Singing Down the Walls: My Experience with a Gay, Christian Music Group

I thought that I would never again set foot in my campus’s chapel, but last night showed that I was wrong. I went there to a concert for a Christian pop duo, Jason and deMarco. The reason why I went? Jason and deMarco are a gay, married couple.

I’ve said before that there are more Christians who are open to homosexuality and the idea that two people loving each other is not a sin just because they happen to be the same gender. However, what Jason and deMarco are doing is still rare, even in the secular community and even moreso in the Christian community. And, honestly, I think it’s great. I think that they are the type of people that this world needs. They came out and said, “Hey, we’re gay, we’re in love, and we’re also Christians.” It’s complicated. It seems contradictory. It forces people to reevaluate what they think about homosexuality, religion, faith, and the neat little categories and stereotypes that we like to force people into.

This is what it means to be out. This is why people need to come out of their own personal little closets. These closets can hide sexuality, they can hide religious beliefs, they can hide personal preferences about what makes other people attractive, they can hide political or philosophical beliefs. Whatever people are, they need to come out of their closets. They need to show the world that human beings are complex, often contradictory individuals and that our tidy little categories cannot possibly contain the vast spectrum of beliefs, attitudes, preferences, and sexualities that can reside in one unique individual. The people who are out challenge us to think, and if we rise to that challenge, we often embrace the ambiguity of the world and become more accepting. Jason and deMarco are two people who are helping others rise to that challenge simply by being who they are.

On a more personal note, I wonder what I would have thought of Jason and deMarco about two or three years ago. I still would have been a Christian, and one of the issues I would have been wrestling with was how I could reconcile my understanding of the Bible with facts about homosexuality. (Those facts being that homosexuality was not a choice, that gays were not child molesters or bad people, and that gays can have romantic relationships that are loving, caring, and understanding.) I probably would have felt a mixture of relief and joy at discovering a group like Jason and deMarco. “Finally!” I probably would have thought, “Here are people who get it! I’m not alone in the way that I think!” To me, they would have been an affirmation that I was not crazy, that God really could love and accept gays, and that Christianity could change and was changing. During the concert, Jason quoted Galatians 3: 28 (“There is no Jew nor Greek, nor slave nor free, nor male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ.”–NIV) and concluded that we make issues like discrimination and acceptance more complicated than they have to be–all we really need to do is be open to accepting different kinds of people, if they are all one in Jesus Christ.

From a liberal Christian standpoint, it really is that simple. Unfortunately, the Christian community that I was in didn’t make it that simple. When I was a Christian, I wanted very badly to believe that God accepted and approved of homosexual love. However, the Christian community that I was in had a tradition of looking down on homosexuality as a lustful perversion, as something unholy and unnatural. I had to constantly defend what I thought against traditional beliefs about homosexuality, and the only way that I could do this legitimately was to defend what I thought with Scripture. This can be done, but the logical pretzels involved are incredibly complicated, and even then I felt as though there was still something wrong with what I thought, simply because it went against what the vast majority of people around me thought. When I finally left Christianity, in some ways, I felt very relieved. I no longer had to try to bend and twist Scripture without breaking it to reinforce what I knew was right. I could believe things simply because they were right and I didn’t have to try to used Scripture to defend what I already knew was true.

This is not to say that Jason and deMarco should stop being Christians. Obviously, they’ve reconciled Christianity with being openly gay, and they’d done so by emphasizing the love and compassion of Christian teachings. I think it’s great that they can do this, and the type of Christianity that they are promoting is the type of Christianity that I think our world needs. I also think that they are more likely to create change in the Christian community than I am. (Christians aren’t too keen on listening to people who’ve left the religion, but they might listen to people who still follow the religion, even if those people don’t follow the religion in quite the same way that they do.) So, for that reason, I applaud them.

I also applaud them for making nonChristians see Christianity in a new way. Really, I hate to say this but it’s true: since leaving Christianity–heck, even before I left Christianity–I tend to stereotype Christians, and my stereotypes are mostly negative.  I don’t want to see them that way, but that’s what my initial reaction tends to be. Fortunately, lately I’ve met some Christians who don’t fit those stereotypes, and Jason and deMarco don’t fit those stereotypes either. I might have been even more encouraged to disregard some of my stereotypes if more of the audience had been comprised of Christian students on campus instead of members of the nearby city’s PFLAG chapter and student members of the campus’s gay-straight alliance. Still, I guess the fact that my campus is even having a group like Jason and deMarco perform on campus shows that Christians can take small steps in the right direction.

As to their music itself, I wish I could have heard more of it during the concert. Mostly, they did covers of other songs, and I would have rather heard music that they’ve written. I’m also not terribly excited by pop music to begin with, so I thought that the music itself was good. Not great, but good. Their chemistry on stage, however, was pretty good. They bantered like…well, like a married couple. It was very sweet. They also came off as very genuine, and they seemed more interested in promoting their message by just being themselves and being honest than by engaging in debate or being confrontational. The way that they are promoting themselves is refreshingly far from the heated rhetoric and name-calling that usually accompanies these kinds of issues.

While the music didn’t knock me over and take my breath away in the same manner that some artists’ music has, I certianly support that message that their music conveys. If you would like to do the same, you can visit their website here.

More to Love No More! : The Finale of Fox’s More to Love

I know that I am a week late in getting this post up. My excuse is that I’ve been bogged down with school work, papers, readings and things of that nature. Better late than never.

Having just watched the finale of More to Love, I can say that reality shows are as sleazy and inspid as I thought they were from the onset. It is impossible to expect two people to fall in love when their every move is subject to a camera. How can people possibly behave genuinely in such circumstances? It is also absurd to expect someone to actually fall in love in such circumstances–when people are put in situations in which they feel pressured to fall in love, they’re going to force themselves to have those emotions, even if those emotions might not be real. It’s just how human nature is. And finally, I think the idea of someone picking their partner from a limited number of choices and expecting to find someone who suits them in every aspect is just ridiculous. Not to mention that the way the situation plays with the contestants’ emotions is just cruel. I’ve given a reality dating show a shot. It was all that I dreaded and more, and I won’t be doing it again.

However, I must say that the finale of More to Love gave me a few pleasant surprises. (From here on out, I’m going to be assuming that you’re familiar with the show and that you’re willing to read some spoilers. If you’re not familiar with the show, visit this site: http://www.fatshionista.com/cms/ from some hilarious recaps.) As the show came to a close, I was thoroughly expecting Luke to choose Malissa. Everything I’ve learned in sociology and psychology classes would say that Luke would choose Malissa. They have similiar backgrounds, they are similiar physically, they seem to be of the same social class. Malissa annoyed me to no end, as throughout the entire show I felt like she was objectifying Luke as a prize to win and not as a man to fall in love with. (In which case, I really can’t blame her, as Luke doesn’t really do it for me, either, to be honest. He’s too into football and meat and potatoes and he doesn’t seem to be much of an intellectual.) I did like the other girl, Tali, as I have a great respect for people who are willing to leave the security of their home country to come to a new country and start all over again. That takes an incredible amount of strength and courage. However, Luke didn’t strike me as the type of person who would see it that way–he didn’t strike me as very deep.

