Blog PostsRaindrops on Roses

Posted on January 7, 2013 by Theresa Basile

This is January 2013, and 200 years ago, Pride and Prejudice was first published. That is my favorite book and Jane Austen is one of my two favorite authors.

My other favorite author is William Shakespeare. I have a possibly irrational, all-encompassing love for Romeo and Juliet because it was my first introduction to the Bard. My other favorite plays of his are Macbeth and Othello for tragedies and A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Twelfth Night, and Much Ado About Nothing for comedies. King John is also a very underrated history play.

I am a fan of musicals. My favorite musicals include classics like South Pacific, Oklahoma!, Anything Goes, and West Side Story, as well as more recent satirical/comic musicals such as Avenue Q, The Book of Mormon, and The Producers. My favorite character in musical theatre is Inspector Javert from Les Miserables.

I am also a fan of science fiction and fantasy. In my lifetime, my three favorite sci-fi or fantasy works have been Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Harry Potter, and Lord of the Rings, with A Song of Ice and Fire/Game of Thrones and The Vampire Diaries slowly gaining ground. I also enjoyed LOST, Star Wars, and Joss Whedon’s non-Buffy works. I preferred Dollhouse to Angel and Firefly, despite the show’s flaws.

Aside from classic literature, musical theatre, and sci-fi/fantasy, what else do I enjoy in film, television, and books? Well, I like romantic comedies when they’re good, satirical comedies like The Producers, dramas, English period pieces with lots of tea parties and social commentary, the Muppets, and violent Quentin Tarantino films. The Wizard of Oz is my favorite movie. I love many, many different books, too many to list here.

I love Disney movies with the so-called “princess” characters like Beauty and the Beast, Sleeping Beauty, and The Little Mermaid. I also love Cinderella, even though I like the Stepmother and the mice more than the female lead. I love all of the Pixar films except Cars, only one of which had a female protagonist (though Dory and Helen Parr are close to being co-protagonists). I like most of the villains and hate most of the “cute” animal sidekicks.

I had Barbies when I was a kid. I played with them even into my tween years, though the subject matter of the pretend games got considerably more adult-themed as I went through puberty (I was weird).

I also loved everything about the American Girl dolls and series. I had an Addy doll and all of her books, and also read all of Felicity, Kirsten, Samantha, and Molly’s books. When Mattell bought American Girl and retired Felicity, Kirsten, and Samantha, it went back in time and stabbed part of my childhood through the heart.

I loved The Baby-sitters Club when I was a kid, as well as Sweet Valley Twins and The Unicorn Club. I also liked A Wrinkle in Time and Calvin and Hobbes. I loved Beverly Cleary books and Ramona Quimby is probably my favorite fictional character of all time.

I loved almost all YA books, especially weepy ones about dying teenagers from Lurlene McDaniel, and ones with cool teen protagonists, like Turtle Wexler in The Westing Game. I was obsessed with Caroline B. Cooney’s Janie Johnson series and read The Face on the Milk Carton and its sequels a million times over.

I’m not interested in sports, for the most part, but my interest level also varies depending on the actual game. Football holds no interest for me. I admire the athleticism involved in basketball. I’ll watch the World Cup. I enjoy baseball, especially seeing minor league games in person, but I don’t have a team I root for. The Olympics, however, are a completely different animal. I enjoy the summer games and have known to be very invested in the outcome of the figure skating in the winter games. I have entire scrapbooks documenting the women’s figure skating competitions in the Nagano and Salt Lake City games.

I enjoy cooking and occasionally baking. I’ve never much been interested in sewing, but I know how to knit.

I don’t know how to play sports, for the most part. I’m not very coordinated. I do like to exercise, though, and dance dorky white-girl style. I love karaoke and singing and can play the violin.

I like fashion, not to the point where fashion is an obsession for me, but I love Go Fug Yourself. If I had the money, I would copy Zooey Deschanel’s entire wardrobe, but would likely not wear her clothes most of the time, because even though they’re adorable and pretty, jeans are so much easier. I like earrings but not necklaces, boots but not heels. I like wearing makeup, but not a lot of it. Pink is a great color and I enjoy wearing it, though blues and purples are what I look best in.

I enjoy almost every genre of music. Classical, rock, and singer-songwriter are my favorite types. Some favorite artists include Rufus Wainwright, Regina Spektor, Bach, Nina Simone, Beethoven, Vampire Weekend, Stars, Led Zeppelin, Eminem, and Darren Criss.

I love comedy. The Monty Python troupe, Mel Brooks, and George Carlin helped establish my sense of humor early in life. Love of Monty Python led to love of other sketch comedy shows like Mr. Show, SCTV, Saturday Night Live, The Kids in the Hall, and Key and Peele. Love for Mel Brooks made me love silly comedies, and George Carlin made me love language-based humor.

Above almost all else, I love The Simpsons. I probably quote The Simpsons more frequently than anything else.

So, why am I telling you all of this? Why am I sharing a laundry list of my interests?

Because I like some things that are traditionally considered “girl stuff,” and some things that are traditionally “boy stuff.”

Figure skating? That’s girl stuff. Makeup? Definite girl stuff. Tarantino movies? Closer to boy stuff. Sketch comedy? Considering that most of the famous sketch groups out there are male-dominated, I’ll go with closer to “boy stuff.”

You’ll rarely find a woman who only likes traditionally feminine activities, and you’ll rarely find a man who only likes traditionally masculine activities – but our society likes to put people in boxes, and tell us we can’t like pink and baking if we’re boys, and we can’t like sports and video games if we’re girls.

Human beings are complex and we all have varied interests. I think we should all celebrate our complexities and each other’s interests.

I am now inviting readers to participate in the comments section. What are some things that you love? What activities and interests do you have that are considered “boy stuff,” and what activities and interests do you have that are considered “girl stuff?”

In other words, what are a few of your favorite things?

Posted in Blog Posts | 12 Comments

Blog PostsWhat’s On Your Winter Holiday Watchlist?

Posted on December 21, 2012 by Theresa Basile

The winter holiday season is upon us, and once today’s apocalypse is defeated (thanks, Buffy!), everyone is going to tuck in and start preparing for their winter holiday celebrations. (I say winter holiday because I have been taken hostage in the war on Christmas and have been forbidden to say the Christ-word. Send help! Pray for Mojo!)

Anyway, there are certain – *glances around nervously* – winter holiday movies and specials that I enjoy watching every year during this special season. This is my winter holiday watchlist.

 

The Muppet Christmas Carol – My family and I watch this film every Christmas Eve. Michael Caine may have an all-too liberal choice in film roles, but he’s still a great actor, and he’s excellent as Scrooge. “One More Sleep Til Christmas” warms my heart every time I hear it. Also, there’s Fozziwig, and Statler and Waldorf are the Marleys – what more can we ask for?

