Rainbow Jello!

If you haven't noticed yet, I like rainbows. I'm not quite sure why I find them visually appealing...but they represent some cool things: inclusiveness and openness, and encompass the full spectrum of variety.

I just stumbled across this page where the author brilliantly created rainbow Jello. Genius.

Latin America + Shock Doctrine

Naomi Klein has been at UIUC for the past few days. Today I had the privilege to attend a panel discussion with her and two academics (Prof. Fernando Coronil, Univ. of Michigan; Prof. Andrew Orta, UIUC) on "The rise of current social movements and protests in Latin America."

It was interesting, to say the least, and refreshingly reminded me that I am situated very close to a college campus. I'd been away from the academic air for a while.

Klein built upon arguments presented at her main lecture last night (I was unable to attend) and in her book, Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Her project is to promote a counter-narrative to the unquestioned neoliberal responses to disasters. Lately, see: 9/11, Katrina, and the bailout "plan." The government has responded to these catastrophes by capitalizing on public shock and fear to push an agenda (war in Iraq/Patriot Act, racism/commercialization of NOLA/overlooking of basic infrastructure problems, free reins with $700B). Additionally, we haven't done a good job at remembering history as it happened either. Thus, we're shocked at the shock...and during this our freedoms are stolen right out from under us, without question.

Klein says we Americans are "addicted to shock."

In the context of Latin America, she said that it is the most advanced site of resistance against this "shock doctrine" and neoliberalism. She cited a few reasons (and noted that it's an incomplete list):

1. It got neoliberalism first.
2. It was an extremely obvious un-democratic (violent and/or racist) overthrow of the status quo.
3. The left there wasn't discredited. Compared to the Soviet bloc, the left (socialist) side didn't fall; in Latin America, it was put down. People can't point to the left and say they screwed it up before.

She said we have a lot to learn from Latin American organizing during our own "reconstruction period."

I think she's got some good points, and I'll put her book on my "to read" list. ...Also, she was recently on Colbert Report if you'd like to see her in action.

This is also an interesting story.

Don't forget!

Creativity+Design

A few things I've recently ran across have really sparked my creative side:

• A movie by Care.org called The Girl Effect. It's one of the better examples of good typography I've seen.
• Twitter's introductory video. A very simple and low-budget video that introduces the concept of Twitter and provides motive to use it. The group (Common Craft) that did it has more similar movies on their website, but I think Twitter was the best.
  
• A list of design RSS feeds. A lot of them are inspirational (in the design sense).
• Plus, a personal favorite, rainbow-based designs.
  

Enjoy!

Sex Education?

So...this is a follow up to the discussion I posted with regard to The Price of Pleasure movie, (the Two Intense Movies post)...

If anyone reads this, what do you think about the following:
How can we learn about sex? How can we get a good education on it? How do we learn what is "right" in a relationship?

Or, more seriously: how can we learn about what constitutes violence or rape in a relationship?

I think we've got some issues as a society when (as I learned from Vagina Monologues) 1 in 3 American women experiences sexual violence in her lifetime. What's our plan to solve this? (Even as individuals?)

I truely believe that...

...everyone should watch this:

It's from youtube's early days...and has 5,000,000+ views. That's crazy.

Fall!

The sugar maple leaves around here are beautiful!

Resurrecting the old blog

I just added a bunch of old posts from my original blog.

Two Intense Movies

The past two nights I've watched two movies: The Price of Pleasure and The Constant Gardener. They were both pretty depressing but at the same time thought provoking. Here are some of my thoughts:

The price of pleasure was about pornography and it's impacts. The aim of the documentary was not to provide a bias or be preachy, but rather its aim is just to get people talking about it, something we usually do not do, no more than the "porn is bad" or "I like/watch porn." The movie included a lot of quotes from porn "users," producers, and actresses. It described a study done to analyze some of the top rented flicks - from the violence in it to racial content. I wouldn't have guessed this but about 90% of the films they analyzed had violent content. (Though I don't know their working definition of violence.) The movie included several porn clips as well, and nothing out of the ordinary, as far as I can tell. It was certainly interesting to see it removed from its normal context.