And then he surprised me. The entire show surprised me. The first big surprise actually came when the girls met Luke’s parents. Because Tali is Jewish and Luke is Christian, there was actually some interesting discussion of religion. Well, maybe “interesting” isn’t quite the right word. When Tali met Luke’s dad, Luke’s dad was basically a jerk in a  way that made me cringe. Yes, Tali’s talk about how just having faith is important annoyed me somewhat, but Luke’s father’s intolerance annoyed me even more. The way he announced, “Let’s have church right here at the table!” after saying grace with the family seemed to be a comment only meant to make Tali uncomfortable. The way he grilled her about how their children would be raised also annoyed me, as I got the impression that the only answer that would satisfy him is if Tali had said, “I’m going to convert to Christianity and we’re going to raise our babies to praise Jay-sus! Baptize me right now! Hallelujah!” Thank goodness she didn’t say anything like that. I do think that it’s a good question to raise, but the  self-righteous attitude of Luke’s father really drove me nuts and makes me so glad that I am a de-convert.

Luke’s mother was also concerned about Tali’s religion, but she handled it so much more gracefully. And she seemed to have the good sense to know that religion actually has nothing to do with morals and values. (Case in point: her rude ex-husband). I get the impression that Luke’s mother had some sort of belief in the supernatural. (When talking with Malissa, who mentioned her own mother’s death, Luke’s mom replied, “She’s still with you.”) But she definitely seemed more open to hearing what Tali had to say about raising children in a family that practices two religions. (Tali seemed to feel that raising children to know about both religions and let them make their own decisions would be fine, and I applaud her on that. It certainly seems to be a good way to raise them to be open-minded and accepting.)

Despite Luke’s mothers obvious approval of Tali, I really expected Luke to choose Malissa. For this kind of show, she seems to be the obvious choice. She is white. She is American. She is the sort of person that I would expect to see win out on a show like this, as white Americans seem to be the ones who get everything. (And this show has not been particularly accepting of race. At the beginning of the season, two of Luke’s “friends” made a brief appearance. One of them was white and one of them was black. The black guy was given no camera time and didn’t say a word. I almost wondered if he was just some guy they pulled of the street and told, “Hey, we need to look like we’re open to racial diversity, so can you just stand around in a tux and pretend you’re old buddies with this guy?”) And yet Luke chose Tali. He chose the Israeli. And I think that’s great. I think it’s wonderful that this show is showing a plus-size girl falling in love AND that plus-size girl happens to not be white. I love it! The moment when Luke proposed to Tali, despite all the cliches in his scripted speech, was the moment that redeemed the show for me. The show attempted to promot size-acceptance and it promoted racial acceptance and acceptance of other religions. It showed an interracial couple from different religious backgrounds being willing to try to make their relationship work. That’s a very positive image, and I’m glad that the show ended that way. (To be honest, I also thought it was adorable when Luke kissed Tali and then picked her up and swung her around. I kind of melted at that point, because I would love it if someone did that to me, but I’ve never dated a guy strong enough to do that.)

Will Luke and Tali’s relationship actually work? I have no idea, and I really don’t care to know, as it’s none of my business. I’m sure that some privacy away from the cameras will probably be a welcome relief, but it might also make them realize that their love was all for show to begin with. I don’t know. Honestly, I’m not even quite sure that the people who say they’ll get married on these kinds of shows actually do get married in real life. As I said, I don’t think I care too much. The ending of the show surpassed my expectations, and I’m content to leave the show on that note.

But did the show actually live up to what it said it would do? Did it show that love comes in all shapes and sizes? Did it give fat women a fairy tale? Personally, it did not live up to the expectations that I had for it. I don’t think that it gave fat women, or any women, a fairy tale because, as I’ve said before, the set up of the show is artificial. You cannot present someone with an array of people and demand that they fall in love with one of them. You can, however, create situations that people associate with falling in love and so they manufacture these emotions, which may or may not be genuine. Also, I don’t feel that the show presented fat women in a very positive light. Though they did ease up on complaining about their weight towards the end of the season, the majority of the women seemed to feel that they could only be fulfilled in life if they had a man, and the reason that they did not have a man was because they were fat. I also disliked the way in which the show seemed to segregate fat women and men–it seemed to say that it’s okay if fat women and fat men fall in love with each other, but a thin man can’t love a fat woman and a fat woman can’t love a thin man.

The one thing that the show did do well (aside from the surprise racial acceptance at the end) was portray fat women as beautiful. All of the women on the show were gorgeous and they were treated as though they were gorgeous. I also think it’s great just to have fat women on TV looking gorgeous! It shows people that fat women can look sexy and it’s also normalizing. In that one small way, I think that More to Love achieved something. Maybe it was only a small step, but it was a step in the right direction. Perhaps it will pave the way for having more sexy fat women and men on television.

I will also admit (somewhat grudgingly) that More to Love has in a very small way given me a more positive perception of men. As obnoxious and dull as Luke was, as much as he objectified women and bought into traditional gender roles, as much as I did not find him in any way attrative simply because he is just not my type in any way, he was a man who said that he found fat women beautiful. Now, maybe he doesn’t really find fat women attractive. I have my suspicions that he is actually very insecure and likes fat women because he wants women who will depend upon him for their confidence and thus not leave him. But in the finale he showed some unforseen depth, so I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe him. The guy says he likes fat women; I have no reason to believe otherwise. And maybe, just maybe, that means that there are some other guys out there who don’t buy into the standards of beauty that our society promotes. Maybe there are some guys out there who are deeper and more open-minded than society gives them credit for. And maybe I should show some faith in humanity and not assume that every straight man out there just wants a bag of bones and boobs to show off on his arm.

But, as much as More to Love did a few good things, I think that its overall portrayal of women was a negative one. This is something inherent in the genre of the dating reality show, which assumes that a woman needs a man in order to be happy. It assumes that everyone aspires to marriage, often a traditional marriage in which the man is the head of the household, the woman’s needs come second to his, and the couple will have children. It also objectifies people mercilessly and reduces them to petty, cutthroat bitches and leering men. I can finally say that I’ve watched a reality dating show, and I can also say that one was enough for me.