It’s a Wonderful Life – Anyone who thinks this movie is too sappy has only watched the last five minutes and have never sat through the whole thing. This movie can get seriously dark, yo, and it earns that joyous ending with all of the pain that comes before it. Also, that scene with George Bailey and Mary on the phone while they’re talking to Sam Wainwright, but trying not to look at each other, is one of the most erotic things I’ve seen on film. No exaggeration.

Little Women (1994) – Shut up, this totally counts as a Christmas movie. There are two major Christmas scenes and a lot of the story takes place during the winter seasons. Winona Ryder is an excellent Jo, Kirsten Dunst is the only actress who has ever made me like Amy March, and the whole film is beautiful and makes me cry.

Christmas Eve on Sesame Street – Poor Big Bird, afraid that Santa Claus won’t be able to deliver presents to the kids. Look at Bert and Ernie being all cute and doing their own version of The Gift of the Magi. Laugh as Cookie Monster tries to write a letter to Santa but eats his paper and pen, and then eats his typewriter, and then eats his phone when he tries to call Santa.

The Simpsons, “The Grift of the Magi” –  The Simpsons has a lot of great Christmas episodes, but my favorite is this eleventh-season gem where the toymakers introduce Funzo. “I have a flower for ouuu!” And Gary Coleman being Tiny Tim! “Watchoo talkin bout, everyone.” And Krusty’s wish for a “Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukah, Kwaazy Kwanzaa, a tip-top Tet, and a solemn and dignified Ramada.” The most recent episode from last year, “Holidays of Future Passed,” is also excellent and might make its way into my regular rotation.

Community, “Comparative Religion,” “Abed’s Uncontrollable Christmas,” “Regional Holiday Music” – I love all three of this show’s Christmas episodes. The first one is a nice showcase for Shirley and the Jeff-Shirley friendship, and talks about inclusiveness of all holidays and faiths without getting preachy. The second is painful and beautiful and makes me want to hug all of them. The third is just inspired silliness.

How I Met Your Mother, “How Lily Stole Christmas” – Remember when this show used to be good? Now, despite my aversion to the word I believed Ted used in place of “grinch,” and despite my acknowledgment that the word is misogynistic and gross, I’m still more on his side than Lily’s, but I enjoy the whole thing, especially NPH being sick. And I love “Ted Vivian Mosby!” “That’s not my middle name!” followed up later with “Ted Evelyn Mosby!” HA!

Pride and Prejudice, BBC version – This isn’t a Christmas or winter holiday series at all, but my mom and I watch it every Christmas break regardless. Because it’s amazing.

South Park, “Woodland Critter Christmas” – Because I’m gross and so is this episode.

How about you? What are part of your, ahem, winter holiday traditions? Leave them in the comments!

Have a safe and happy holiday season and I’ll see you all again on January 7th.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Articles‘Once Upon a Time,’ Women Were Friends

Posted on December 17, 2012 by Theresa Basile
[This post was originally published on Bitch Flicks.]
Once Upon a Time, last year’s big ABC hit now in its second season, is like Lost with fairy tale characters. Created by two former Lost writers, Once Upon a Time is also a show about strangers in a strange land, with only a few key characters aware of the world’s rich history. Both shows combine flashbacks and present-day stories to portray how characters have changed over time. Both shows slowly reveal bits and pieces of the mythology and backstory in a non-chronological fashion. Both shows combine fantastical situations with real-life emotions, and emphasize the importance of community.
There is one way, however, where Once Upon a Time is far superior to Lost: its portrayal of female friendships. As the show becomes more complex in its mythology and introduces more characters, we see even more positive interactions among women.
One of the first relationships we’re introduced to is the strange friendship between Emma Swan (Jennifer Morrison) and Mary Margaret Blanchard (Ginnifer Goodwin). Their friendship is a little unusual because Mary Margaret is, in fact, Snow White with an altered memory, and Emma’s mother. (Mary Margaret/Snow has been frozen in time while Emma has not, which explains why the mother and daughter are the same age.) They strike up a friendship when Emma moves to the town of Storybrooke at the request of her biological son, Henry. Neither woman believes Henry’s fantastical tales about every person in Storybrooke being a fairy tale character, but they quickly grow to like each other. Mary Margaret provides Emma with a home when she needs it, they discuss their failed relationships with men, and when the town turns against Mary Margaret when she is accused of murder, Emma alone continues to defend her.
Now that the spell on Storybrooke has been broken, Emma and Snow are aware of each other’s identities. Snow’s maternal instincts have kicked in, and she is much more protective of Emma, but neither woman has forgotten their previous bond. Their mother-daughter relationship is now on even firmer ground because of the friendship they established before the spell was broken, and watching them rediscover each other has been a heartwarming joy to watch.
Still, it’s no surprise that Snow White is able to have a good relationship with her daughter, because she has a history of valuing her friendships with women. Several flashbacks on Once Upon a Time have shown that Snow has a casual but supportive friendship with Cinderella (Jessy Schram), and a deep and fulfilling friendship with Red Riding Hood (Meghan Ory). When Once Upon a Time throws a twist in the traditional fairy tale and reveals that Red and the Big Bad Wolf are, in fact, the same person, Snow supports her friend through her changes and doesn’t judge her for her wolf side. Red, for her part, helps Snow in her quest to rescue Prince Charming. (Another cool thing about Once Upon a Time? The women rescue the men just as often as the men rescue the women.)
Red, for her part, is also loyal to Cinderella’s Storybrooke counterpart, Ashley (see what they did there, with the naming?) While Snow and Emma are briefly trapped in the enchanted forest, Red quickly bonds with Belle (Emilie de Ravin), helping her ease the transition into a more steady, normal life. Red may be separated from her bestie, but she still makes new friends.
Perhaps the best example of the complex female relationships on the show can be found in the first part of this sophomore season, where four women traveled through the forest on a quest together. Two new characters,Princess Aurora (Sarah Bolger) and Mulan (Jamie Chung). The women, at first, are rivals who are both in love with Prince Philip, but after a wraith sucks out his soul, they quickly bond in a shared goal to punish the people who let the wraith into their world – Snow and Emma.
The outlook is bleak for this new friendship, as Mulan and Aurora first see Snow and Emma as enemies, but this changes very quickly. Aurora soon understands that Snow is not at fault for what happened to her beloved Philip, and the women find common ground, as they have both been victims of the terrible Sleeping Curse. The mother-daughter team and Aurora/Mulan trek across the forest, with different goals that sometimes clash with each other – Snow and Emma want to return to Storybrooke, and Mulan wants to keep Aurora safe – but in the end, they all succeed by working together.
The quest across the forest was satisfying to me on so many different levels. I loved seeing four women travel together as a group. I loved that Aurora and Mulan’s love for the same man bonded them together instead of tearing them apart (though, to be honest, I’d rather see the two women as a couple at this point). I loved that each woman had different ways of contributing to the mission – Snow and Mulan through fighting skills and physical dexterity, Emma through strategizing and working with the enemy (the disturbingly sexy Captain Hook), and Aurora through communication in the netherworld. I loved that their conflicts were organic to the characters and situations, not stereotypical catfights among competitive women.
Most of all, I loved that Once Upon a Time took characters from different fairy tales and classic stories, characters who have traditionally lived in male-centric stories with female villains, and made them discover complex and varied female bonds. They find strength in themselves and with each other.
The trek across the forest is now over, and I’m happy to see Snow/Emma reunited with their family, but I hope this isn’t the end of female bonding in Once Upon a Time. I hope and trust that the writers are only going to show more examples of women interacting positively with other women.
Posted in Articles | Tagged | 4 Comments

Blog PostsA Note on My BtVS and Consent Series

Posted on December 14, 2012 by Theresa Basile

So, there is a lot of talk on the Internet this week about a certain piece rife with rape apologia, written by a woman whose friend raped an unconscious woman but totally feels bad about it and didn’t know it was rape, you guys!!!

