WBEZ | feminism

How growing up Disney shapes gender roles

Fri, 07 Jun 2013 09:00:00 -0500

If you are currently between the ages of 18-29, then you were raised during the Disney Renaissance. This golden era of musical films—beginning in the late 1980s and ending around 2000—not only saved Disney from creative and financial ruin, but also renewed interest in the Disney brand as a critical and commerical goldmine.

And if you were a pre-adolescent girl during this time, chances are good that you had a favorite Disney princess (mine was Ariel, the plucky and impossibly beautiful heroine of The Little Mermaid) whose love affair with a handsome prince may have been your first model of what a grownup boyfriend/girlfriend relationship should be.

Unfortunately, the fairytale romances in films like The Little Mermaid (1989) and Beauty and the Beast (1991) actually set very poor examples for young girls to follow. Ariel and Belle are smart and refreshingly independent female protagonists; that is, until they enter into relationships with their male lovers, fall head-over-heels into stereotypically submissive gender roles and lose themselves along the way.

While Ariel does have some feminist qualities (she wants to explore, rebel and experience a life beyond the confines of her underwater world), she ultimately succumbs to a subservient role by giving up everything for her man.

Ariel trades her means of communicating and expressing personality—her voice— for the eroticism of human legs, turning her into a purely visual object of desire. Think about it: she literally gives up her voice to be with Prince Eric, even though she's only known him for about five minutes, to become the perfect mute for the male gaze.

Furthermore, the idea of Eric growing some gills and becoming a merman himself is never even mentioned. Because he is the dominant male, Ariel is expected to change her life for him—not the other way around. She transitions from being directly under the control of her father to being Eric's wife; so, despite longing for freedom throughout the course of the film, she is never truly independent.

The female protaganist of Beauty and the Beast also ends up conforming to patriarchal gender strereotypes in her "happily ever after," although she does not begin her story that way. At first glance, Belle is the ideal feminist. She has a passion for books, longs to escape the confines of her provincial town and makes it clear to the lecherous lothario Gaston that she has zero interest in marrying him.

However, Belle still represents the sexist role of submissive female in relation to her dominant male counterpart. A pretty girl with no money falls for a rich, abusive monster. Belle submits herself to the Beast as the self-sacrifyicing daughter, and then yields to his every command without even trying to escape. This portrayal suggests that women are repsonsible for controlling male anger and violence, even if that means completely disregarding their own sense of safety and well-being.

Belle's character further presents a damaging role model for young girls in showing that a woman is obligated to stay loyal to the abusive male in her life. She learns how to tame his outbursts and "fix" him to become sweet again: a dangerous error that many women make when struggling to leave a home of domestic violence.

Also, the overly-sexualized, anorexic Barbie doll image of Disney princesses like Ariel, Belle, Jasmine, Pocahontas and even Tiana from The Princess and the Frog is another problem of gender conformity (the most beautiful and desirable women have perfectly delicate features, tiny waists, huge busoms, etc.) that Disney continues to perpetuate today.

For example, while Pixar made great progress in writing the female protagonist of Brave as a courageous and self-actualized heroine whose journey doesn't revolve around a man (how refreshing!), the controversial decision to "glamorize" Merida's body type for promotional purposes still proves that sexist ideology is alive and well at the Disney corporation.

What kind of role models should children be looking up to in Disney movies and beyond?

Leah Pickett writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Facebook, Twitter or Tumblr.

Porn stars on Vine: they're just like us

Wed, 05 Jun 2013 08:00:00 -0500

In the olden days of pornography, the lives of the performers were mostly limited to what we saw acted out on film.

Of course, rabid fans knew who Linda Lovelace was hooking up with offscreen and whether Jenna Jameson actually dated women in real life; but on the whole, porn stars existed as larger-than-life projections of what their audiences wanted them to be.

They played to the fantasies of millions, then disappeared back into their private lives. Under the guise of their erotic fake names and strategically-tailored public personas, they could expose every inch of themselves, yet still remain completely unknowable as human beings.

That is, until social media came along and changed everything.

While Facebook continues to lock out porn stars (their "no nudity" policy extends to Instagram as well), Twitter has welomed them with open arms. Not only can these performers tweet nude photos and other NSFW material to their personal accounts, but they can also use Vine—Twitter's six-second video sharing app, the moving picture version of Instagram—to create mini-movies of themselves for the world to see.