The “Freed” Virgin: A Comparison between Western and Islamic Women

A few weeks ago, I mentioned that I had read Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s book, Infidel, and planned on reading her other book, The Caged Virgin. Well, I’ve finally read The Caged Virgin and I enjoyed it. It wasn’t quite as engaging as her autobiography and I feel as though she could have done some deeper analysis. Or perhaps her book just left me asking more questions, which very well may have been its point. Another possibility is that her essays contained in The Caged Virgin are aimed at Danish people and politicians and Muslim people and immigrants who were already more aware of the issues she was addressing than I am.

Anyway, her discussion of the role of women in Islamic societies was a thought-provoking one. As I read it, I found myself comparing and contrasting the roles of women in Islamic societies to those of women in the West. I should probably say right now that in my own discussion, I plan to focus primarily on the oppression of Western women that is still sadly present in our society. However, in doing so, I in no way mean to take away from the suffering and hardship that women in Islamic societies face. I also in no way mean to ditract from the suffering that Hirsi Ali herself has overcome. I encourage you to visit her website’s foundation here and learn more about her cause.

Have I sufficiently ensured that I won’t offend anyone I don’t want to offend? Good! Here we go, then. In her discussion of women in Islamic societies, Hirsi Ali emphasizes the extreme measures taken to repress women. Some of the most obvious signs of this repression are countries in which it is madatory that women wear headscarves or even hijabs and jilbabs. There has even been some debate about this issue in the Western world when France outlawed hijabs worn in public. One of the less visible but certainly more serious measures is the “circumcision” of women. (I say “circumcision” because the procedure really isn’t comparible to a male circumcision. The process involves cutting off a girl’s clitoris and scraping away her labia and then sewing them shut. Essentially, as I understand the procedure, the girl is left with no outer genitalia and painkillers are not administered.) The health problems that these procedures can cause are numerous and sometimes life-threatening, especially in third-world countries where adequate medical care may not be readily available and when it is, it is expensive. (I feel I should point out here that there is nothing in Islam that commands female “circumcision.” The procedure dates back to cultural traditions that were in place long before Islam reached Africa. However, the religion and the tradition were woven together so that now religious ideas are used to justify the practice. This does not need to continue, and Muslims can continue to pratice their religion in a way that does not justify female genital mutilation, but for this to happen, as Hirsi Ali says, Muslims will need to look at the values that their religion idealizes, like charity and compassion, and then examine how Islam is sometimes practiced in reality.)

So, why should Islamic societies go to such extremes to ensure that women are covered and sewn shut? Well, part of the answer lies in how these societies view female sexuality. I was shocked when I read passages in Infidel in which Hirsi Ali recounts what she was told as a child about her sexuality and femininity. In extremist Islamic societies, a woman is told that even the slightest eye contact with a man can make him mad with desire. The merest suggestion of her skin can drive him into an uncontrollable sexual frenzy. Teachers even went so far as to tell Hirsi Ali that if women were uncovered, society would not be able to function because men wouldn’t be able to think about anything but sex.

Obviously, this view is very different from the Western view of women and their sexuality. The biggest difference that I noticed is that Western men are expected to get over themselves and have some self-control. But therer’s another difference that’s a bit more subtle. As I was reading Hirsi Ali’s account of how female sexuality and desirablity was taught to her, I was surprised that women were taught that they were desirable to begin with! Now, this is not the kind of desirablity that women should be taught that they have. It’s terrifying to think that men are justified in leering at you as you walk down the street. It’s horrifying to feel that it is your fault if you are raped because men have no self-control at all. Such a view, I would imagine, could make women feel as though their bodies are dangerous to them and to the whole of society. Add this to the fact that women’s bodies must always be covered, and I’m sure that women feel as though there is something inherently wrong with their bodies and their sexuality.

But how does this compare to the view of Western women’s sexuality and feminimity? Well, as I said, one of the differences that I noticed was that women were told that they were desirable. I don’t think that Western women get quite this same message. We are also told that our bodies are wrong, but in a completely different kind of way. In fact, we are given the opposite message–we are told that our bodies are completely undesirable. Or rather, they are only desirable if they conform to the image that is presented to us as beautiful, and even the models who present this image to us don’t live up to it, because creating this image involves computer editing. Instead of being told that we are wanted, Western women are told that we are disgusting. Large women and tall women feel as though they appear too intimidating and unfeminine. Smaller women feel as though their breasts are not large enough or their bodies are too boyish. Girls with large breasts feel freakish. The majority of women in the Western world are dissatisfied with their bodies.

No, this is not as drastically serious as female mutliation, although its effects may be similiar. One of the reasons that female “circumcisions” are performed is to cut off a girl’s desire for sex. Telling a woman that she is physically unattractive seems to do the same thing. Based on statistics that I’ve read, women who feel physically unattractive do not have a very strong sex drive. Feeling that they are ugly makes women inhibited and self-conscious when they are having sex. It keeps them from enjoying sex. It makes them feel as though sex is something that another person is graciously bestowing upon them, so they shouldn’t enjoy it and they shouldn’t ask for anything during it.

Granted, one could point out here that feeling ugly is vastly different from female genital mutliation, which makes intercourse unbearably painful for many women. As I said before, I’m not trying to detract from the suffering that these women experience. I’m just trying to use then as a counterpoint to the oppression that Western women face, which might not be as severe but is still present.

Though Western women are certainly more liberated than women in other cultures, this standard of beauty that Western culture forces upon women still keeps them repressed. It acts much like a hijab in the sense that it inhibits women’s expression of their sexuality. It keeps them from seeing themselves as sexual beings, because no matter how they actually look, they are taught that they are physically unattractive and undesirable. This way of thinking can even repress women’s sex drives. Essentially, this view creates a buffer between women and the rest of the world. It keeps them from fully experiencing their sexuality and, if we give any value to women’s personal accounts, it even prevents them from living life as fully as they could. (“I’ll take dancing classes after I lose thirty pounds.” “I need to lose weight before the wedding!” “I should be grateful that my boyfriend is willing to stay with someone who looks like me.”)

This view also places a buffer between women and men, much like the extremist Muslim dictum that women must not socialized with men outside their family. This keeps men and women from interacting with each other, so when they marry, they simply don’t know how to communicate with each other. Western standards of beauty that inhibit women’s sexuality also function in a similiar way. Not only do they make women less sexually demanding and confident but they also prevent women and men from communicating with each other as well as they could. Consider this scenario: A nice, decent man is in love with a wonderful woman and he thinks that she is beautiful. He tells her this, but she does not believe him because she cannot imagine how anyone can see her about beautiful because she does not live up to Western standards of beauty. This causes her to doubt him and his feelings for her and makes her insecure in their relationship. This also makes the man feel hurt because she is, in a way, rejecting him and his feelings for her.