I’m not linking to the piece because I don’t want to give Those People any more traffic. All you need to know is that a person wrote a really long article explaining why her rapist friend is not really that bad of a guy because he totes feels bad for what he did, and engaged in victim-blaming while claiming she wasn’t engaging in victim-blaming. If you want to read the actual disgusting post in its entirety, I recommend a search engine.

Or, you can read other people’s takes on the article. Melissa McEwan has a fantastic, blunt post about this on Shakesville. Some highlights:

“It is eminently possible to talk about rapists as complex human beings without talking about them (inaccurately) as “good people who just happened to do a bad thing.” Rape is not an act that happens accidentally. Rapists, all rapists, are predators who are hostile to consent and spend plenty of time feeling out, as an explicit or unconscious strategy, how far they can push boundaries (sexual and otherwise) without consequence before they commit rape.

This absurd construct of a “good guy who just happened to rape someone because he hasn’t been taught any better” is comprehensive bullshit. Rapists are predators. And that is true whether it’s a serial rapist who carefully stalks specific victims, or whether it’s a “good guy” who exploits an opportunity to rape an unconscious woman.”

She also went on to say…

“there are two kinds of rapists, and the distinction is not, as the GMP and other rape apologists would have us believe, rapists who intend to rape and rapists who rape accidentally whoooooooops, but is in fact sadistic rapists, for whom the lack of a victim’s pleasure isn’t a bug but a feature, and opportunistic rapists, who are primarily sex-seeking rapists who coerce victims and/or exploit lack of consent by virtue of their victims having borderline or overtly impaired states of consciousness.”

Excellent, important delineation here.

Then I started thinking about my own BtVS and Consent series, and how I frame the discussions of rape in those episodes, and realized that there might be some confusion as to what I’m trying to accomplish in that series. I want to take this time to clear up any misconceptions that might be lingering.

Specifically, I want to talk about my decision to write about both “the mind of the perpetrator” and “the victim’s perspective.”

The reason I write about “the mind of the perpetrator” is to examine the reasons why the potential characters are committing rape or an act that is on par with a violation of consent. Looking at the reasons is NOT, in any way, an attempt to excuse the characters’ actions. In every case I write about, I believe the perpetrator is wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong, full stop.

I write about their reasons because I want to look at whether or not the characters are, as McEwan pointed out, sadistic rapists or opportunistic rapists. Some of them rape because they want to cause the other person pain. Others are not actively looking to cause pain to their victims – they simply don’t care about their victims at all. They want to have sex with their victims, and if their victims don’t want to have sex with them, oh well – they’re going to do it anyway.

I think a lot of conversations about rape, and motivations for rapists, often become unfortunately simplistic. People will either believe that rape is all about power and hurting victims, and ignore the opportunistic rapists who rape because they want to have sex, or they believe that rape is all about sex and ignore the existence of the sadistic rapists. I write about what the perpetrators are thinking because I want to emphasize that not all people rape for the same reasons.

This is also why I write “the mind of the perpetrator” and “the victim’s perspective.” I don’t write about “the perpetrator’s perspective” because I don’t want to imply a “he said, she said” (or, in the case of Faith and Xander, “she said, he said”) dynamic. I never want to imply that the perpetrator’s and victim’s feelings are just “two sides of the story.” I never want to imply that their reasons and feelings deserve equal weight and attention.

One of my goals in this series is to point out that, regardless of whether the rapist is a sadist or an opportunist, the victim is still hurt. The victim is not to blame no matter why the rapist rapes. The victim is still hurt, and affected, and changed, and abused. The victim is probably not going to be comforted to learn that hir rapist was an opportunist rather than a sadist, because it was still a violation of hir body and consent.

Katrina is not less hurt by Jonathan and Andrew than she is by Warren because Warren wanted revenge and Jonathan and Andrew “just” wanted sex. She might be hurt for different reasons, but she is not hurt less.

Riley is not less hurt by Faith because Faith was not actively trying to hurt him, and simply using him as a way to hurt Buffy. He might be hurt for different reasons, but he is not hurt less.

Buffy is not less hurt by Xander because Xander was possessed by a hyena, but…well, actually, yeah, she probably is less hurt. That’s not the best example. After I write about a few more individual episodes, I’m going to write specifically about the way rape/consent issues are portrayed on genre shows like BtVS, because there’s not really a real-life equivalent of “mystical animal possession,” is there?

So far, I haven’t had any negative responses to this BtVS and Consent series. I think people who read this series understand what I’m trying to accomplish. But with all the rape apologia garbage on the Internet and in the world, I wanted to clarify my purpose for this series, just in case someone reading did not understand why I wrote about “the mind of the perpetrator.”

[Blog note: There are only a few episodes left that I plan to cover – “Seeing Red” (the Big Kahuna of consent issue episodes), “Never Leave Me,” “Get it Done,” and “Chosen,” and I’ll write a few wrap-up posts after the episode reviews. Next week, there will be three non-Buffy-related posts before I take a two-week break for holiday celebrations/working on my novel. Thanks for reading, everyone.]

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , | 6 Comments

ReviewsBtVS and Consent Issues: Episode 6.13 – “Dead Things” (Part 2)

Posted on December 12, 2012 by Theresa Basile

[Note: I’m writing a series about consent issues in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I will post a new entry in this series every month. In this series, I will look at an episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer that deals with rape, sexual assault, or consent issues as a main plot point or as a featured event of the episode. I will examine these episodes in chronological order. If, in my writing of this series, you feel that I have skipped an episode that should be a part of this series, feel free to submit a guest post, and I will consider publishing it.]

EPISODE: “Dead Things”
INCIDENT: Sex, lots of it, in different positions with different implications
PARTICIPANTS: Buffy and Spike

The specifics and the respective participants’ perspectives: Buffy and Spike interact meaningfully several times in this episode.

Interaction #1: They’ve just finished having sex underneath the rug in his crypt. They have a pleasant chat about the way he’s decorated his apartment. Spike realizes that they’re having an actual conversation. Buffy enjoys it until Spike calls her an “animal” for the way she acted in bed. He asks if she even likes him, and she says, “Sometimes,” but doesn’t trust him with the handcuffs.