However, not all of these Vines are as titillating or overtly sexual as one might think. In fact, many of them are downright mundane: driving in traffic, cooking dinner, spinning around in parking lots (fun fact: Lexi Belle and I have the same Ikea office chair) and other activities that aren't unlike anything you, your sister or your best friend might capture on a given day.

This disarming display of normalcy is what makes these videos so remarkable. Porn stars are pulling back the curtain on their private lives and showing viewers that despite their "unique" career paths, they're really just like us.

For example, porn actress and activist Stoya wrote a wonderful piece for Vice a couple of weeks ago that defends this cultural shift, saying that social media outlets like Twitter, Tumblr and Vine have been enormously helpful in allowing viewers to see porn stars as more than just sexual objects:

"Porn stars can definitely be quirky and are probably more sexually liberated than the average adult, but we aren't so far removed from humanity that we're above concerns like bills and laundry," Stoya writes, "To pretend that we are underestimates the intelligence of people who are interested in the lives of porn stars or what goes on behind the scenes of the adult film industry."

Dylan Ryan is another porn actress who defends the right of women to be sexually liberated in whichever ways feel right for them, even going as far as to say that the choice of an adult film career can be both "feminist" and "empowering."

"I am the agent of my own experience," Ryan told the Huffington Post, "One of the things that people often think about porn is that the women who are performing in it are distant from their bodies or they're there because they're getting paid or because they've been sexually abused or because they have a very unhealthy sense of self. And while those stereotypes are based in a lot of realities that exist...that's not the experience of every performer, and that's not been my experience."

Perhaps one can be a feminist and a porn star, a kinky exibitionist and a down-home girl who likes to Vine videos of her cat jumping onto a beanbag chair. All of us are full of contradictions, some of them surprising and often endearing: that's what makes us human.

Does seeing photos and videos of Stoya goofing off with her friends or Lexi shopping for Nutella at the grocery store strip away their fantasy, or make them even more interesting—and by extension, even more sexy and appealing—to porn fans and naysayers alike?

Leave me your take on the humanization of porn stars (and whether this has been a positive or negative side effect of our 2013 "insta-share" culture) in the comments section below.

Leah Pickett writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Facebook, Twitter or Tumblr.

Zoe Saldana and the great weight debate

Tue, 21 May 2013 08:00:00 -0500

Allure magazine is feeling the backlash after printing the weight of Star Trek Into Darkness star Zoe Saldana on the cover of their June issue.

"115 lbs of grit and heartache" reads the headline. And many people did not like it.

News outlets from Yahoo to The Cut have called out the headline as "bizarre and unnecessary," saying that "everytime we seem to be making progress in the way women are portrayed in magazines, somehow we take a step back."

But Saldana had no qualms about stripping down for Allure, both in posing for semi-nude photos inside the magazine and in unabashedly revealing her digits on the cover:

"I think it would have been wrong if they were lying about my weight," Saldana told the Today show Thursday, "This is how much I weigh, it's something I can't control, it's who I am. I've always been a very thin frame, I was a ballet dancer. I don't think it was to make an issue of my weight. I think it was to say for a lightweight person, I seem to be really strong-minded."

Ah, so what Allure meant to say was that powerhouses often come in small packages. It's a message that tries to be girl-power positive (don't underestimate the gorgeous 5'7'' knockout just because she's thin!) but unfortunately sounds much more like the glorification of an ideal body type than anything else.

Would Allure print the weight of a plus-size actress (say, "215 lbs of grit and heartache") on the cover of their magazine? I highly doubt it.

Saldana may just be small-boned and naturally thin; however, nobody should aspire to be 115 lbs, or any other number that a fashion magazine splashes across its front page as beauty personified.

On the whole, men tend to be more comfortable discussing weight with each other, especially in regards to how much they can bench, eat or drink under the table in a given night. Women, on the other hand, usually approach the subject with an unspoken vow of secrecy and a sting of self-evaluation that's sometimes hot to the touch.

For example, one woman may coyly mention, "I weigh ___ pounds" to her girfriends, and their internal reactions could vary wildly: from sighs of relief ("Phew, I weigh less") to surges of panic ("I weigh so much more than she does") to eye rolls of annoyance ("Ugh, why is she telling us her weight? I don't want to hear it.")