To put it another way: I once had a conversation with a male friend about how men are insecure that their penises are not big enough to satisfy their girlfriends. No matter how many times I told him, “But most women really don’t care!” he didn’t believe me. The conversation continued, and somehow ended up being about how most women are insecure that they are not thin enough to satisfy their boyfriends. No matter how many times he told me, “Guys really don’t care!” I didn’t believe him. Obviously, there’s a connection there–both sexes are insecure that a certain physical characteristic will not please their partners, even though their partners claim that they are not interested in judging that physical characteristic. I feel like this issue could be a potential springboard for women and men to start a dialogue about physical attractiveness in our culture and what women and men really find attractive in partners, but as far as I can tell, such a dialogue has not happened yet.  (In a relevant tangent: such a dialogue would probably involve a discussion of what our society presents as physically attractive and necessary in order to attract a partner. This could then be contrasted with what men and women actually find attractive in a partner. They could then examine why society’s presentation of attractiveness is so different from what real people actually find attractive. They could then deconstruct society’s view of what is attractive and find ways to tear down the stereotypes of what men and women want in a partner. Then those stereotypes could be replaced with views of what is attractive that are more representative, and hopefully broader and more inclusive, view of what men and women actually find attractive.) Until such a dialogue does occur, communication between men and women will be frustrated and inhibited by our society’s standards of beauty.

So, does the Westernn standard of beauty act as a sort of hijab to cloak women’s sexuality and their empowerment? Yes. It represses women’s sexuality and confidence and it creates a communication barrier between men and women. Is this repression of women as serious as the repression practiced in extremist Muslim countries? No, but it is spreading to these places. Women all over the world, even in the third world, are being presented with the Western image of beauty, and they want to resemble it. (For instance, women in Iran will smash their noses in order to make them look smaller.) This is certainly a form of colonialism, but it is also a form of sexism. These images are not empowering women. If anything, they are making them less empowered. Instead of freeing them from the confines that their societies place upon them and their sexuality and their agency, these images are burdening them even more. There is too much repression of women in the world, and while Western women may be more liberated than other women, the ways in which Western women are still repressed are spreading all over the world.

Instead of contributing to the repression of women, the West (and the whole world, really) needs to build women’s confidence and sense of agency. Perhaps these ideas, and not ideas about body image, will spread and allow women to think critically about their societies and religions and reshape them in ways that empower women. If women can rethink their roles in society and religion in such a way as to emphasize the virtues of these societies and institutions (such as the empahsis on compassion within Islam) and do away with the things that contradict those virtues (such as female genital mutliation, not granting women a choice to wear a hijab or not) then the society and the religion will be strengthened as well as the position of women.

Sick with Fear

I just came from a “conversation” about health care reform. It was actually one of the best discussions of the issue that I’ve ever heard. There were conservatives, moderates, and liberals, but everyone was respectful–everyone listened, everyone gave other people a chance to speak, everyone was polite. No one came to blows. I feel like I should be excited that people can actually sit down and speak intelligently about this thing. And yet I feel like I want to curl up in a ball and cry.

Just to get this out there, I am for health care reform. I support a national health care plan for people that covers those who cannot afford private insurance and that gives people another option. From a humanist perspective, I think that it’s the compassionate thing to do. People are suffering and need care, well, we should give it to them. From a patriotic perspective, I think we need better health care in America, because our availibity and quality of care lags far behind other developed nations. From an economical perspective, I think that we need health care reform now, because our economy is tanking. Yes, a national health care plan will involve costs, but it will also create a healthier work force. A healthier work force is a more productive workforce. A more productive workforce means a more productive economy.

Admittedly, I’m not as well-informed on this issue as I could be. And trust me, we could all be better informed on this issue. The bill is on line right now for anyone with access to the internet to read. (I have not read it yet.) In fact, I’m not going to give anyone an excuse to have not read it. You can read it right here: http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf. It is currently 1018 pages long. (This is why no one has read it. I’d be willing to bet that the representatives who are going to decide if it passes or not have not read it. This means that our leaders are about as informed on this issue as the general public is, and that’s just sad.) However, I have talked to someone else who has read it and let me clear up a few misconceptions:

1.) There are no death panels. No one is going to say that after a certain age, people must opt for euthanasia. (Arguably, some people might say that the insurance companies themselves are now acting as death panels, because they decide what kind of care is available to people and what they will pay for. If you need a surgery to save your life, but your insurance won’t cover it, some people could argue that your insurance company is acting as a “death panel.” Keep in mind also, I’m a liberal, I’m coming at this from a liberal bias, and I’m in a depressed mood right now, so my mental filter that keeps me closer to the center is not as active as it usually is. So if I sound a little pissy and a little down on private insurance companies, that’s why.)

2.) The national health insurance plan will not cover illegal immigrants. To recieved national health insurance, you will have to be a United States citizen. ‘Nuff said.

3.) No one will be forced to accept the national health care plan. If you’re happy with your private insurance and you want to keep it, you have that option. Also, there will be no government fines if you decide to keep that option.

4.) If we accept national health care, we are becoming socialist. First, I must ask: What is wrong with being socialist? Why is that such a bad thing? Why does the word “socialist” strike fear in the hearts of Americans? I honestly don’t know. I will say this: our economy already has elements of socialism in it and it has from day one. We are a mixed economy (meaning that our economy has elements of socialism and capitalism) and we have been for centuries. The idea of the government controlling aspects of our lives and our economy is nothing new. The military is socialized for God’s sake! Our education system is socialized. Our health care system already has elements of socialism in Medicare and Medicaid, which will still be in effecti, by the way, if the national health care is enforced. And let me reinstate, that public health care will be an option. No one is going to force people to accept it if they want to continue being covered by their private insurance.

So, why am I so depressed about this issue? I’m not sure. Partly I’m depressed because I can’t believe how ridiculous some people are being about it. The nation seems to be paralyzed with fear, though fear of what I’m not sure. Are we afraid of the government? Why? Are we afraid of the costs? We shouldn’t be. Like I said, the healthier the citizendry is, the more productive our economy is going to be. I don’t understand what people are afraid of. Death panels? Like I said, there are no death panels. Are we afraid of paying taxes? Guess what, we live in a society. Putting money into that society that helps society as a whole, and each individual is part of society. What I’m saying is that when you pay taxes, that money comes back to you in making this a better country to live in.

And yet we’re still afraid.  And that’s not a good place for a nation to be. Fear makes people panic. It keeps them from thinking clearly. It makes them clutch on to whatever they think will save them and make them safe again. And often, what we first clutch at is not the thing that will save us. I’ll be honesty, even I’m afraid. I’m afraid that this reform isn’t going to go through. I’m afraid that Obama is going to look like a failure and I’m afraid that people are going to lose faith in him. I’m afraid that, despite the change in regime and the Democratic majority in power, I’m going to continue living in a country run by the conservative right. (Like I said, my mental filter that usually keeps me from saying blatantly prejudiced things against Republicans and conservatives and other groups like that, but my mental filter just isn’t running today. If you are a conservative and are against health care reform, you’re welcome to put me in my place and leave me a comment.) I’m afraid of my own party failing on me. To be honest, I’m just as scared as everybody else.