Spike’s perspective: He’s genuinely surprised when Buffy seems to be talking to him, and seems both bitter and accepting that she only “sometimes” likes him. He calls her an animal as a compliment of her skills in the sack.

Buffy’s perspective: She seems to enjoy talking with Spike until he calls attention to the fact that she’s enjoying talking with him. She doesn’t like being called an animal, and says that she sometimes likes Spike, but doesn’t trust him and never will.

Interaction #2: Spike comes up behind Buffy in the Bronze as she’s looking down on her friends dancing together on the main floor. He points out that she’s always walking away from her friends, and says she doesn’t belong with them: “You belong in the dark, with me.” He runs his hand up her leg. She tells him to stop, and he says, “Stop me,” and soon he’s fucking her from behind (sorry, there’s really no other way to put that). He tells her that she clearly loves getting away with banging him in front of her friends, right under their noses.

Spike’s perspective: Spike wants Buffy for himself. If that means banging her while she’s depressed, away from the friends she’s no longer able to relate to, so be it.

Buffy’s perspective: Buffy looks pretty unhappy during this whole exchange and I don’t think she’s enjoying herself much. She doesn’t stop Spike, even though she’s physically capable of doing so, because she believes that he’s right – she is a creature of the dark, there is something broken in her. However, maybe there is a part of her that really does get off on being dangerous and naughty like this.

Interaction #3: Buffy approaches Spike’s crypt at night and touches the door. He senses her presence and touches the door on the inside of the crypt. Their hands seem to connect in the same spot, the door between them, but when Spike walks outside, Buffy’s gone. She is distracted by the time-shifting demons surrounding her and gets into a fight. She discovers Katrina’s dead body and believes that she killed Katrina. Spike orders Buffy to go home and tells her that he’ll take care of this. Buffy has a dream: Spike crawls into her bed, kissing her, and then they’re having sex with her on top and with him in handcuffs. She imagines trying to stake Spike and killing Katrina instead.

Spike’s perspective: He wants sex and a connection with Buffy. When she thinks she’s killed Katrina, though, he wants to help her so that she’s not connected to the death.

Buffy’s perspective: She’s caught in a vicious cycle in her relationship with Spike. She views being with him as both a source of comfort and a source of depression. She dreams of him being tender with her, but also dreams of staking him.

Interaction #4: Buffy has decided to turn herself into the cops for killing Katrina. Spike stops her and admits to getting rid of the body. Buffy wants to confess anyway, and Spike doesn’t want her to. Buffy knocks Spike down and beats his face bloody, shouting that she could never be his “girl.” Spike insists that “you always hurt the one you love.” Buffy runs off.

Spike’s perspective: Spike doesn’t want Buffy to turn herself in because he wants to be with her. There’s a part of him, though, that seems to be capable of loving her unselfishly – he also doesn’t want her to go to jail because he wants her to be okay. Of course, he uses exactly the wrong tactic to convince her, claiming that Katrina’s death doesn’t count because Buffy’s saved so many people’s lives – not the argument you want to use with a woman whose mission is to protect ALL human life.

Buffy’s perspective: Buffy is hellbent on punishing herself and resents Spike for trying to stop her. When she beats him up, she shouts, “There is nothing good or clean in you. You are dead inside! You can’t feel anything real!” Spike is the one she’s physically attacking, but she’s really beating herself up. These are all things she’s saying to herself.

Interaction #5: This is a conversation Buffy has with Tara ABOUT Spike, but I’m including it anyway. Buffy is horrified to hear that she didn’t come back “wrong” at all. She was hoping for there to be something seriously wrong with her, something incomplete about the resurrection. She wants to hear that she’s damaged in some way. She feels guilty for using Spike, for letting him in, for sleeping with someone who she’s supposed to hate, and collapses into Tara’s lap, sobbing.

What does this episode say about misogyny and rape culture?

To put it very simply, Buffy and Spike’s relationship in the sixth season is an abusive one. BUT, describing the relationship in ONLY those terms doesn’t do justice to the complexities of the relationship, AND it’s not always clear who the abusive partner is.

It’s easy to say that Spike is taking advantage of a woman who is clinically depressed, that while the scene on the balcony is not technically rape, he’s taking advantage of her insecurities and pushing her buttons. He doesn’t care how unhappy she is, as long as she ends up with him. That’s gross, and that’s textbook abusive behavior.

On the other hand, I also feel like Buffy has been looking for an excuse to be with Spike since she came back from the dead, because being with him is, as she says, the only act that makes her feel anything at all. The “you came back wrong” assertion is tormenting her, but it’s also strangely comforting and justifying. If she came back “wrong,” she can do what she wants. It’s okay for her to sleep with a soulless vampire if she wants to, because something physical and supernatural about her is technically broken.

And even though Spike is completely selfish in many aspects of his relationship with Buffy, he’s not wrong to want to stop her from going to the police. There, his instincts are correct, even if his actions are not. He knows that Buffy’s not going to the cops because she’s trying to do the responsible thing; she’s doing an act of self-destruction. A Buffy in her right mind wouldn’t run to the police after what happened with Katrina. A Buffy in her right mind would have thought, “Hey, wait a minute – there was this weird time-shifty thing when I was fighting, and I had issues with time-shifty things messing up my life a few weeks ago…it must have been the nerds!” And I think that here, he wants to help Buffy for Buffy’s sake.

Then Buffy is beating Spike’s face bloody, taking out her self-hatred on another person, and is also exhibiting textbook abusive behavior – not the behavior of a narcissistic, sadistic abuser, but an abuser who vents insecurities on another person.

Then there’s the classic, “You always hurt the one you love.” A phrase that is SO problematic out of context, but oddly works for this relationship. Spike has never been in a healthy relationship, and as a soulless vampire, associates beatings and torture and violence with the two women (Drusilla and Buffy) he’s loved. As for Buffy, I take this statement – and her silence when Tara asks her if she loves Spike – as a tacit admission that she does love him, and an acknowledgment of the way Spike hurts her.

Basically, these two have a messed-up relationship and both use and abuse each other, yet there are also many times where they find comfort in one another, and understand each other better than anyone else can. What implications does this have in our culture? What does it mean to have this narrative play on our screens – a narrative where both parties can be described as abusive at different points in the relationship – when few real-life instances of domestic violence can be described as “mutually abusive?” Is this an irresponsible way to portray an abusive relationship, or does this dynamic make sense for Buffy and Spike as characters – and can the answer to both of those questions be “yes” at the same time?

I’ll leave it up to you. Discuss in comments.

Next up in January: “Seeing Red.” Oy vey.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , | 7 Comments

ReviewsBtVS and Consent Issues: Episode 6.13 – “Dead Things” (Part 1)

Posted on December 10, 2012 by Theresa Basile

[Note: I’m writing a series about consent issues in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I will post a new entry in this series every month. In this series, I will look at an episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer that deals with rape, sexual assault, or consent issues as a main plot point or as a featured event of the episode. I will examine these episodes in chronological order. If, in my writing of this series, you feel that I have skipped an episode that should be a part of this series, feel free to submit a guest post, and I will consider publishing it.]

