that is primarily the province of boys. Our culture refuses girls access to open conflict, and it forces their aggression into nonphysical, indirect, and covert forms. Girls use backbiting, exclusion, rumors, name-calling, and manipulation to inflict psychological pain on targeted victims. Unlike boys, who tend to bully acquaintances or strangers, girls frequently attack withitn tightly knit networks of friends, making aggression harder to identify and intensifying the damage to the victims" ( Odd Girl Out, 2002).

true dat.

Simmons' observations are based on her studies of the social behavior of school-age girls, but in my experience, these behaviors are also seen in grown women. Her work makes me think of women's social networks, and the workings of some women's communities, particularly the queer ones. In my experience there are 3 distinct types of queer women's communities, and I hope readers will forgive my tendency to generalize.

1. QUEER THEORY GIRLS - These are the women who are into radical sex politics and queer theory. Many are pierced, tattooed and consistenly exude a "too cool for school" attitude and demeanor. This group is tied to the academy, and heavily influenced by postmodern, identity politics. Many consider themselves feminists, but are aware of the problematic nature of the term. Some resist the trappings of monogamy or anything too similar to straight-defined relationships. Instead they laud the righteousness of polyamory, and prefer fluid, somewhat committal types of romantic unions.

You must have a certain, unidentifiable degree of "hipness" to be accepted into this crowd. Also, you have to have the "right" politics meaning that you have to focus on heterogeneity in all aspects of life, and never, ever let on that you aren't opposed to metanarratives. You can't make general statements (especially about people) and must always be aware of the ever shifting power dynamics involved in all human interactions. Most have race and class consciousness, but purely in cultural terms as a facet of one's differentiated identity. Most are white, middle-class and upper middle class, with a few women from working-class backgrounds thrown in for variety. While membership is about as exclusive as Studio 54 in 1977, these women are not too judgemental in other areas, resisting the temptation to moralize about people's behavior. If these women have a problem with you, some will confront you directly, while others will express disapproval in the ways Rachel Simmons describes. Because they pride themselves on transgressing or perhaps resisting established social boundaries, they are able to throw down on a Saturday night without much guilt. Beware though, some of the women in this community are loaded to the gills with anti-depressants, and anti-psychotic drugs, so you may experience many personalities when you thought you were only dealing with one.

2. PC, LIBERAL FEMINIST GIRLS - This type of women's community is, hands down, the most unpleasant. To be in the company of these women is as painful as having a fingernail extracted without anesthetic. These are the academic, professional queers who want nothing more out of life than to be the best goddman professional feminists they can be. They never pass up an opportunity to network, and these interactions are probably the most meaningful ones they regularly experience. If there is a rule to be created or enforced the PC liberal fem girls are there. They are typically a superficial, insincere lot and unbelievably politically correct. If you don't agree with their opinions, or view the world through a liberal feminist lens, then you are fucked, my friend. Liberal feminism is their religion, their metanarrative, and they enforce its rules with heavy, heavy hands. It's a peculiar brand of facism defined and carried out by uptight women who pride themselves on being good girls with politically pure politics. They are the judges, the juries and the executioners all rolled into one. The feminist vanguard. Virtually all are white, middle-class women. Some are from working-class backgrounds but have thrown off those shackles in their path toward liberal feminist enlightenment. They have virtually no race or class consciousness, even though they sometimes pay lip service to these considerations. Politically they focus solely on gender, with sexuality being a close second.

The politics they seek to enforce and inscribe are generally lame, non-thought-provoking and very restrictive. They live in a Bush- like world where if you are not with them, you are against them. If you do not think like them, you are not one of them. And for the women not like them, they will strike out against you, but never, ever directly. Their hostility will be expressed in the ways Rachel Simmons describes above. These women take the label of feminism very seriously and tolerate no problemitizing of the term. If you are not a liberal feminist then you are, at the very least, a bad feminist, or an anti-feminist. Some are pierced and tatooed, but most opt for the more sober, well-scrubbed look. Most enjoy committed, long term relationships although some also reject traditional relationships associating them with patriarchal, straight-defined unions. Some are on anti-depressants, but most value therapy and like to talk about people's "issues." Unlike the Queer theory girls, the PC liberal feminists will never throw down on a Saturday night. They may go to their local coffee shop to hear a lesbian folk singer, or to a tasteful, clean bar to have the occasional martini, but anything more would be much too excessive. Avoid this group at all costs.

3. THE JUST PLAIN QUEER GIRLS - These girls are usually not assoicated with the academy. Some have college educations while others are just working stiffs. Some label themselves as feminists, while others have no political affiliations whatsoever. Some are "diesel dykes", while others are "sports dykes," and most are somewhere in between. This group's membership has all races and class backgrounds. These are the women who, by and large, have never considered the political nature of being queer or a woman. If they have it's usually queer politics lite, or women's studies lite. These women are just plain queer, and the most difficult to make generalizations about. Of the three types of women's communities, they are probably the most diverse, most accepting of others and the least judgemental. Unlike the girls Simmons encountered during her research, and the PC, liberal feminist girls, these women would never express aggression in the ways Simmons describes above. No, No, No. They would give it to you straight up and move about their business, still being able to be friends with you. No red flags here, but it is always wise to proceed with caution.


I know or have known women who belong to all 3 of these groups. I, like many queer women, do not fit neatly into any of them, but I prefer the company of members of groups 3 & 1, in that order. I loathe group 2. I recently was associated with a PC liberal feminist group in Minnesota. Unfortunately, I was forced to have many associations with these women because my partner worked with them at a University there. After three years of being around this sorry lot, I now steer clear of any queer feminist woman remotely resembling someone from this group. Life is simply too short to suffer fools.



jb,

proud to be one of the odd girls out.