And that’s not a good place for me to be either. Admittedly, maybe I should be positive. I just came from an environment that was diverse and yet welcoming and willing to talk about the issue rationally. Maybe I should have more faith in the American people. Maybe we’re not the headless chickens that the media makes us out to be. Maybe we are thinking about this issue in a calm and rational way, we just don’t realize that there are other people out there who are thinking in the same way that we are.

So what should we do? Well, we need to talk about the issue, I think. We need to talk about it with our peers. We need to talk about it with people who have private insurance. We need to talk about it to people who are on Medicaid. We need to talk about it to people who have no insurance. We need to see it from other people’s perspectives. We also need to learn about the issue from people who have a better knowledge of it than the average citizen. We need to listen and read. We need to be informed. We need to read newspapers. (Note: newspapers, not a newspaper. Reading more than one paper will give us a broader perspective on things. Admittedly, I don’t always do this. I tend to stick with the New York Times, which I know is not always a good thing.) We need to listen to politicians and decide which side makes the most sense to us. We need to read the bill for ourselves and find out what’s actually in it. We need to research what the health care situation in our country actually looks like now. We also need to ask ourselves, most importantly, I think, about why we feel the way that we do about the issue? What cultural myths and ideologies influence people’s thoughts on health care reform? What beliefs and values does our society have about this issue? Are these beliefs and values correct or do they need to be changed? Do these cultural myths and ideologies have a solid foundation? In other words, we need to think critically.

So I encourage everyone to go out and really examine the issue. I know that I should be doing this, and I’m encouraging other people to do so as well because I know that if I tell others to do it, I’ll force myself to do so too. Don’t believe something just because your pastor or your mother or your teacher or your best friend said it. Examine it. Look into it. And definitely don’t believe something just because I said it.

Fat Acceptance in A. A. Milne’s “Teddy Bear”

Okay, I know I haven’t posted for a while. I’ve been busy starting classes and getting used to life at school again. I want to put up something thought-provoking, but I really haven’t had the time to really craft any good writing. So, I’m going to put up somebody else’s writing.

As a little kid, I always loved the Winnie the Pooh stories by A. A. Milne. And I’m talking about the original books, not the Disney knock-offs, which really aren’t that great. There is one poem, though, that I always enjoyed, and you won’t see Disney turning this one into a cute little movie anytime soon.

It’s called “Teddy Bear.” You can read the full poem here, because I’m not sure if I feel comfortable copying the entire poem. But I’ll summarize it for you. Winnie the Pooh, referred to as “Edward Bear” in this work, is concerned that he is too fat. He spends his days staring outside the window and envying “those who walked about/Reducing their unwanted stout./None of the people he could see/’Is quite,’ he said, ‘as fat as me!'” He spends his night stuffed inside an ottoman, in which he finds a picture book with kings and queens in it. One of the royalty in the book is “King Louis So-and-So/Nicknamed ‘The Hansome!…And (think of it) the man was fat!” Pooh is very encouraged to find such a person. I think we all are when we discover someone who is fat and beautiful and confident and important. But he very astutely observes, “Is Louis So-and-So still living?/Fashions in beauty have a way/Of altering from day to day.” The next day, Pooh is pondering this question as he looks out the window, which happens to be open. He falls out suddenly when…

 There happened to be passing by/A plump man with a twinkling eye/Who, seeing Teddy in the street,/Raised him politely to his feet/…Our bear could only look and look:/The stout man in the picture book!/That ‘hansome king’–could this be he?/This man of adiposity?/…”Are you,” he said, “by any chance/His Majesty the King of France?”/The other answered, “I am that.”

And after his meeting with “the King of France,” Pooh is a changed bear. He…

however hard he tries,/Grows tubby without exercise./Our Teddy Bear is short and fat,/Which is not to be wondered at./But do you think it worries him/To know that he is far from slim?/No, just the other way about–/He’s proud of being short and stout.

There are so many Fat Acceptance ideas and HAES (health at every size) ideas in this poem! (And this poem was written long before the FA movement or HAES.) I love how it makes note that fashions change. At one point in time, being fat was considered beautiful. It meant that you had enough to eat! I also love how it affirms Pooh at the end of the poem. The moral isn’t that he should be thinner. It’s that he should be proud of his body exactly the way it is. I hope that little children are still being exposed to this kind of literature. I’m sure that kids (and even teachers and parents too) around them will not be giving them this kind of empowering message.

The Beauty of Serenity

Even though I’ve just completed my first day of classes for this year and have a lot of homework that I could be working on, I chose to write. I’ve also just started an ESL tutoring job, and as I was waiting in the library for students to show up (if they feel the need to, and I doubted that they would on the first day of classes), I was overcome by the silence of it. Usually this silence makes me melancholy, but tonight it seems peaceful. I found myself writing about it in a creative and all-consuming way that I haven’t experienced for a while. I’m not sure if the silence helped me do that or the fact that I feel like I have enough distance on some things to be honest about them now. Anyway, I felt like posting what I came up with:

The Beauty of Serenity

There’s something about being alone in a library. Nothing rivals the total silence of it. It puts one in mind of graveyards and catacombs. It’s a sad silence. The sort of silence that lets you know that there is no one else there except the dusty books, some of which have not been checked out in decades and have become prey to the silverfish and dust mites. But it’s a peaceful silence too. While it’s infinitely sad, it’s also infinitely peaceful. There is nothing that needs to be done. One can be totally alone and absorbed in one’s thoughts or one can absorb one’s self in the thoughts of some of history’s greatest thinkers.

I have connections with this library that I never imagined, and yet the memories rush back to me as I sit here. I remember wandering the floors and shelves as a freshman, just because I wanted to get to know this place—get lost in it. I didn’t want to have someone show me where everything was or look up the books on the computer’s catalogue. I wanted to discover them! By the time my freshman orientation class took a tour of the library, I already knew it.

 And now it knows me, too. It knows my past.  The room diagonal from the one in which I now sit is where R___ and J___ and I worked on our modern poetry project. I remember discovering the feminist theory section upstairs and reveling in it. I remember feeling lost and heartbroken this time last year as I wandered the humor section and hoped to find something that would make me laugh myself to sleep instead of cry. I remember searching the shelves desperately for anything that would help me with my medieval literature project. I checked out over a dozen books, hoping that at least one of them would help me create a thesis. I remember A__ teaching C___, S____, and I how to do somersaults up on the third floor. I remember when I broke my laptop and the computer lab became my haven. And even when I got a new laptop, my printer still didn’t work, so I rushed to the lab at least once every week, before classes started, so I could print out my religion seminar papers.