EPISODE: “Dead Things”
INCIDENT: Mind control, attempted rape, murder
PERPETRATOR: Warren Mears, Jonathan Levinson, Andrew Wells
VICTIM: Katrina Silber

The specifics: The Trio wants to take their attempts to take over Sunnydale to the next level. They create a cerebral dampener, a device that will allow them to control the mind and actions of any victim of their choosing. Their goal: to turn a woman into their willing sex slave. (“Willing” is a word they use rather liberally, considering the context.) Warren chooses his ex-girlfriend, Katrina, as their target. He engages her in conversation where she informs him that she never wants to see him again, but then he activates the dampener and Katrina says, in a robotic tone, “I love you, Master.”

The next time we see Katrina, she’s still under the influence of the cerebral dampener, only now she’s dressed in a French maid’s outfit and serving drinks to the Trio. All of them want to take a turn “playing” with Katrina, but Warren lays claim to her first. They go into the other room and kiss. He tells her to get on her knees, and she does. Then the spell wears off and she runs out of the room, yelling at the Trio. She informs them that what they’re doing isn’t a game or a fantasy: it’s rape. She tries to leave, but Warren is violent with her and breaks a champagne bottle over her head. Andrew discovers that Warren has killed her.

Andrew and Jonathan are upset, but Warren comes up with a plan: to use their assorted talents and skills to make Buffy think that she killed Katrina. This plan mostly succeeds until the end of the episode, when Buffy realizes that Warren had to be involved in Katrina’s death. Meanwhile, Warren and Andrew are satisfied that Katrina is no longer a problem and that they got away with murder. Jonathan, on the other hand, remains disturbed.

The mind of the perpetrators: “Dead Things” shows a marked difference between Warren, the leader of this group, and Jonathan and Andrew, the followers. Jonathan and Andrew want a sex slave that will do anything they want, and it can be any woman they find in a bar. Warren isn’t interested in picking a woman at random. He wants his ex-girlfriend back and claims to still be in love with her – and I think he believes that he means that. When Jonathan and Andrew comment that Katrina is “cute” and “hot,” Warren talks about the shape of her lips, her smooth skin, the way her nose crinkles when she laughs – traits of Katrina’s that he seems to miss. This doesn’t stop him from wiping her mind and treating her like a piece of meat, however.

When Katrina realizes what’s happening to her and calls them out on being rapists, Andrew and Jonathan are visibly shocked and upset that Katrina is defining them that way. (They also, notably, think that Warren trying to brainwash his ex is “messed up.”) Warren isn’t – he doesn’t care what Katrina in her right mind thinks, as long as he can brainwash her into being the Katrina he wants her to be and turn her back into his sex slave.

After Warren kills Katrina, Jonathan and Andrew, again, are more upset than Warren is. Andrew is the first to suggest that they turn themselves in (a detail that I had forgotten, and it surprised me), and Jonathan agrees with him – they both seem to think that the police will be more lenient with them if they confess to their crime. They’re still thinking of themselves, though – if they have genuine guilt over what they did to Katrina, the guilt is overshadowed by their desire to find a lesser sentence for themselves.

By the end of the episode, their three states of mind are clear, and all different from each other.

Warren, having told himself that he really loved Katrina and wanted her back, is completely unconcerned that the woman he supposedly loved is dead. Ironically, the first time we saw Warren back in season five, he was ditching the sex-bot he created and finding love with a real live woman because she was more interesting than a sex-bot. In this episode, he tries to turn the real live woman into the sex-bot and punishes her when she doesn’t capitulate.

Andrew’s intentions are less malicious than Warren’s, though he’s equally culpable for the group’s actions. Andrew lives in a complete fantasy world. He defines every person in his life, including himself, as a role in some kind of story that he’s creating in his head. He’s defined himself as an evil mastermind, a cool super villain in a comic book story. He thinks it’s okay to treat Katrina as a sex slave because she, too, is just a sex slave character in a comic book story. He is genuinely upset when Warren kills Katrina, and he has a brief window of opportunity to treat this issue seriously, and he is the first one to suggest that they turn themselves in. But after Warren breaks into the computer system to make Katrina’s death seem like a suicide, Andrew only says, “We just got away with murder. That’s…kinda cool.” He had a chance to make a positive change, but he didn’t take it, because treating himself as a cool super villain character is easier than owning his actions.

Jonathan’s intentions, by the end of the episode, are the least terrible of the three. Again, he, Warren, and Andrew are equally culpable for trying to rape Katrina, but he’s the only one who seems permanently unsettled about what they did. He sarcastically comments that “there must be some more girls that we can kill,” and it comes from a place that’s disturbed about what the group has become. He’s not redeemed by any means, but he’s at least realized that this Trio of Doom is not a game anymore.

The victim’s perspective: Katrina could not be more clear with her “no” when Warren tries to sweet-talk her at the bar. She reacts with fear, anger, and disgust when she realizes what the three men were planning to do with her. She immediately recognizes Jonathan and Andrew’s intentions for what they are:

“You bunch of little boys, playing at being men. Well, this is not some fantasy. It’s not a game, you freaks! It’s rape!”

She also threatens to get them locked up in jail: “And then we’ll see how you like getting raped!”

She’s angry, she’s direct, she fights back – and she’s still killed.

What does this episode say about misogyny and rape culture?

Hoo boy, does this episode have a LOT to say.

First of all, the word “rape” is mentioned. Buffy the Vampire Slayer has more than a handful of episodes that have rape or violation of consent as a plot point, but “Dead Things” is the first one that actually has a character call it “rape.” Buffy made reference to “the great roofie spirit” in “Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered,” and Angel and Faith talked about safety words in “Consequences,” but this episode actually uses the word “rape.”

This episode is also a criticism of geek culture and its sense of entitlement and victimization. Warren, Jonathan, and Andrew all have built-up anger from being ignored and treated badly in childhood and in high school. They believe that they’re entitled to sex from whatever woman they want. Sex with a hot woman of their choice is their reward for having been bullied and ostracized in their youth. They don’t see that their objectification of women is denying women their humanity, much like others denied their humanity when they were younger. Jonathan and Andrew are upset when Katrina calls them rapists, not because they feel remorse for taking advantage of a woman, but because they don’t want to see themselves as rapists.

Then we have to consider the Trio’s choice of sex slave in Katrina. Warren chooses Katrina because he claims to miss her, and maybe a part of him does, but he also wants to punish her/have her apologize for breaking up with him a year ago. He’s using sex as a weapon to denigrate the woman he claims to love. Even Jonathan and Andrew think that Warren brainwashing his ex is “messed up.” Of course, they have no problem with brainwashing a woman they don’t know. They’re all potential rapists and they’re all using rape as wish fulfillment, but they have slightly different mindsets. Warren is using rape as punishment and a culmination of a twisted romantic fantasy. Jonathan and Andrew are using it JUST as wish fulfillment, and they don’t seem to have a desire to punish women. They would, however, prefer to select a randomly chosen “hot girl” than someone they know, probably because picking a woman they don’t know makes it easier for them to deny her worth as a human being

The lesson here? Rapists don’t all rape for the same reasons.