Perhaps the responses we should have to such a disclosure are "Who cares?" and "As long as she's healthy, why should it matter?" After all, most of us feel comfortable talking about sexual preferences and how much our apartments cost with people we barely know; so why is weight still considered a "do not discuss" topic outside of trusted confidantes?

Do these numbers really have such a powerful hold on us that we can't bring ourselves to speak them aloud?

Ultimately, the decision to share your weight or keep it to yourself is a personal one, and should be free of shame on both sides. If Saldana is fine with telling people her weight, and feels no shame in it, then good for her. If other women want to shout their numbers from the rooftops, then they should feel free to do so.

As long as we don't define ourselves by how much we weigh, or determine our self-worth by something so arbitrary as an ever-fluctuating number on a scale, then we can just be and let societal pressures fall by the wayside.

Or as Jennifer Lawrence and I tend to do, deflect all weirdly body-focused questions with "I love french fries" and call it a day.

Leah Pickett writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Twitter, Facebook or Tumblr.

Angelina Jolie's double mastectomy, message to women

Tue, 14 May 2013 08:00:00 -0500

Angelina Jolie may be one of the most beautiful women to ever grace the silver screen. In real life, she seems almost too perfect: an alien-like presence of unattainable sexuality (ask any geekboy who first ogled her curves in Lara Croft Tomb Raider) whom many women have been quick to hate despite her outstanding work as a UN Ambassador and comittment to feminist causes around the world.

Perhaps this idea of Jolie as an aloof ice-princess being shattered overnight is why her recent reveal of a double mastectomy feels all the more inspiring and important. She had her storied breasts removed, and she wants other women to know that it's okay to do the same.

In a powerful op-ed for the New York Times, Jolie describes how she recently underwent surgery to combat a "faulty gene" that predisposed her to breast and ovarian cancer:

"My doctors estimated that I had an 87 percent risk of breast cancer and a 50 percent chance of ovarian cancer," Jolie writes, "Once I knew this was my reality, I decided to be proactive and to minimize the risk as much as I could. I made a decision to have a preventive double mastectomy. I started with the breasts, as my risk of breast cancer is much higher than my risk of ovarian cancer, and the surgery more complex."

Jolie's decision was no doubt a difficult one, but the op-ed does not read "woe is me" or at all. In fact, Jolie's purpose for writing the piece is clear: she wants women in a similar situation to be informed about their options and unafraid to take drastic action if need be.

Of course, Jolie is ridiculously wealthy and can afford the best healthcare imaginable. But rather than glossing over this privilege as if it doesn't exist, she makes a point of admitting that "the cost of testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2, at more than $3,000 in the United States, remains an obstacle for many women."

Moreover, being rich and famous does not exclude her from the same horrible disease that took her own mother's life (ovarian cancer) and the lives of myriads more who will never have their names in the papers. Jolie also points out that breast cancer alone kills 458,000 people each year, according to the World Health Organization, mainly in low and middle-income countries.

Then Jolie addresses the big elephant in the room: does she feel like less of a sex symbol now that her famous breasts have been removed? Absolutely not, she says:

"On a personal note, I don't feel like any less of a woman [for having this surgery]. I feel empowered that I made a strong choice that in no way diminishes my femininity."

So whether you like Jolie or not, as an actress or as a human being you've only seen in movies and read about in gossip rags, at least she is strong enough to tell you that her womanhood is not defined by her outward appearance. I admire her for this message, as a woman's decision to remove her breasts and ovaries—which many believe to be the very essence of their sexuality—is often one of the hardest choices that she will ever have to make.

Still, choice is the most important word here. The title of Jolie's op-ed is "My Medical Choice," implying that other women should also feel just as free to make their own decisions in regards to their personal health and wellbeing.

Recent studies have shown that most women who undergo double mastectomies don't really need them. However, shouldn't the woman be the one to decide, especially if she feels that the risk of succumbing to the same fate as her family members or leaving her children motherless is ultimately too great of a risk to take?

In the end, Jolie is grateful that she can tell children, in all confidence, that "they don't need to fear they will lose me to breast cancer." And for many women, that is more than enough reason to part with their breasts and still be as beautiful, feminine and unbreakable in their inherent womanhood as ever.