 I remember slogging through a project on Shaw with E____ and N___ and L____ and I can’t remember who else. I remember desperately wanting to leave, to be done. I thought Shaw was sort of nuts, but he was crazy in a way that occasionally made sense. I remember a quote from Major Barbara, “You have made for yourself something that you call a morality or a religion that doesn’t fit the facts. Well scrap it. Scrap it and get one that does fit.” That quote terrified me when I heard it because I knew that it was true. The deepest part of my being knew that my religion was a lie, and yet my mind trembled at the thought of a life without Christ. On these library shelves, in the theology section, I searched in vain for a book that would reveal a goddess in Christianity for me, a book that would redeem Christianity for me. I found nothing. Later, when I was no longer afraid, I found answers in the atheist section, right next to the books on theology. This was the library that gave me Richard Dawkins’s The God Delusion, which I devoured at the expense of homework and sleep.

 This is the library that gave me a reason to hold my head up high. It gave me the works of Naomi Wolf, whose writing seemed to justify my existence. Her books made me feel human and explained the world to me in a way that I had never dared imagine. The Beauty Myth made me feel vindicated in my own skin. Promiscuity validated my sexuality.

It was here that I also found entertainment—The Forty Year Old Virgin, Superbad, on DVD and free for the taking. It was here that I made my boyfriend swear to watch Lord of the Rings for the first time with me. He never kept that promise, and sitting here, remembering his arm around my waist that night, I know that it was right that he never kept that promise. I am not the same girl who asked him to make that promise. I am at peace, as peaceful as the stillness that surrounds me now in the silence of the library.

 The gentle chirping of cicadas and other night insects is only a background humming in tune with my computer and the clicking of the keyboard. There is an emptiness here. I feel as though the walls are longing to vibrate with a silent echo. Ever since my freshman year, I have vowed, on the last day of my senior year, to run through the halls of this building as I scream like a woman running from the reaper. When my mind is full of worries, the silence suffocates me. It forces me to be alone with myself, when I most need the connection, the comfort, of another human voice.

 And yet tonight, the silence is exquisite. It is a rare gem that has always lain at my feet, yet this is the first time I have paused to examine it. It is beautiful, so beautiful that it makes me sad, yes, but sadness is a gentle one. Soon it will pass. Soon I will be outside again, with the buzzing cicadas and the shouts and laughter of friends around a bonfire. Then, I will relish the crackling branches and rumble of voices. But right now, I will sit in the quiet. Alone and content, I will contemplate the beauty of serenity.

“There’s Only So Many Times You Can Apologize…”

I hate it when people get mad at me. I mean, I really hate it. If someone is upset with me or angry with me, then I feel like I have to do anything to make them stop feeling that way. I will grovel, I will beg, and I will literally apologize a gazillion times. With some people this works. Most of the people that I know will accept an apology and after we make ammends, that’s the end of the issue.

However, there are a few people in my life who never seem to accept apologies. Any apologies that I give are treated as an excuse to remind me what a horrible person I am for making them angry in the first place. Any attempt to make up for what I’ve done is just an excuse to remind me how worthless I am.

And for a long time, I believed that the people who treated me that way were right to do so because I had made them angry. I felt as though I was horrible and worthless and they had every right to rub my mistakes in my face at every opportunity they got. Usually, this created an awful cycle where I’d do something that angered another person, that person would make me feel horrible, I’d apologize for what I’d done, the other person would make me feel even worse, so I’d apologize even more…I’m sure you can see where this is going.

I few weeks ago, I was going through this awful cycle and I discussed my problem with a friend, and he said something that’s really stuck with me. He said, “The thing is, there’s only so many times you can apologize for this. After that, you need to move on.” He then proceeded to tell me that, as is the case in most relationships such as the one I was in, most bad situations are not entirely the fault of one person. Usually, while one party might be primarily responsible for the problem, there is also some blame to be shouldered by the second party. And, at the end of the day, there’s only so long that I can go on feeling sorry about what I’ve done. After a certain point, I have to move on, even if the other person isn’t willing to do that.

It sounded so simple, and yet I’d never realized it before. There’s only so many times that you can apologize. There’s only so long that you can go on feeling sorry for something you’ve done. After that, you have to move past it, and if other people can’t do that too, then you need to just leave them behind. We all make mistakes. None of us are perfect. And we need to accept our failings, learn from them, and then get on with our lives. We also need to ignore the people who hold us back from doing that. We need to remind ourselves that we are still good people, we are still worthy of love and respect, even though we might make mistakes sometimes.

Those are my words of wisdom tonight as I’m waiting for my laundry to finish drying. Tomorrow I leave for school and will be busy, so expect the posts to be few and far between, though I promise to do my best!

Religion and Criticism: How Much Is Too Much?

Right now, I should be getting ready to go back to school. I’m leaving tomorrow and yet I still have not packed everything that I’m going to need. I have chores to do before I go back. If nothing else, I could be studying for the GRE. But I have other things on my mind…

How much is too much? This is a question that I’ve been asking myself a lot lately in regards to criticism of religion, particularly Christianity. I started asking myself this question after I read Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s Infidel. At the time that I read it, my interest in de-conversion was mild. It’s something I’ll probably always be interested in. It will always be a significant part of my life, but my interest in it waxes and wanes periodically. But reading the book sparked my interest again. Also, in preparing for a class I’m going to start soon, I was reading some essays on religion by Emile Durkheim. My interest flared up even more.

One of the things that Hirsi Ali and Durkheim have both been criticized for, in their times, is for saying too much about religion. The thing is that what they both say is so glaringly obvious that people tend to overlook it, but when an astute observer points it out, it can’t be ignored. It’s true and it’s there and it’s not going away. And a lot of people don’t like the fact that somebody brought it to everyone else’s attention. A lot of people get offended, even though people like Hirsi Ali and Durkheim usually don’t mean to offend. They’re just honestly asking some questions and honestly describing the world as they see it. They say what they mean with no hidden motive and no malice. It’s just that this kind of truthfulness offends some people, usually the people who would like to pretend that these kinds of truths don’t exist.

And yet these kinds of truths do exist and there’s a lot that I’d like to say about them, but I don’t know how to say it. I want to discuss things in a way that promotes dialogue between opposing sides. I’d like to discuss things in a way that can bring people together, not separate them. I’d like to discuss things in a mature and open way that brings out the best in people. I certainly don’t want to engage in name-calling or stereotyping. I don’t want to engage in what I call “pointing-and-laughing.” (You’ve seen these types of blogs or heard these kinds of discussions. They usually begin with, “Hey? Have you heard what this group who disagrees with us is saying now? Ha ha! It’s that just ridiculous? How could they think that way? Ha ha!” I do this sometimes, but I don’t want to blog like this. These kinds of discussions really aren’t discussions. They involve no explanation or criticism. There’s no attempt to understand the other side’s thinking or clearly define why someone thinks it’s wrong. It’s lazy and appeals only to those who already agree with the writer although it doesn’t even benefit those agree because it doesn’t help them reach a deeper understanding of their position. We all do it sometimes, but at the end of the day, it gets us nowhere.)