And the reasons for their actions do not make a lick of difference to the actual victim, Katrina. She’s angrier with Warren because of their personal connection but doesn’t spare Jonathan or Andrew her wrath. She wants all of them to be held accountable for what they did. She does her best to get away, and she still dies.

The lesson here? You can do everything you’re told to do – fight back, try to run away, be “tough” and strong – and still be killed.

“Dead Things” has some very useful lessons about rape culture: rapists are often methodical and plan carefully and are not just “overcome” with lust, and that victims can follow every piece of advice in a “don’t be raped” seminar and still not escape. These lessons are disturbing, but necessary.

Unfortunately, the series fails to follow up on some of the promise in “Dead Things.” Katrina is only mentioned two more times in the rest of the series, and only once by name. Jonathan makes a bitter “deader than an ex-girlfriend” crack in a later episode, and Willow taunts Warren with an image of Katrina when confronting him for killing Tara. Andrew kills Jonathan in season seven and then becomes a hostage/comic relief of the Scooby gang, and the group judges him for having killed Jonathan and for generally being a weasel, but they don’t mention his role in Katrina’s death. We’re left to assume that Katrina’s death is still ruled as a suicide in police records, and that her parents are left believing that she killed herself.

The writers clearly forgot about this character when they moved on with developing the rest of the Trio. I don’t have a problem with that from a storytelling perspective – Katrina was a two-episode character, after all, and the Trio was the main villain of the season until Willow went evil. Still, it’s a little disturbing and ironic that a show can a) accurately portray the mentality of rapists while b) eventually disappearing the victim.

Almost 2,000 words and I haven’t even touched on the Buffy/Spike plot in “Dead Things,” so that will be a post of its own.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , | 7 Comments

Articles“Pregnancy Brain” in Sitcoms

Posted on December 7, 2012 by Theresa Basile

[This was originally published at Bitch Flicks.]

Pregnancy brain. Momnesia. Preggo ladies be cray-cray. Call it what you want, but the idea that pregnant women lose their minds while their hormones go whack is a popular stereotype based on questionable evidence. Some mothers recall feeling forgetful during their pregnancy, while others don’t. (Wow, you’d think different women have different experiences with pregnancy, or something.)

Regardless of how true pregnancy brain is or isn’t, or how different women react to the changes in their bodies, sitcom writers have taken this idea and run with it. Last year, Lily Aldrin experienced an episode’s worth of pregnancy brain on How I Met Your Mother, and this year, Gloria Delgado-Pritchett struggled with her own pregnancy brain problems on Modern Family. The setups were similar: the women had short-term memory problems as a result of their pregnancy hormones. The results, however, were a little different.

On How I Met Your Mother, the characters first notice something different about Lily when she agreed to move to the suburbs, after years of insisting that she would never move to the suburbs and wanted to stay in New York. Marshall, suburban-born and raised, is thrilled that Lily has changed her mind, but Robin warns him that Lily only wants to move because of pregnancy brain. Marshall doubts that pregnancy brain is even a “thing,” and Robin insists that it is: “Her brain is marinating in a cocktail of hormones, mood swings, and jacked-up nesting instincts.” Then Marshall and Robin recall a few incidents of Lily acting strangely: putting her keys and wallet in the freezer and ice cubes in her purse, texting Robin to ask for directions back from the bathroom, and saying “fungus” instead of “fetus” and “metal factory” instead of “mental faculty.” Robin cautions Marshall against letting Lily make any major life choices while pregnant.

This is all just in the first five minutes of the episode, by the way. The point is clear: Lily, while pregnant, is completely incapable of making any decisions for herself and has a more impaired short-term memory than Dory from Finding Nemo. Robin doesn’t think “that moron” can do anything. (Sidebar: why is Robin “I never want kids and have no interest in ever being pregnant” Scherbatsky suddenly an expert in pregnancy brain, anyway?)

A year later on Modern Family, Gloria experiences similar symptoms of pregnesia, at a much later stage at her pregnancy than Lily’s. She puts soap in the fridge and butter in the shower. Jay calls his daughter Claire to “babysit the stupid pregnant lady” (Gloria’s words), but he claims that Gloria called Claire and forgot, and she initially believes him. She drives with Claire to Costco and laments over her pregnesia: “I have two brains in my body and I’ve never been so dumb.” Claire tells her not to be too hard on herself: “You have another human being growing inside of you competing for resources.” Claire herself struggled with forgetfulness when pregnant with her daughter Alex (but not so much with her daughter Haley or son Luke). The women exchange a nice moment until Gloria tries to get out of a moving car.

The setup here is slightly different: Gloria is forgetful and scattered, but self-aware enough to know when people are pandering to her. Still, she’s not at her best.

Back on How I Met Your Mother, the plot continues with Lily acting even more ridiculous. She tries to make waffles using a laptop, and Marshall takes advantage of her lapse in judgment by convincing her to buy things for the apartment that she doesn’t really want. Soon, though, she turns the tables on him. She tricks him into thinking that she called a broker to sell her grandparents’ house in the suburbs. Instead, she’s led him to the suburbs on Halloween so they can hand out candy to trick-or-treaters. She’s trying to manipulate him with cute children to convince him to move to the suburbs. It looks like the silly pregnant lady has more “metal factories” than meets the eye.

Meanwhile, on Modern Family, Claire and Gloria go shopping at Costco. Claire has to run to a different part of the store to find a sweater to wear, because Gloria’s been standing in the frozen food aisle for half an hour and can’t remember what she wanted to buy. When the two women finally go to the parking lot after their shop, Gloria accidentally almost closes the door of the minivan on Claire’s head – after all that time, she forgot the eggs. Claire lectures Gloria: “You are purposely turning your brain off!” Then Claire is interrupted by a store’s security guard: she forgot to return the sweater she wore while Gloria stood in the frozen food aisle, and accidentally stole the sweater. Claire tries to plead her case, but the security guard takes her back inside the building.

In the third act of the Marshall/Lily plot on HIMYM, Lily has convinced Marshall to move to the suburbs. Then a few trick-or-treaters come to her door, and she hands them a stapler, scissors, and a bottle of pinot noir. She doesn’t realize what she’s done until Marshall points it out to her, and then she cries because she’s going to miss the stapler. Lily admits that she can’t make any big decisions right now, at least not until she’s done being affected by hormones.

On Modern Family, Claire argues with an overly vigilant store detective. Gloria stands, panicked, and announces that her water broke. Claire and the store detective rush her to the car. As Claire drives, Gloria reveals that she dumped a water bottle on the floor and pretended to go into labor in order to help Claire: “I couldn’t sit there and watch you suffer just because you turned your brain off.” Claire apologizes for pandering to Gloria and doubting her abilities.