Seeing the clips out of context, it was even more clear how big a role male dominance is in the scenarios of standard porn. The movie pointed out that when sex is attached to these socially unacceptable (politically incorrect) ideas they can be extremely overt and we don't seem to care as much or at all. The male dominance is one facet, but race (gendered) is also a factor. Extremely over-sexualized black men, docile Asian women, demanding white men, etc., the standard racial stereotypes, but on steroids and very obviously tied to gender. These politically incorrect ideas are overlooked and more acceptable in porn. Why is that?

To me the most interesting phenomenon is how the concept of "normal" is completely altered by watching pornography. For many men*, porn (videos and magazines) is one of the first and perhaps only source for information on sex and relationships. (*I say men here because they are the overwhelming majority of porn consumers.) How then will they ever develop a frame of reference on sex outside of that? In other words, their views on sex are created by the world of porn, and these ideas are too often brought into the world of the bedroom. With no anchor on normality outside of porn, this fundamentally changes what will register as violence, or as rape, in a man's mind.

I do not blame the men who watch porn. Though I think there are healthy alternatives to using porn (like not using it), I find it hard to place blame on the individual men. How so? I think it has something to do with how the concept of normal is altered - it's not conscious. They're not thinking "I'd like to see violent porn and change my perception of violence and then act violently toward my significant other." Furthermore, demonizing or shaming men for doing this would tend to make them more resistant to change. So, though I do not think these individuals are to blame, I do think they are the ones who need to change. Once they realize that their views of sex and relationships are affected by porn, they should question that. It is their responsibility as a part of an intimate relationship to be aware of their ideas of sex and what they bring to that relationship.

And in a free market system where we are not allowed to blame a company for producing porn, I believe we shouldn't put the responsibility on them either, i.e. ask them to censor themselves. I do think it is the responsibility of individuals to have control over themselves. Men need to find a masculinity that is not derived from a dominance over women, and their free market demand should thus requisite less supply.

OH, and HERE'S the bibliography. (It's a PDF file from the Price of Pleasure website.) (There's a lot else at the website, including a trailer and interview w/ Noam Chomsky.)

Ok, well I've been rambling a bit more than I thought I would so I'll come back to the other movie another time. Let me know what you think.

MySQL on Windows Vista

P.S. If you have vista and you're trying to run MySQL, do not use 5.0. You must use 5.1. 5.0 doesn't work with vista.

Web Dev Tips

I'm just figuring out how to become a freelance web designer. If you're in the same boat, I want to share some resources with you:

• Firebug - a Firefox plug in to modify HTML and CSS (plus a few others) live in the browser
• CSSVista / Litmus - CSSVista is the desktop version of Litmus - which both let you view HTML and CSS in multiple browsers. Yes, this really is what you've been longing for.
• http://lynda.com/ - Lynda.com offers tutorials on just about anything you can imagine that's related to web development.
• idealist.org - I'm personally interested in working with non-profits or non-governmentals to develop their websites. Idealist.org can be a good place to find jobs in that arena.
• Web Developer toolbar - this toolbar adds tons of functionality to Firefox related to web development - anything from CSS to forms to resizing the window, etc etc.
• ColorCop - a program with an eyedropper tool to grab colors from anywhere! (RGB and Hex values)
• Inkscape - opensource vector graphics program

That's all off the top of my head right now. (Thanks to Kate for most of them.) Good luck.

Implicit Associations and Blink

As a psychology nerd (at least for some types of psych.), I find the following project interesting. For non-nerds and nerds alike, it's kind of fun to play with and see your results:
http://implicit.harvard.edu/

Project Implicit, based at Harvard, but well-connected across the country, is conducting research on implicit associations. To break it down for non-nerds: implicit is sort of analogous to automatic. So, in other words, they study the associations you make semi-automatically. Stereotyping is an example of this.

I just finished Blink by Malcolm Gladwell which was about the ramifications of these judgments - when they go wrong, when they're avoided, etc. For example, the conclusion of the book tells the story of how women began getting accepted into prestegious orchestras...by auditioning behind a screen so judges couldn't stereotype their abilities based on gender.