Of course, at the same time, I realize that what I want to say is probably going to offend somebody somewhere simply because some people can’t take anything objectively. Extremists and fundementalists aren’t going to like my opinions, and nothing that I say will probably change their opinions. That’s fine. But at the same time, I don’t want to come off as being opposed to all religions in all degrees. Really, as long as religious doctrines do not supercede compassion and empathy and common sense or one’s sense of self and dignity, I have no problem with religion. I am perfectly okay with religious moderates, liberals, and pluralists. I don’t want to join them, but they do not offend me, and I don’t wish to offend them.

But at the same time, I don’t want to censor myself, which is what I’ve found myself doing lately. There are some things about religion that I’ve been wanting to say, some good (The Evangelical Lutheran Church of America finally decided to ordain homosexuals! Yay!), some bad (Okay religious right, the way that you have been treating President Obama is just totally unfair), some might be offensive to some people (all evidence seems to point to the Bible being the work of men and not of divine inspiration), and some is just personal (Look, Mom and Dad, I love you very much, but…). And I mean none of this to be disrespectful. I’m not angry. I don’t have some hidden agenda. I don’t hate religious people and I don’t wish that they would shut up. I just want to say what I think without anyone, myself included, censoring what I have to say.

I just had to get that off my chest. Pretty much, what I’m trying to say is that I’d like to talk about religion and my thoughts about it more. However, I want to keep what I have to say rational, respectful, open-minded, and moderate. And above all, I don’t want to categorize people or judge people purely based on their religious affiliations. I really don’t like criticizing things. I’d rather mention the good of a postmodern existential existence than constantly gripe about the problems of religion. At the same time, though, there’s some stuff that I want to say, and I don’t want to stop myself from saying it, and if I get out of line, that’s why I have a blog. So somebody can leave me a comment and tell me why they think I’ve gone too far.

Okay, now that I’ve said that, I really need to go pack. Have a wonderful day, everyone!

Weight! Weight! …Don’t Tell Me!

A while ago, I wrote a post about the “reality” show More to Love. Even though I haven’t been writing about it, I have continued to keep up with it. I just haven’t written about it because, well, there’s not much else to say about it. (And if there is, then Fatshionista over at http://www.fatshionista.com/cms/ has said it all much better than I ever could.) All of the episodes run together: Luke takes a couple girls on dates, the other girls bitch to each other and try to make each other cry, the girls confess about how awful it is being fat, Luke uses the words “curvy” and “voluptuous” and “the future Mrs. Conley,”  the girls gush about how much they love Luke whom they barely even know, there’s an ending mixer, Emme appears, Luke boots a few more girls off the show, and then there’s a teaser for next week’s show. Everything that I said about my critique of the pilot has held true for all the following episodes because, really, the show hasn’t changed that much. I’m not sure what annoys me most, the objectification of people or the constant whining about weight.

The objectification is fairly cut and dry. The producers of the show are objectifying everyone because they don’t want to present these people as people, instead they want a set of one dimensional characters who will entertain viewers for about an hour. (Personally, I find people more interesting and entertaining than one dimensional characters, but I guess that’s what you get when you don’t want to pay for writers to actually come up with a series for you.) Luke is objectifying the women because he’s seeing them as eye candy and potential wives and not as human beings. The women objectify each other as nothing more than obstacles to be dispatched. And even Luke is getting objectified by the women because they all see him as a prize to compete for and win and not as a real person. Basically, it’s an hour of watching people being dehumanized while they dehumanize each other. (And so you’re probably wondering why I’m watching it at all. Well, I like deconstructing the show and seeing what it says our society thinks about love and about fat people and about fat people in love. Also, as bad as the show is, it does one thing right—it shows its audience what fat women look like and it presents them as beautiful, which is normalizing. That one good thing does not make up for the mess that the show is, but it is a tiny, tiny, tiny step in the right direction.)

The constant whining about weight, however, is getting on my nerves. In the pilot episode, it didn’t bother me so much. I actually kind of expected it. However, as the show as continued, it hasn’t let up. There’s always something wrong in these women’s lives because of their weight. And there’s only so many times that I can hear, “All of my problems are because I’m fat!” before I get bored and annoyed.

But at the same time, I understand the mentality because I used to think that way. It’s easy to think that way. Just turn on the television. You’ll see ads upon ads for makeup and weight loss products and spas, and all of them will be telling you that there is something wrong with every part of your body, which can only be fixed if you spend money on something to fix it. Just pick up a magazine. You’ll see the same ads. You’ll also see articles about some new diet that actually works or about all of the health problems that will befall you if your body type does not resemble a child’s stick-figure drawing. Go hang out in a high school, and you’ll hear a bunch of teenage girls of all body types bemoaning how ugly they look because of their hair and their face and their noses and their fat stomachs and fat thighs. You’ll also hear teenage boys crudely rating these girls’ bodies. Go hang out in a gym. You’ll hear women discussing their goals of how many pounds to shed that month. Go to the movies, and the only women that you will see on the screen are impossibly thin. Wherever you go, you see images or hear messages that tell you that your body is wrong and bad and it makes you unlovable. You are told that your body is particularly wrong and bad and unlovable if your body is fat.

So, I can understand why these women blame all of their problems on their weight. I used to do the same thing. Just a few years ago, I could have watched this show and said, “Right on, sister!” or “Amen!” whenever one of the contestants whined, “Dating is so hard because of my weight!” or “Because I’m a bigger girl, no one’s been willing to try to love me!”

And even now, I think that there is some truth to those sentiments. It is hard to be confident about who you are and how you look when you live in a world that does its absolute best to squash that confidence. It is hard to approach guys when you’re wondering in the small back corner of your mind, “Does he think I’m unattractive?” It’s hard to put on a short skirt and go dancing when you’re feeling self-conscious about your jiggly thighs. Maybe you know that beauty is just a social construct and not something absolute, but you also know that most of the world doesn’t realize that. Maybe you know that you are beautiful and loveable and totally sexy, but you realize that not everyone else is going to see you that way. It’s hard to feel beautiful, no matter how you look, when you hear guys (maybe even a guy that you’re dating or are interested in) discussing what is attractive in a woman and what isn’t. It’s hard! So, these women’s complaints do have some truth to them. I can understand why they think the way that they do, and I don’t think that they’re completely wrong.