Two sitcom episodes, less than a year apart from each other, both dealing with forgetful pregnant women who don’t know how to manage their lives without help, but the message of each episode is very different. The How I Met Your Mother episode is sexist and cliched, while the Modern Family episode attempts to treat the pregnant character with humanity, and mostly succeeds.

Look at the way the other characters talk about Lily and Gloria. Lily is “marinating in a cocktail of hormones,” a “moron,” and acting like the “drunk girl at the bar” – descriptors that would be perfect for a pregnant character on a darker or more satirical comedy, but seem out of place and mean-spirited on a feel-good show like How I Met Your Mother. Claire, on the other hand, initially sympathizes with Gloria, pointing out that pregnancy is draining and of course her memory would be on the fritz.

Lily is also treated like an infant during this pregnancy. She’s not just forgetful – she can’t make any major decisions while these hormones are affecting her brain. SHE IS NOT TO BE TRUSTED. Gloria, meanwhile, is forgetful and scattered, but she hasn’t completely lost her mind, and cleverly saves Claire from the repercussions of her own brain fart.

But I think the biggest reason that the Modern Family storyline mostly succeeds and the How I Met Your Mother episode doesn’t is because the first show remembers to show the female perspective on a woman’s issue (imagine that). The episode of How I Met Your Mother isn’t about how Lily deals with pregnancy brain; it’s about how Marshall deals with Lily’s pregnancy brain. Let’s empathize with the poor, long-suffering husband while he deals with the changes in his wife’s body (yawn). Modern Family at least shows us pregnancy-related forgetfulness from the perspective of the female characters. I liked seeing two women bond over their different pregnancies, and I especially liked that Claire didn’t have the exact same experience with every pregnancy.

I don’t know if pregnancy brain is a real thing or not. I’m skeptical, but I’ve had at least two currently pregnant or formerly pregnant friends tell me that they were constantly forgetful during their pregnancies. My impression is that it’s true for some women and not true for others. Both shows exaggerate the concept for for comic effect, but How I Met Your Mother reduces the pregnant woman to an infant and Modern Family remembers that Gloria is still an adult. I know which episode I prefer.

Final thought: if walking into a room with a specific purpose, and then immediately forgetting said purpose for being in that room, is a sign of pregnancy brain, I have been pregnant for the last twenty-eight years. I do this at least twice a day. Maybe pregnant women and scatterbrained artist-writer types are cut from the same cloth.

Posted in Articles | Tagged , | 13 Comments

Blog PostsSo, this whole Damon/Elena thing…

Posted on December 5, 2012 by Theresa Basile

I haven’t watched last week’s episode of The Vampire Diaries yet, and I probably won’t watch this week’s episode, either. In fact, I’m probably going to take a break from this show for a little while, at least until I read more promising spoilers.

Even saying that I want to read spoilers is a sign of how uncertain I feel about this show right now. I used to be a complete spoilerphobe when it came to The Vampire Diaries, to the point of literally covering my ears and going “la la la” when other fans talked about episodes I’d missed.

I just can’t handle this whole Damon/Elena thing, people.

I really thought I could. I’ve written before about why Elena/Stefan/Damon is my favorite love triangle and how much I appreciate the complexities of all three relationships (and how I love it even more when Katherine is thrown into the mix). I’ve mentioned that I love the way Elena’s relationships with Stefan and Damon are changing and evolving over time, in ways that were true to character. And I said that I would be fine with an eventual Damon/Elena relationship even though I’m a fan of Stefan/Elena.

Now Damon/Elena has actually happened, and I can’t do it, folks. I can’t.

First, you have to understand that The Vampire Diaries, like Glee, is a show that I discovered at a very difficult time in my life, and like every emotionally healthy person, I turned to television for comfort when it was too painful to talk to people. The Stefan/Elena relationship, much like the Kurt/Blaine relationship on Glee, was a strangely comforting story when I was going through a bad time. When they broke up in “Plan B” – season two, episode six – I did the heavy, dry sobbing thing for several minutes. It was ugly, folks.

As you can see, that relationship struck a personal chord with me, and I feel attached to it. Even aside from my personal attachment, though, I’ve always preferred Stefan/Elena to Damon/Elena for two reasons: I thought they had more chemistry (obviously a very subjective thing), and Stefan respects Elena’s choices.

This is a pattern that I’ve seen over and over again, and was most glaring in season two. Elena wanted to make a deal with Elijah. Stefan didn’t necessarily agree with her choice, but respected it, while Damon told them all to go to hell because they didn’t protect Elena the wayhe wanted them to. I can’t forget the way Damon dismissed Elena’s opinions in the season finale as “every bad idea, ever,” and I can’t stand the way he’s constantly telling her what she wants and the kind of person she is.

Damon doesn’t respect Elena’s choices. Stefan does.

Now, to be fair to both brothers, I don’t think their respective attitudes regarding Elena’s choices are all about Elena. I think Damon has a very low opinion of humanity in general and thinks free will is overrated. He remembers how used his free will to become obsessed with Katherine and cling to her memory for a century and a half. He doesn’t think the ability to choose is the big deal it’s cracked up to be because he remembers his own string of poor choices. Stefan, on the other hand, was compelled by Katherine and was compelled by Klaus, and knows how it feels to lose control. That’s why he values free will and choice above almost everything.

Still, I don’t like the way Damon is constantly telling Elena, “This is who you really are. You’re a creature of the night, a killer, blah blah blah.” He wants Elena to be just like him, and in doing so, overlooks and discounts her compassion and inherent goodness – two qualities that are at the very core of who Elena is as a person. Stefan, on the other hand – I can’t help but think of the way he spoke to Caroline in the second episode of this season, where he admitted that he wanted Elena to let loose and experience what it means to be a vampire, but didn’t know how to be around her while she did it, because of his own issues.

Some fans see Stefan as the brother who puts Elena on a pedestal while Damon is the one who loves Elena for who she really is. I never saw them that way. I saw Stefan as the brother who values the whole Elena – the side of her that wants to be compassionate and good and not hurt anyone, and the part of her that wants to indulge a little in being a vampire – while Damon is the brother who wants Elena to be like him.

Then episode five of this season happened, when everything went to hell, because Stefan kept information from Elena for no good reason.

Seriously, what was that? Stefan hasn’t kept information from Elena since the first season, as far as I can remember. He tells her things. And this episode had him keeping information about a potential cure away from Elena – why? Because Klaus said so? Since when does Stefan do what Klaus tells him to, unless he’s being compelled?

And then we have that anvil dropped on our heads when Damon claims that “he loves Elena either way?” Right, except when she’s being compassionate and caring about the lives of human beings – then you think she’s being stupid and overly sentimental, but that counts as loving her either way?

And now, on top of everything else, Elena has run into Damon’s arms and slept with him, right when Caroline has figured out that there’s a probable sire bond between Elena and Damon.