I egotistically think this is a good reason that my name can be read androgynously.

Anyway, there's some food for thought if you're interested in that kind of thing or have some time to waste and want to help out cool research.

P.S. I now have more BS.

I did graduate! I wasn't sure until just yesterday whether I've got a BS or a BA in Psychology, but I'm proud to announce that I do now have a BS. Or, just more BS, depending on how you look at it. Hopefully as I get my life on the track I want it to be on (or, you know, start finding tracks) I'll be posting more and interacting more with the blogosphere in general. Thanks for reading.

final finals EVER

[...yep, still trying to graduate...]

here's what that looks like:

14(ish) page paper draft due tonight (well actually like 2 weeks ago, but hey)
6 pages due on tuesday
1 page due on tuesday
final on tuesday
3,000 words (10 pages) due on wednesday
draft of LONG paper due on saturday
that paper due on next wednesday
organize coalition
make people come to meeting
wrap up ties to international impact as treasurer
pass over all info from vice presidency
try not to pass out or ignore everyone i care about

i suppose that's not too bad, right?
thought i'd blog about it to procrastinate/take a break.

just now

i am walking home from studying at a library.

it's late at night, so i chose to take the brightest lit road home. a conscious decision.

i'm walking at a brisk pace past a dorm, and i am the only one walking within a few blocks.

"wanna double bed?" a male voice calls from the dorm, "because i'll double penetrate your asshole."

i keep walking. i don't even flinch, nor dare to look in the direction of his voice. i walk about 10 more steps.

"answer the motherfucker." yells a second voice.

i keep on walking. trying not to too obviously look around me in fear that someone is following.

3 and a half blocks home, and my heart is still racing when i get to the door.

i quit

graduating college is stressful. i do not need the added stress of a part-time job demanding me to sit behind a computer for 10 hours a week. receiving disrespectful emails and hearing from my co-workers that my boss is pissed at me is not something i'd like to have in my life right now.

i feel ashamed for quitting, but i feel that this is only nominal. i have been detached and disinterested in this job for a while; it has not asked me to be creative, and when i have been, this has not been honored, or even accepted.

i no longer feel compelled to integrate this environment into my schedule, perhaps the busiest time of my life thus far.

so i quit.

new orleans, part 5

being in New Orleans (NOLA) again has reminded me to not be normalized. i love how that city and the spaces it provides allow me to express my true, more radical sides, rather than my institutionalized, academic, more rigid personality. school is making me less radical and i hate it. in that way, i'm glad this era is ending.

the city is still plagued, but is healing, too. V to the 10th helped me see that in a really powerful way. focusing on ending violence against women and spotlighting post-katrina new orleans, in the superdome was emotional. hearing people talk, rap, slam, cry, and share about their experiences was a healing for me, one that i've rarely had the opportunity to be a part of. the superdome, reclaimed as superLOVE for the weekend was transformed into a welcoming, art filled, female filled place -- a womb for birth and growth, if you will. :)

i'm so glad i was able to go. getting this respite, change of pace, and challenge to normativity is a good perspective to have as i'm getting ready to graduate.

here are some important things i wrote down that i want to remember:

• -see NOLA as a "canary in the coalmine" -- in terms of government, capitalism, misuse of public trust, etc. we should make sure that this doesn't continue to happen on a national level.
• -eve ensler: "the struggle is the change." eve rocks.
• -jane fonda spoke about art and activism -- art opens the heart, activism creates the change. i hadn't previously connected the two, but i'd like to start integrating that into my life and perspective.
• -slam poetry is HOT.
  

i suppose i viscerally FELT a lot of things i 'knew' about rape and violence against women. rape isn't necessarily violent or forceful, in the way we generally understand those words. it doesn't have to involve guns, blood, or physical force. it seems that media/popculture/etc have claimed and defined this discourse -- INCORRECTLY. the framing of these issues as such (on a societal AND individual level) lead us to incorrect solutions. the discourse and solutions should revolve around respect, consent, and the sacred-ness of sexuality. our society has violated that, and continues to do so even as it claims to restore it. women may not know, i did not know that "no" MEANS no. this space, this gift is mine, and maybe i will -share- it with someone else. how many times did you say no, did you feel 'no' or 'stop' or 'i don't want to' but you did anyway? how many more times will it take for you to speak up? how many more before you empower yourself and claim yourself? none. no more will i silence myself, no more will i let this continue. i will respect that choice and honor it. this is the beginning of something sacred.