Note: Chicago's own Kartemquin Films produced an amazing Emmy-nominated documentary on this topic, In the Family, that will stream online at PBS.org for an extra two weeks in light of Ms. Jolie's announcement.

Leah writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Twitter, Facebook and Tumblr.

Elizabeth Smart decries abstinence-only sex ed, and her message hits home

Wed, 08 May 2013 08:00:00 -0500

Before Amanda Berry, Gina DeJesus, Michelle Knight and Berry's young daughter were discovered in the basement of a Cleveland home on Monday, held captive by a neighborhood man for over 10 years, the nation was captivated by another abducted girl-turned miracle story: the case of Elizabeth Smart.

In 2002, 14-year-old Smart was kidnapped from her bedroom in Salt Lake City. She was found nine months later, only 18 miles from her home, and her captors (who also raped her repeatedly and threatened to kill her) were sentenced to life in prison.

Today, Smart is working on behalf of the Elizabeth Smart Foundation for abduction awareness, and in light of recent events in Ohio, speaking out against abstinence-only education and its detrimental effects on victims of rape and human trafficking.

During a panel at John Hopkins last week, Smart (now 25 and finishing up a music degree at Brigham Young University) described how intense guilt and shame kept her from escaping her abusers:

"I remember in school one time, I had a teacher who was talking about abstinence,” Smart told the panel, “And she said, 'Imagine you’re a stick of gum. When you engage in sex, that’s like getting chewed. And if you do that lots of times, you’re going to become an old piece of gum, and who is going to want you after that?’ Well, that’s terrible. No one should ever say that. But for me, I thought, ‘I’m that chewed-up piece of gum.’ Nobody re-chews a piece of gum. You throw it away. And that’s how easy it is to feel you no longer have worth. Your life no longer has value."

I received a similar abstinence-only lecture while attending Catholic school in Texas. As I sat in a gymnasium with 200 other girls between the ages of 12 and 14, a speaker put on a pair of velcro garden gloves ("Barbie and Ken," he called them), slapped his hands together and then pulled them apart with a loud, drawn-out ripping noise.

"That's the sound of your virginity being taken away," he said.

On another occasion, my middle school classmates and I were shown pictures of aborted fetuses, then given white cards that we had to spray to reveal our pink stains of STDs from pre-marital sex.

I got chlymadia on the card, but not in real life. Meanwhile, the abortion scare tactics seemed to have little effect on my peers, as many of them went on to have sex behind the bleachers in high school.

Unfortunately, this "virgin purity" absurdity is perpetuated by faiths the world over, and causes religious victims of rape and molestation to feel even more worthless than they would already.

After being raised in a Mormon household, Smart attests that she felt "so dirty and filthy" for being forced into pre-marital sex, and understands why victims don't run for "that alone."

However, she also believes that instead of slut-shaming children with creepy used gum and premarital-sex-is-like-being-a-dirty-glass-of-water analogies, they should be taught that "they have value no matter what."

Smart remains a devout Mormon to this day (married to a young man whom she met on a mission, no less) but her strength and courage in denouncing a key component of the religious right proves that she is a true advocate for more comprehensive sex education as well.

When asked for her thoughts on the Ohio kidnap rescue earlier this week, Smart said that she hopes the three victims will "find their own pathway back to some sense of well-being" and not blame themselves for the abuse that they were forced to endure:

“[Their abductor] has stolen so much from them already, they deserve to be happy," Smart told ABC's Good Morning America, "I would tell them I hope that they realize there is so much ahead of them, that they don’t need to hold on to the past … They don’t need to relive everything that’s happened, because it’s proof, their rescue is proof that there are good people out there."

"It's not their fault," Smart made sure to add, "It's never their fault."

Leah Pickett writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Twitter @leahkpickett or join the conversation on Facebook.

Interview with 'Sexy Feminism' co-author Jennifer Keishin Armstrong

Fri, 03 May 2013 08:54:00 -0500

I chat with a homegirl today, who grew up in the Chicago suburbs before moving to New York, where she spent a decade on staff at Entertainment Weekly, cofounded SexyFeminist.com, and now writes for several publications, including Women’s Health, Runner’s World, Writer’s Digest, Fast Company, and New York‘s Vulture. Jennifer Keishin Armstrong's history of The Mary Tyler Moore Show, Mary and Lou and Rhoda and Ted, is coming out on Tuesday, while her collaboration with Heather Wood Rudulph, Sexy Feminism, was released earlier this year. She has provided pop culture commentary for CNN, VH1, A&E, and ABC and teaches for Gotham Writers' Workshop. You can learn a lot more about her here.