So, first we have Stefan acting out of character, disrespecting Elena’s choices and keeping secrets about her FROM her, to make Damon/Elena more possible, and now we have a disgusting, rapey consent issue at the heart of the Damon/Elena hookup that can be used as a convenient escape clause to get back to Stefan/Elena?

What has happened to the writing of this triangle? I’m honestly appalled.

And it didn’t have to be this way.

Because as big a fan I am of Stefan/Elena, the Damon/Elena eventuality made sense to me. Damon has many faults, but I haven’t forgotten that he was there for Elena in ways that Stefan wasn’t and couldn’t be for an entire season. I haven’t forgotten about the trust that was built between them, organic trust that was in character for both parties. I haven’t forgotten that Damon was kind and empathetic to Elena, and dropped the judgment when she was at her most vulnerable.

I could also see the writing on the wall, that Stefan’s “no human blood whatsoever” method of being a vampire wasn’t going to work for Elena. I could see that Damon’s way of being a vampire worked better for Elena.

There it is: a way to make Damon/Elena plausible and strong, in-character storytelling, that would make even Stefan/Elena fans like me appreciate and be interested in the relationship. Inherent trust built over a year + compatible vampire styles = relationship. The formula was ready. The pieces were in place for everything to move smoothly.

Instead, Stefan is suddenly a withholding jerk, Elena is suddenly attached to Damon because of sire issues and not because of their friendship, and Damon is suddenly an accidental rapist. (Of Elena. He was already a rapist of Caroline and Andie.)

What the HELL, Show?

Also, knock it off with the constant killing of black people. This was always a problem you’ve had, but it’s become even more glaring now that Bonnie has almost NOTHING to do and you brought on that hybrid Chris for one episode just to use as cannon fodder. STOP IT. RIGHT NOW.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged | 13 Comments

Blog PostsStoneybrook Revisited: BSC #32 – “Kristy and the Secret of Susan”

Posted on December 3, 2012 by Theresa Basile

In this Very Special Episode of my “Stoneybrook Revisited” series, Kristy Thomas baby-sits a girl with autism. Let’s see how this goes, hmm?

Chapter 1 – Kristy baby-sits her brother and her new adopted sister, Emily Michelle, and then her older brother takes her to the BSC meeting. Claudia and Dawn are the only two there so far, drooling over the Aussies moving in to Mary Anne’s old house. Kristy wonders if “Aussie” is an offensive term (yet she doesn’t have a problem describing Claudia as “exotic.”) We get our first glimpse of Susan, a seven-year-old girl walking down the street with her mother. Except the mother (Mrs. Felder) is leading her, not walking next to her. Susan takes quick, short steps and flaps her hand in front of her face.

Personal connection: My brother doesn’t flap but I’ve worked with other kids with autism who do. He doesn’t take quick, short steps. He tends to walk a few paces, and then walk backwards and re-take those steps because he didn’t do them right the first time. That’s OCD for you.

Chapter 2 – The obligatory introduction chapter. Kristy says she’s “just beginning to be interested in boys” (yeah right) and doesn’t show any passive-aggressive jealousy towards Dawn, so maybe she’s growing.

Chapter 3 – Blah blah, club procedures, blah blah. Mrs. Felder calls and explains about her daughter, Susan, who is autistic. She wants a sitter for her daughter three afternoons a week so she can go run some errands. Kristy says she’ll call Mrs. Felder back. She explains the situation to the other BSC members. None of them know what “autistic” means. Claudia wonders if “autistic” and “retarded” were the same thing. Kristy calls Mrs. Felder back and accepts the job, and Mrs. Felder asks Kristy if she wants to meet Susan before making her final decision.

Personal connection: If this book were written today, I’d call bullshit that none of the baby-sitters even heard the word “autistic” before, but this was written in 1990, so I believe it. Back then, if I told classmates that my brother was autistic, I’d get blank looks. Also, when I read the book as a kid, I was FURIOUS with Claudia for thinking “retarded” and “autistic” were the same thing, even though it’s obvious that she didn’t know any better and was just asking a question. Continue reading →

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , , | 5 Comments

Blog PostsLady T Recommends “A is for Acceleration,” Heifer International, and Hurricane Relief

Posted on November 30, 2012 by Theresa Basile

Thanksgiving has passed and the holiday shopping season has begun. This is a time of year where many of us look to buy Stuff for our loved ones – material goods or gift certificates so they can buy material goods for themselves. Material goods can be great. I don’t believe in completely taking away the commercialism out of Christmas, because I like getting Stuff and I like giving Stuff.

But let’s say you have that family member or friend who seems to have enough Stuff and doesn’t seem to want or need any more Stuff (see: George Carlin’s “Stuff” routine). You want to give your friend a meaningful present, but you’re not sure what to buy, and you’re not talented or skilled enough to make a homemade gift.

My suggestion? Make a donation in your friend’s name to a charitable organization.

No, I’m not talking about George Costanza’s Human Fund. I’m talking about real charitable organizations. Last year, I purchased a share of a goat from Heifer International in my grandmother’s name. A goat can supply a family with a ton of milk a year, extra milk to make cheese or yogurt, and younger baby goats to raise and make more milk, cheese, and yogurt. My grandma is a charitable person and she was happy to have this donation made in her name, as she doesn’t care much for more Stuff.

You might also want to make a donation to the Community Food Bank of New Jersey. The food bank is distributing 100,000 pounds of food daily to the families hit hardest by Hurricane Sandy. Many people are helping with hurricane relief by donating to the Red Cross. ABSOLUTELY, keep donating to the Red Cross! But the Community Food Bank has 95 cents of every dollar going directly to local programs and services, while the Red Cross has 92. Give to one or both if you can.

Or let’s say you have a feminist Rosie Riveter-type friend who’s really passionate about women’s rights and reproductive health. Buy her or him a donation to A is For’s Indiegogo campaign: “A is for Acceleration.” Folks, we’ve had a few significant victories this past election, and personally, I’m feeling a little more hopeful and…change-y?…thanks to Obama’s re-election and the way we sent a record number of women to the Senate. BUT our work is far from over. A is For is planning a great campaign to accelerate their movement to promote women’s reproductive rights. This is what they’re raising money for (quoted from the website):

  • ” Supporting and expanding our video outreach campaign

  • Manufacturing our scarlet letter A ribbons

  • Maintaining and expanding our website

  • Developing a database of proposed laws that would affect women’s reproductive rights

  • Maintaining and expanding our campaign infrastructure through stipends for writers and researchers

  • Covering labor costs associated with the shipping and handling of our A ribbons

  • Funding groups that share our common goal of protecting women’s reproductive rights.”

They want $10,000 and have reached $3,510 so far at their indiegogo campaign. They will receive all the money donated to them by Monday, December 17th. Please consider donating to this campaign and/or sharing the campaign with other like-minded people.

Also, if you have any particular favorite charities, mention it in the comments! Let’s encourage a little more giving and a little less Stuff.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , | Leave a comment