if you want more information on this movement, visit the vday website: http://www.vday.org
if you'd like to talk to me about it, comment on the blog or send me an email; i'd like to hear what you have to say.

rereading past posts of mine on this blog, it's interesting to see these themes woven throughout. from aug.08.2006, almost two years ago, i posted a list of quotes from thich nhat hanh. here's one that i've finally come to understand this weekend:

"when we hold back our feelings and ignore our pain, we are committing violence against ourselves. the practice of nonviolence is to be here, to be present, and to recognize our own pain or despair."

again as i've expressed on this blog before, i hope this is the beginning of a string of related posts. hopefully finishing school will give me more free time to devote to this.

thanks for reading.

my creativity has been gone for a while. o, where has it gone.

i am jealous because of the movie <slacker>. it's slightly inspirational. lots to think about at the least.

questions from justin

--------------------------------------------
(1) from justin: "If there is a group of people who have always been cold, would it be wrong to send them a box of heat. They don't even know about boxes of heat, it wouldn't occur to them they they didn't have one before. Further more, they have no reason not to think that cold isn't the way things should be so they have desire for heat the way we know it, and maybe they wouldn't even like it... Would it be wrong to assume they want the same thing we have just because we can't conceive of them not wanting it?"

(2) another: "There is a place where women are taught that they are inferior to men and that they are stupid. They have only ever known this and have no reason to question it, additionally they live in an oppressive social situation and are strongly discouraged from questioning it. Would it be wrong to tell some of these women that this isn't the case? Furthermore, to help them realize this physically and become self actualized even though this would severely change their culture, way of life, and actual life they have at this point? Is it presumptuous to say that our way of looking at the world (all people being equal) is the right way? Why or why not. This is obviously a different question that the previous one because it deals with human rights and social issues, and more so because it broaches the issue of absolute or subjective morality. I still think it is interesting in its own way to consider, especially before going into other cultures as an outsider."
--------------------------------------------

(1) The box of warmth

My initial response to the first sentence is: yes (it's wrong), if it's unsustainable and locally unavailable. If you show them something they can't have, you just make them want it and tease them with its potential. If they've never wanted it before, why give it to them? Who are we to say that warm is good, when they're perfectly fine with it being cold?

That also immediately reminded me of a question posed a few years ago. Something like "if there was a starving child, and you had enough water to elongate his life for one day, would you give it to him or just let him die?" I think that the answer to this question is obvious: give him the water, because the next day it's possible to come across a less limited source of water. At least there is potential for survival. However, you are promoting suffering; living on the bare minimum of water is probably not very pleasant. Though, do you think it would even be physically possible to deny yourself the water? The kid would almost physically /have/ to drink it. (I realize this example doesn't relate directly, but again, something to consider in brainstorming.)

I don't think there's a clear answer to your question. I think it just morphs into another one, rather than getting 'cleared up'. I think the question becomes: what makes warm "good"? Why would we even think of providing this to them? Think about it from their perspective: "What the hell is this? These people are crazy, giving us a totally different environment...we're used to coldness, warmth is so different. It's not how it's supposed to be, it's not how it has been, and we don't have any idea how to make it stay warm, even if we did like it." (Something like that?)

I think your last question is confusing, so I'm gonna try and work it out: "Would it be wrong to assume they want the same thing we have, just because we can't conceive of them not wanting it?" Initial response: yes, it would be wrong of us to assume. But here's more thinking: let's disregard our conceptions of them wanting it, and just focus on our assumptions. (<<>There is a place where women are taught that they are inferior to men and that they are stupid." Hmm...let's just call this "mainstream society."

"Would it be wrong to tell some of these women that this isn't the case?"
What if telling them made them so socially deviant that they would be killed?