I’m guilty of this myself but often, women criticize other women’s definitions of feminism. What were some criticisms you anticipated people lobbing towards Sexy Feminism that you wanted to head off at the pass and address within it?
We knew when we named our website Sexy Feminist (and then our book Sexy Feminism) that we were being a little, you know, provocative. But we knew it would start specific discussions, and we were right. Our thing is that we're definitely NOT delineating ourselves from other feminists somehow—you know, we're sexy feminists, and the others aren't—but we're saying that, despite continued misperception, ALL feminism is sexy. And we'll stop calling our website Sexy Feminist when everyone gets that. The idea is to stop people who have not necessarily identified as feminists but who are feminist-curious to look at the book or the site and want to learn more.

Tell me about the cover of the book: what were some other possibilities (if any) that were considered?
The only other possibility we got from the publisher was a very straightforward cover with no photos or graphics, which we thought was a little ... less than exciting, given the provocative name. This was the alternative we ended up with after sharing that feedback with them, and we felt okay about it. It's attention-grabbing, and that lipgloss is so fantastic that I ended up going out to hunt down anything I could find at Sephora that came close. (Hot tip: Tarte's lip crayon in "Enchanted" is my new favorite toy, and Tarte is one of our feminist-friendly cosmetic companies named in the book. Win win!)

What do you think are examples of pop culture that got feminism right both in terms of definition/idealism but also by demonstrating it in an everyday, practical way?
I feel a professional obligation to say this, but I also believe it: The Mary Tyler Moore Show. They weren't trying to be feminist, but the movement was so much in the air at the time, and they had so many feminist-identified women writing for the show, that it came through. I always say Mary Richards was the original Sexy Feminist. She really came into her empowerment throughout the series, and we saw her argue for equal pay to her male predecessor, we saw her talk about the pressures of being the only woman in the newsroom, and we saw her (mostly in later years) assert herself strongly with men. In one of the last episodes, she even asked Lou Grant out. It didn't work out, but still.

You’ve written books about The Mary Tyler Moore Show and the Mickey Mouse Club. What are some books about shows you’d read if they were written (but don’t want to write yourself?)
I love this question, because I can tell you that when figuring out my next book (which is now officially Seinfeld) I basically just pored over lists of TV shows. The ones I feel like I definitely can't tackle are sci-fi shows: I love some of them but don't have the geek-level knowledge required. So I think about stuff like Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Lost. Those are the two that I think could hold up to book treatment, but I'm not necessarily the right author for them.

Tell me about what you do as a career coach/consultant. And what do you do when you feel like you need consulting?
I'm very good at running other people's lives! Actually, I have to admit I think I've had a pretty good run in my own career so far, and I really do like helping other people figure out how to make those key decisions that can make a difference. Most of the time, it's that people are simply frozen into inaction by fear—fear of failing, fear of succeeding. And writing, in particular, is such a baffling career path full of constant decisions. You don't just take the corporate job and then wait 50 years so you can get your gold watch. So I can talk to clients about everything from getting their first few publication credits to moving to the next level of publications to getting an agent or going freelance full-time. It's funny you ask about what I do when I need consulting, because I've just recently started feeling that itch, like, okay, what now? I've started looking for mentors to befriend so I can ask them for a little advice in exchange for a few rounds of drinks; I also went to a great conference last week run by ASJA, and got tons of ideas for ways to advance my career more.

What’s something really unfeminist that you like? (Sometimes I dance to really misogynistic music.)
Oh, man, I do love me some "In da Club" and "Big Pimpin.'" They're just good songs. I also happen to really enjoy watching The Bachelor/Bachelorette. I always say I will allow myself to watch them because I have studied media and feminism enough that I watch them with a (very) critical lens, and because I don't personally have a Nielsen box, so I'm not actually affecting the ratings. If I get a Nielsen box, it must stop immediately.

When you worked at Entertainment Weekly, which fanbases tended to respond most rabidly when you wrote about their favorite show/artist/movie etc?
Well, despite my claims that I couldn't write a whole Lost book, I did do some reporting on Lost in my day, and, you know, you can imagine that fan base. But more surprisingly, people get just as into their Grey's Anatomy, for instance. I used to recap that and couldn't ever read the message board comments. They were very, very passionate, and channeled that passion into being not-always-kind to me.