What is wrong, however, is how these women seem to blame these problems on themselves. Many of them say that because they are fat, they have problems finding men who are interested in them. The implication in their statements is that the problem is with them and their weight and not with men and the standard of beauty with which society presents men. Several of the women have claimed that their past boyfriends have cheated on them because they are fat. The implication is that these men wouldn’t have cheated on them if they weren’t fat, so the problem is with them and their fat, not with the fact that their cheating ex’s were jerks. In other words, what bothers me about these women’s constant whining isn’t so much that they are whining. What bothers me is that when these women do blame all of their problems on their weight, they assign the blame to themselves! It doesn’t occur to them that maybe, just maybe, society’s perception of beauty is entirely too narrow. It doesn’t occur to them that society is at fault. No! They just assume that it is their fault that they are so fat and that if they weren’t fat, then they would have no problems at all.

But even if these women did place blame on society’s perception of them…well, the whining would still get annoying. There are only so many problems that you can blame on your weight, and when you start blaming EVERYTHING on your weight, you sound a little immature. How ‘bout instead of saying, “My last boyfriend broke up with me and the only reason that I guy would ever break up with me is because I’m heavy!” (because that’s the only reason that a guy would ever break up with a girl, of course) say, “My last boyfriend broke up with me because he couldn’t see what a great person I am and what a beautiful body I have!” or say, “You know what? I’m an awesome person inside and out and my ex was a good person, too. We just weren’t right for each other, but I know that I am going to find somebody who is right for me.” You could even say, “My ex and I just weren’t right for each other, but that doesn’t mean that there’s something wrong with either of us. In fact, there’s nothing wrong with me at all, and I’m just fine the way I am, with or without a partner!”  Instead of saying, “My ex-boyfriend cheated on me because I’m so big,” say, “My ex-boyfriend cheated on me because he’s a jerk and I’m better off without him!” I don’t know the details of these girls’ past relationships, but the alternative answers that I’ve provided seem to be a bit more mature and a bit more reflective of reality than boo-hooing, “All of my problems are because I’m fat!”

I also resent these women’s assumption that they need a male romantic partner to validate their existence and tell them that they are beautiful. Yeah, having a boyfriend can be nice, but not having a boyfriend does not make you an unworthwhile person, contrary to what our patriarchy would have you believe. You don’t need a man to make you happy or feel good about yourself or have fun. You can have all that and be single. The show, however, doesn’t seem to be interested in sending out that message.

And yet, our society’s messages that there is something wrong with women’s bodies and that women all need a man to give them worth seem so pervasive that the women on More to Love can’t move past them. Even when they have Luke there telling them that he is attracted to them because they are large women, they are still insecure about their weight! And I can understand that. All of their lives, these women have been told that men are only attracted to tiny, emaciated, blond, big-breasted, blue-eyed women and that anything outside of that very narrow ideal is anathema to them. It’s hard to overcome a lifetime’s worth of programming, and it’s not going to be done immediately just because some large and rather dull man suddenly declares, “I like curvy, voluptuous women!” (And declares it so many times that I want to throw a thick, hardcover thesaurus in his bland face.) I can understand why these women are so insecure about their size, even when Luke tells them that they are beautiful because of their size. I know how difficult it is to believe a guy when he tells you that he likes your body and your body is so different from society’s narrow view of what is beautiful. I know because I’ve been there! So, I’m saying that I understand these women. I understand why they’re still insecure and why they probably don’t believe Luke when he says that he is attracted to them physically. I can especially understand that in this case, considering that Luke is giving these compliments to many women at the same time, and it’s hard for somebody to feel special when their partner is treating them as though they are one of many and not really special at all. (This is what I hate most about these types of dating show.)

But when I watch it on the show, I can also see how silly it is. Here these women are complaining about how fat and unattractive they are, and there Luke is chanting, “I like curvy, voluptuous women!” every chance he gets (and annoying the hell out of me with his unimaginative little phrase). Obviously, they have no reason to feel insecure about how they look when they’re around Luke, aside from the fact that he’s constantly judging them against each other. (Well, they shouldn’t feel insecure about how they look around anyone, anyway.) And yet they can’t seem to accept the fact that Luke is physically attracted to them. When they talk about their attraction with Luke, they always say that he sees them for who they are inside or that weight is not an issue with Luke. Okay, first of all, if a guy loves you for your mind and personality and character but doesn’t love you for how you look, dump him immediately because he’s not worth your time and affections. If a guy loves you, he better love what’s inside, but he also better love the package that it all comes in exactly the way it is! If he doesn’t, go find somebody who does. Secondly, if Luke requires a girl that he dates to be fat, then weight is an issue with him. It might not be an issue in the same way that it is with most guys, but it’s still an issue. My point: Luke has made quite clear (in an obnoxiously repetitive and ineloquent way) that he is attracted to fat women. The women still don’t expect him to find them attractive. And because of the social programming that they have been given all of their lives and because of the fact that Luke is sizing them all up against each other, I can understand why the women feel that way. However, it still looks ridiculous and illogical. It seems like they are making a conscious effort to remain insecure, which is absurd.  

And the absurdity of it all is why I’m so sick of hearing these women blame every single problem that they have on their weight. To some extent, I can understand it, but it’s just getting ridiculous. It especially seems ridiculous to me because I’ve been in these women’s position and I’ve gotten out of it. I’ve been able to say that I don’t fit the slim model that society has cast as beautiful, and I’m okay with that, because the problem is with society and not me. I’m freakin’ gorgeous, and if no one realizes that, then at least I know it and that’s enough for me. I’ve decided that I’m going to live my life with the same confidence that skinny women supposedly have. (But that most don’t have, because no matter what your size, our society will tell you that there is something wrong with how you look, which means that nearly every woman out there feels that there is something about her body that is absolutely hideous.) I’m going to wear the shorts and the short skirts. I’m going to go dancing and participate in other activities that require me to act sexy because I am. And I’m doing all of this without a man to validate me or tell me that I’m beautiful. Because I don’t need a man. Sometimes I’d like one, but I don’t need one. I can be happy and confident on my own, whatever my weight is. And honestly, I’m much happier this way than I was when I let my size hold me back and keep me from doing things. Sometimes it’s hard to keep up that confidence. Sometimes I do feel like a lumbering blob, and on those days, I fake feeling pretty, which can be difficult and frustrating (but is worth it, because eventually I believe myself). Sometimes it’s hard to honestly examine who I am as a person and how I need to mature instead of simply just making my size my scapegoat. Yes, it’s difficult, but in the end, it is much more freeing and satisfying to accept myself exactly as I am than to blame all of my problems on my weight. And I want to see a television show that presents that message and not the whiny message that More to Love is presenting, because I think my message would be much closer to reality than this supposed “reality” show.