Just because it's something they've never known, doesn't mean they have no reason to question it. I think human nature calls that into question. Oppressive regimes are generally called 'oppressive' because they're oppressing people -->who don't want to be oppressed<-- I think they probably know that other things are possible. I think 'hope' may be a generalizable ideal...that "all humans have hope for something" may be true. ...For this case, I suppose women would hope that one day their intelligence could be recognized, that they could be recognized as an entity separate from men, and not merely defined by a hierarchical relationship to them. Lots of people are told they're inferior and stupid every day. I think it's when these "inferior" and "stupid" people get together that they can realize that---related to each other at least---there are other ways to define oneself. From here, the movement will start. Again, though, if they were told "you're not really inferior to men" or "you're smart" they might respond: "No, we really are inferior. We really are not smart and we should let men control all the things that require intelligence. Our position in society is to be inferior, and if we were anything other than that, we wouldn't know what to do. We actually find it comforting to be in this position, because society reinforces this, (ok, they wouldn't say it with these words, fine) and embraces it when we are this way." Bottom line, though, coming from a group of women who recognize that they are different ways to define themselves, is much different than coming from some outsider trying to tell them that there are different ways to define themselves. ...not that the latter is wrong necessarily.

3/3/08

i am confused. there are so many questions that are going through my head, and very rarely do they get affirmation. i can't find support, or at least some acknowledgment that what i am going through now is right, acceptable, good, and will lead to something better in the future. sometimes i talk to michael who also works at the ovp and she reminds me that it's ok, and that i shouldn't "shit all over myself." i reluctantly agree. i think what i need to do to help sort this out a bit more, as well as provide a reference for myself that progress isn't an illusion is: to write. write about what i'm struggling with, write about why i choose to do this, what i think i'm embarking on, what motivates me, and whatever other questions come up. // what is suffering? who are we to define it? // the question isn't whether or not we should go, but /how/ we should go. // link of the day from michael: http://chronicle.com/weekly/v54/i26/26a03401.htm title: american students abroad can't be 'global citizens' by talya zemach-bersin. i haven't read it yet but want to before work is over. i have to finish a homework assignment first.

with so much happening in my life here at school ...classes, clubs, boyfriend, friends and social ties, family, etc...how can i possibly focus on a larger picture? am i ethically supposed to? what about that question...should we care about people we don't know?

i don't intend to go somewhere and do something with a clear conscious, determination achieved by sorting out all of the questions i'm facing right now. i don't intend to feel that i know what i'm doing is right, but, rather, moving away from doing something i feel is wrong, in search for something different. // what exactly is wrong with this? i suppose what's wrong with this is that if i keep living here like this, (even knowingly?) i'll be living into the life of privilege, unquestioningly in practice, perhaps different in theory, but all the while at risk of falling into it after losing momentum to question, constantly swimming against the stream. this, i think, is what i'm trying to avoid right now: complacency created by buying into the system. i think this definitely stems from my parents saying they empathize with many of the counter-cultural feelings i experience now, but looking at them from my perspective, are part of that system (culture) themselves.

yeah, i guess granted that we can never really escape this privilege given to us at birth, and not that i'm trying to necessarily avoid the facts, but i'd rather not continue the treadmill.

what can i do to end this culture of privilege, of imperialism? this is what i seek to answer.

this, though, should not be the motivation to go abroad, to seek to find it outside of ourselves. or should it? can we not get a good glimpse of our own culture without contrasting it to another? taking ourselves and placing our cultured selves into another culture, and examining the differences? i think the answer is: both are needed. we need to be fully grounded here at the same time as exploring our boundaries with contrast to other cultures, and noting the details of the differences. perhaps in this way we can inform ourselves about our culture, about its deficiencies and about parts that should be embraced and celebrated.

questions from justin

--------------------------------------------
(1) from justin: "If there is a group of people who have always been cold, would it be wrong to send them a box of heat. They don't even know about boxes of heat, it wouldn't occur to them they they didn't have one before. Further more, they have no reason not to think that cold isn't the way things should be so they have desire for heat the way we know it, and maybe they wouldn't even like it... Would it be wrong to assume they want the same thing we have just because we can't conceive of them not wanting it?"