Who are some of your favorite sexy feminists in pop culture (and you cannot name either Tina Fey or Amy Poehler.)
Ha! Those ladies do rule, but I've been totally enamored of Lena Dunham of late. If you watch or read her interviews, man, that girl is scary smart. And a totally out-and-proud feminist. She takes the loads of criticism of her work quite beautifully, and I think her constant nakedness onscreen really is revolutionary the way she does it. We truly do need to see more body types besides 90 pounds and 5-foot-10 with Olympic-level abs. I also adore Mindy Kaling, and her show does a lot of subtly feminist things: Her character is great at her job and clearly smart, even though she's a little boy crazy and talks like a teenager. But more importantly, she has this insane sexual confidence that I think makes her a strangely wonderful role model to young women. Also, she's unbelievably funny, in her own way.

You’ve worked with Heather Wood for a long time (back when I interviewed you for MBToolBox about Sirens Mag.) Why do you two work so well together and what tips do you have for working with a longtime collaborator?
We definitely just have that mind-meld thing happening. We're each totally comfortable letting the other speak on our behalf as a team. I'm an independent spirit, but it's nice to have a collaborator to fall back on sometimes when your life gets crazy with book deadlines or personal stuff. It's the best when I log onto the site and see that she's posted new content or edited a piece I'd been neglecting. We can talk each other off professional ledges sometimes, too. The main thing is to treat it almost like a romantic relationship. Keep lines of communication open and constantly express appreciation. One of the things I've noticed we automatically do, and I like, is to always thank each other. If she sees that I put up a new post, she thanks me. If she does our taxes, I thank her. I've actually carried this over into my romantic relationship, and it works wonders!

How does it feel to be the 347th person interviewed for Zulkey.com?
I feel really good about that number. There's something auspicious about it.

Follow Claire Zulkey @zulkey, check out previous interviews here or see her at Funny Ha-Ha tonight.

Five myths about feminism

Thu, 25 Apr 2013 08:00:00 -0500

Female superstars like Taylor Swift, Katy Perry and Beyoncé want to empower young girls and be champions for women everywhere. Just don't call them feminists.

When asked if they considered themselves feminists, they all balked at the term:

"I don't really think about things as guys versus girls." — Taylor Swift, The Daily Beast
"I guess I am a modern-day feminist. I do believe in equality. Why do you have to choose what type of woman you are? Why do you have label yourself as anything? I'm just a woman, and I love being a woman." — Beyoncé, Vogue UK
"I am not a feminist, but I do believe in the strength of women." — Katy Perry, Billboard's "Woman of the Year"

All of these statements are non-answers that completely miss the point. By definiton , feminism is "the theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes." So if you "believe in equality" and "the strength of women," then you are, in fact, a feminist. Why hem and haw around the question? Honestly, I don't think that these women have any idea what feminism actually is.

Say what you will about the "adorkable" Zooey Deschanel, but at least she has the balls to openly declare her feminism, unlike most Hollywood starlets these days:

"There is not an ounce of me that believes any of that crap that they say. We can't be feminine and be feminists and be successful? I want to be a f-cking feminist and wear a f-cking Peter Pan collar. So f-cking what?"

A modern aversion to the word "feminism" may stem from old myths about the women's movement that still exist today ("I'm not a feminist because I'm not a bra-burning, man-hating megabitch, etc.") and, in my opinion, should be myth-busted immediately.

Here are a few common misconceptions about feminism that are simply not true:

Myth #1: Feminists hate men.

Feminism is about equality, not the superiority of one sex over another. Patriarchy can be just as damaging to men as it is to women (encouraging an "alpha-male" mentality, instructing boys never to cry or show emotions, etc.); so, by that rationale, men can be feminists too. Feminism isn't about shifting blame or shoehorning all of the world's problems onto men. It's about identifying areas of inequality and working together to fix them.

Myth #2: Feminists don't believe in marriage.

Contrary to popular belief, not all feminists are bitter old spinsters, mannish lesbians or ice-queen CEOs who only care about climbing the corporate ladder. Just because you want to get married one day (to a man or a woman) does not mean that you care any less about women's equality at home or in the workplace.