Magazine Mania

i am absolutely wild about magazines. there is something so satisying about sitting down and reading a magazine from cover to cover. my love of magazines started back in the day (in the 70's when i was a teenager) with *tiger beat*, *16*, *cream* and *hit parader*. i got hooked on magazines while accompanying my mom to the grocery store. every two weeks, when my father got paid, my mom would go to our nearby A&P and stock up on food. since she only went every two weeks, and we had a big family, this took some time. as soon as we hit the store i would race to the magazine stand and read the entire time my mom was shopping. invariably, my mom would buy 1 or 2 magazines to take home with me. i read the above mentioned magazines every month, cover to cover, and cut out pictures to hang on my wall. the latest pics of leif garrett, shawn cassidy, john travolta (he used to be a teen idol, remember) and linda carter (wonder woman) had to go on my wall immediately. these people kept me company, and transported me from the appalachian coalfields to los angeles and new york. also, it was through these magazines that i became such a big music fan, with *cream* and *hit parader* being my way to stay up to date on what my favorite bands were doing, and to turn me on to new music.

i eventually moved on to *rolling stone* and *spin* as i headed into high school. i also would buy *cosmopolitan* and *teen* occasionally just because all of my friends did so, but to be honest, i never could get into those mags for young women. all the talk about one's physical appearance, and how to get a boyfriend just didn't resonate with me. they left me feeling inadequate and ugly.

now, i read a number of different magazines on a regular basis - some that i subscribe to, others that i buy at the newstand, or read at the campus library. here is a list of the magazines we currently have subscriptions to at the moment. please keep in mind that some of these were xmas gifts, and not chosen by us. however, we do enjoy all of them.

1. HARPER'S - wow. what a magazine. it's glossy and smart. anne turned me onto harper's a couple of years ago. every article is like a mini-dissertation. it's fabulous.
2. THE ATLANTIC - this has good political commentary. they are scary and alarmist sometimes, but it still keeps me up to date on politics. they no longer cover fiction regularly. you have to buy separate editions for that. but this year (2005) they had a wonderful, 5 part series -"in the footsteps of tocqueville" -by bernard-henri levy, a frenchman who goes all over the u.s. and writes about his observations. it's good stuff.
3. NEW YORK - this magazine can be a bit lurid in their coverage of scandal in new york city, but overall it's good cultural and political criticism and keeps us informed on what is happening in n.y.c.
4. ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY - this magazine is so skinny and glossy. this was a gift from a.'s mom. it's a cursory look at film, tv, music, books etc. very superficial but a quick and entertaining read most of the time.
5. BITCH - this is a gift from our friend, cheryl. it's good cultural criticism from a young feminist perspective. we dig it.
6. THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER - yes, we do get this one every week. this was a gift from a's mom and we thorougly enjoy it. i don't usually read a word of it, but i love the pics of celebrities caught off-guard. it's mean-spirited and salacious but very, very funny.
7. LIVING - nana bought this for us as a xmas gift a couple of years ago. she loved martha stewart and was a lot like her. we enjoy the practical advice of this mag, and some of the recipes are delicious. thanks nana. may you rest in peace.

okay, that's it for now. i'm open to suggestions about magazines that other people enjoy.

jb

Thought Control and Media

my significant other has just discovered that a student has plagiarized her final paper in their ws class. oy-vey. the business of stealing one's words and thoughts continues in higher education. it puts professors in tangled positions not knowing whether to simply fail the student on the assignment, or for the entire class, or to take a drastic measure and send them to the conduct board. it's one of the definite unpleasantries of being an educator.

speaking of thoughts and the ownership thereof, our dear old president (will we ever tire of hating and criticizing him?) has given some one-one-one interviews to journalists (well, at least 1) and has even taken some questions after prepared remarks. remember, he has been doing some speaking engagements this week to gain more support for this dangerously stupid war he started in 2003. yesterday, after speaking in phillie, he surprised everyone by taking questions. many things struck me while watching this.

1. i'm cynical when it comes to bush answering reporters seemingly "off the cuff" questions. i'm sure they, like most other reporter's questions during his presidency, have been staged. even though the questions in phillie were about the number of dead iraqi civilians, i'm certain the question and the response were both agreed to beforehand.

2. it seemed fresh and new to have a president wind up a formal speech agreeing to take questions from the press. then i realized that former presidents did this all the time. it used to be procedure before the bush administration. used to be. now it seems like a relaxed moment with bush bonding with "the american people" - getting real, and answering tough questions. if only.

3. g.w.'s attempts this week to gain support for his war also brought up the media thought control that has increased and become par for the course during his presidency. we all know how our "news" journalists ( and the spineless democratic party) gave bush and co. all the support they needed to invade iraq in 2003. critiquing the administration back then was equivalent to saying "i'm glad the awful terrorists drove our planes into the twin towers." it took hurricane katrina, the obliteration of the gulf coast, and the bush administration's awful neglect of this disaster to open the doors for critique of his administration and their violent policies. finally.

yet we still have a media controlled by the right wing, and a president who is protected by it. and, imho, the critiques that have been issued (by media and members of the democratic party) are weak, and don't go nearly far enough in calling this man what he is: a war criminal.

this brings me, finally, to my purpose with this blog entry. last night i saw an ad in Clamor magazine about a media collective that exists to "circumvent the corporate media" by organizing speakers and films to bring to college campuses and towns throughout the country. they sound really cool and so important in this time of censorship. they are called Evil Twin Booking. check out their site at:
www. eviltwinbooking.com

later,

JB

p.s. the answer to my question about whether we will ever tire of hating and criticizing george w. bush is a definite NO. in fact, i consider it a duty of citizenship.