(2) another: "There is a place where women are taught that they are inferior to men and that they are stupid. They have only ever known this and have no reason to question it, additionally they live in an oppressive social situation and are strongly discouraged from questioning it. Would it be wrong to tell some of these women that this isn't the case? Furthermore, to help them realize this physically and become self actualized even though this would severely change their culture, way of life, and actual life they have at this point? Is it presumptuous to say that our way of looking at the world (all people being equal) is the right way? Why or why not. This is obviously a different question that the previous one because it deals with human rights and social issues, and more so because it broaches the issue of absolute or subjective morality. I still think it is interesting in its own way to consider, especially before going into other cultures as an outsider."
--------------------------------------------

(1) The box of warmth

My initial response to the first sentence is: yes (it's wrong), if it's unsustainable and locally unavailable. If you show them something they can't have, you just make them want it and tease them with its potential. If they've never wanted it before, why give it to them? Who are we to say that warm is good, when they're perfectly fine with it being cold?

That also immediately reminded me of a question posed a few years ago. Something like "if there was a starving child, and you had enough water to elongate his life for one day, would you give it to him or just let him die?" I think that the answer to this question is obvious: give him the water, because the next day it's possible to come across a less limited source of water. At least there is potential for survival. However, you are promoting suffering; living on the bare minimum of water is probably not very pleasant. Though, do you think it would even be physically possible to deny yourself the water? The kid would almost physically /have/ to drink it. (I realize this example doesn't relate directly, but again, something to consider in brainstorming.)

I don't think there's a clear answer to your question. I think it just morphs into another one, rather than getting 'cleared up'. I think the question becomes: what makes warm "good"? Why would we even think of providing this to them? Think about it from their perspective: "What the hell is this? These people are crazy, giving us a totally different environment...we're used to coldness, warmth is so different. It's not how it's supposed to be, it's not how it has been, and we don't have any idea how to make it stay warm, even if we did like it." (Something like that?)

I think your last question is confusing, so I'm gonna try and work it out: "Would it be wrong to assume they want the same thing we have, just because we can't conceive of them not wanting it?" Initial response: yes, it would be wrong of us to assume. But here's more thinking: let's disregard our conceptions of them wanting it, and just focus on our assumptions. (<<>There is a place where women are taught that they are inferior to men and that they are stupid." Hmm...let's just call this "mainstream society."

"Would it be wrong to tell some of these women that this isn't the case?"
What if telling them made them so socially deviant that they would be killed?

Just because it's something they've never known, doesn't mean they have no reason to question it. I think human nature calls that into question. Oppressive regimes are generally called 'oppressive' because they're oppressing people -->who don't want to be oppressed<-- I think they probably know that other things are possible. I think 'hope' may be a generalizable ideal...that "all humans have hope for something" may be true. ...For this case, I suppose women would hope that one day their intelligence could be recognized, that they could be recognized as an entity separate from men, and not merely defined by a hierarchical relationship to them. Lots of people are told they're inferior and stupid every day. I think it's when these "inferior" and "stupid" people get together that they can realize that---related to each other at least---there are other ways to define oneself. From here, the movement will start. Again, though, if they were told "you're not really inferior to men" or "you're smart" they might respond: "No, we really are inferior. We really are not smart and we should let men control all the things that require intelligence. Our position in society is to be inferior, and if we were anything other than that, we wouldn't know what to do. We actually find it comforting to be in this position, because society reinforces this, (ok, they wouldn't say it with these words, fine) and embraces it when we are this way." Bottom line, though, coming from a group of women who recognize that they are different ways to define themselves, is much different than coming from some outsider trying to tell them that there are different ways to define themselves. ...not that the latter is wrong necessarily.

2/28/08

i never thought of making anything permanent in latin america. only observing how they interact with their surroundings, what they consider their problems to be. maybe at one point i can consider offering advice, but i do not feel anywhere near that point now. there's no way i can even begin to think about how to affect those communities in the abstract ideals that permeate our conversations.