Myth #3: Feminists are pro-abortion, bra-burning, bleeding heart liberals.

Yes, feminists tend to be more liberal than conservative, and collectively pro-choice for the most part. However, you don't have to vote Democrat to support women's equality, and defending a woman's right to choose does not make you "pro-abortion." The key word here is choice, and that's the true beauty of feminism. Choosing to be a stay-at-home mom or dad doesn't make you any less of a feminist, just like choosing not to have children doesn't make you any less of a woman or man. Also, those "hairy-legged women libbers" of the sixties never burned their bras in protest. True story.

Myth #4: Feminists are offended by any gesture of gallantry.

I like when men open doors for me. It's a nice break from having them slammed in my face. Feminists may have introduced the idea of splitting the check (and treating our partners to dinner every now and then) but that doesn't mean we hate chivalry and romantic gestures as a whole. I appreciate when a guy offers to pay for dinner or insists on driving me home; however, I always make sure to return the favor at some point. As long as there's equality and balance in the relationship, then a feminist couple can take care of each other in whichever way feels right for them.

Myth #5: Feminists may have been necessary in the past, but we don't need them anymore.

We've come along way since the fight for women's suffrage and Roe v. Wade, but we still need feminism, both in the United States and around the world. Rape and victim-blaming, child brides, sex trafficking, genital mutiliation and disfigurement, honor killings, forced prostitution, infanticide of female babies in countries like China and India, domestic violence and other crimes against women are as rampant as ever. The struggle for equality continues on, and feminists will not rest until every woman has the inalienable rights and freedoms that she deserves.

Leah Pickett writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Twitter @leahkpickett.

The Old Girl Network: Charity Cookbooks and the Empowerment of Women

Sat, 20 Apr 2013 14:38:00 -0500

The Old Girl Network: Charity Cookbooks and the Empowerment of Women Presented by Janice Bluestein Longone Curator of American Culinary History, University of Michigan’s Special Collections Division

Before mass media, communication and transit, the first wave of the women’s movement was already active via the most ordinary of objects – the lowly cookbook. “Charity cookbooks,” a legacy of the Civil War, championed many causes: suffrage, education, temperance, prohibition, equal rights, working conditions, welfare, immigration, and legal rights and responsibilities, while benefiting churches, schools, sororities, the homeless, and others in need. The effort required to create, publish and distribute the books created networks of communication, which nurtured fledging political movements that transformed American culture. The books demonstrate how women worked together to help themselves, other women, and the outside world, while, along the way, the recipes and how-to advice in the books offer a compelling glimpse into America’s cooking habits and its region-by-region culinary heritage.

As many people do not understand why we preserve these ephemeral materials, we invite you to our illustrated lecture to see the politics just under every woman’s nose (and, often, behind many men’s backs). In short, if you think cookbooks are dull with nothing but recipes (as interesting as they may be) in them, then this is the lecture to prove you wrong!

Recorded live Saturday, April 20, 2013 at Kendall College.

Sheryl Sandberg tells Chicago women to 'Lean In'

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 08:00:00 -0500

Is Sheryl Sandberg the most radical feminist to ever challenge the status quo of a man's world? No, but she is a powerful force in changing the way women feel about their own capabilities as leaders.

Sandberg spoke to a sold-out crowd at Chicago's Palmer House Hilton Thursday evening, in an event sponsored by Nielsen and presented by Trib Nation as part of the Chicago Tribune's "Press Pass" speaker series.

In a conversation with Tribune vice president and associate editor Joycelyn Winnecke, Sandberg shared advice and anecdotes from her new book, Lean In: Women, Work and the Will to Lead, which has already stirred debate and provoked a backlash from some of Sandberg's female critics. In her book, Sandberg argues that women may be the ones holding themselves back from true gender equality in the workplace. She says that women need to "lean in" and "sit at the table" with their male peers in order to acheive the same levels of success.

During her talk, the effervescent Facebook COO (and multi-millionaire) elicited knowing laughter and spontaneous applause from her overwhelmingly female audience, as she delivered one quotable nugget of "girl power" inspiration after another. Here are a few of her most memorable soundbites:

- On the Marissa Mayer controversy at Yahoo:

"If a man did it, there would not be a single headline."

- On the self-confidence of women in comparison to men's:

"Women remember their performance lower, and men higher, in relation to their success."

- On the difficulty of finding a mentor as a young woman, especially when most seasoned pros in corporate America are older men:

"Searching for a mentor has become the professional equivalent of waiting for Prince Charming."

- On her desire for less restriction and more equality in gender roles:

"We need to teach our girls to be leaders and our boys to be nuturers."

Sandberg also described how assertive girls are often teased for being "bossy," a derogotary term that is never applied to boys when they attempt to take on similar leadership roles.

"I wrote this book for every young girl who has ever been called 'bossy' on the playground," said Sandberg, which made the bossy-pants Hermione Granger in me exclaim, "Hear, hear!"

Audience members were encouraged to tweet with the hashtag #TribNation during the hour-long event (Sandberg is a social media maven, after all) and Twitter users responded with a flurry of feminist discussion that continued long after Sandberg left the stage around 7 p.m.

And while the Internet mogul still has her critics, the palpable surge of female empowerment in the room last night proves that Sandberg's message of "let's change the conversation from what women can't do to what they can" has earned her many loyal fans here in Chicago – this sometimes-cynical blogger included.

Watch the full event here, courtesy of the Chicago Tribune.

Leah Pickett writes about popular culture for WBEZ. Follow her on Twitter @leahkpickett.

Lena Dunham: The voice of a generation?

Wed, 30 Jan 2013 05:00:00 -0600

Lena Dunham and I have a lot in common.

OK, we’re not exactly alike. I don't share Dunham's much-maligned body type, and my mother is not a famous artist with a $2 million loft in TriBeCa. I also don’t co-write, direct or star in my own hit series on HBO (except for in my dreams) But in many ways, I consider Dunham to be a kindred spirit, or at least a wacky spirit guide for surviving my mid-twenties.

Her character on Girls, the awkward yet somehow endearing 24-year-old Hannah Horvath, is an aspiring writer trying to make it in New York after her parents cut her off financially. Replace Brooklyn with Logan Square, and that’s my life in a nutshell. Also, since Dunham is essentially playing herself (albeit an exagerrated version with fictional monetary woes), her stories of personal and professional struggle bizarrely reflect my own.

Dunham isn’t a role model per se, but she does represent a faction of society that currently dominates popular culture: postgrad twenty-somethings. Or as the baby boomers like to call us, the “entitlement generation."

That being said, I can see why so many people hate her. Dunham was born into privilege, attended one of the most expensive art colleges in the country and apparently didn't grow up around too many black people. Her pet project Tiny Furniture got picked up by several film festivals in 2010, prompting Hollywood hitmaker Judd Apatow to take her under his wing and launch Girls with his new protègè front and center. No wonder her critics keep making fat jokes! They have to bring her down somehow.

"Bad Friend," an episode documenting Hannah's misadventures with blogging, clubbing and cocaine that aired on Sunday night, is a prime example of why Girls is one of the best shows currently on television. Hot off the heels of two Golden Globe awards, one for Best Comedy Series and the other for Dunham as Best Actress, the series continues to top itself week after week and shows no signs of slowing down.

Dunham and Girls co-writer Jenni Konner have been showered with praise since Season 2 began in early January, especially in addressing the "people of color" issue that had been previously overlooked in Season 1. Dunham recently acquired a $3 million-plus book deal as a result of the show's success, and HBO has already announced a greenlight for Season 3.

But while Girls became a commercial and critical darling almost overnight, Dunham's public persona is decidedly less beloved. She has been called fat, ugly, racist, talentless, stupid, elitist, sexually grotesque and offensive on every level. This doesn't seem to bother her though, as she continues to eat birthday cake naked and makes no apologies for it.

A lot of people hate Lena Dunham because they believe that her lifestyle--a white, privileged and excessively tattooed hipstergirl cavorting through Bushwick--does not represent them (and how dare you suggest such a thing!) However, coming from a wealthy and well-connected family doesn't make her any less clever or insightful, and being a "half-Jew, half-WASP" with lots of white friends doesn't automatically make her a racist.

We are all the product of our environments, and Dunham happens to tell some very funny stories about hers. The voice of a generation? I wouldn't go that far. A symbol of her generation? Absolutely. So say what you will about Dunham as a cultural icon, but she's going to keep eating her cake (and enjoying it too!)

Follow Leah on Twitter @leahkpickett