?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

sore feet anxiety with added Ladyhawk

Trepidatious about the Scissor Sisters gig tonight. The punishment of spending Friday in funeral shoes has blossomed (three days later!) into limping agony. Also, an evening weirdly punctuated by chores and anime led to my watching Ladyhawk deep into the night while reading The Fortean Times.

I've been curious about it (Ladyhawk, not the Fortean Times) for years as it seems to be one of the regular fliers in geek masturbation jokes. Having watched it, I'm still rather confused. Rutgar Hauer naked in a hole in the snow? Michelle Pfeiffer having an arrow yanked out of her? Confused, and vaguely disturbed...

Huh, I wanted to be able to dance tonight. I'm not even sure I'll be able to stand up. How can my feet be hurting this much?

I won't be able to make it to the Zutons tomorrow, as I have a work do to go to. Just as well, or it would have been a three week gig, what with Eberg on Friday. Thursday is the gallery opening, though given that I have no invite or anything they might just turn me away at the door; we're sorry, madam, you're not arty enough for us.

French schools are still trying to ban the veil; personally, I hate it, but I also hate t-shirts which say "stop staring at my tits" on them and kitten heel trainers. Should these signifiers of sexual difference also be banned? Somewhere I have some pictures of butch black men wearing elaborate veils; a french designer, I think. I'm always amused by the women who go on about how a Burkha stops you having to worry about what you're wearing. No-one in my area dresses as elaborately as the women who have to concentrate all their glamour, status and beauty into an eyespace and the occasional flash of ankle. No, no, to veils. Men don't need more reasons to despise women. Women don't need to show more contempt for men.

Saturday will be Jo's unvalentine party, where I will drink champagne and try and come to some conclusions about being single. Batchelor. Batchelorette. Spinster. It's funny how the first two hold the expectation of a different future, while the third firmly does not. Unci.

Webtoons: soft, stomping, silly, familiar and anal.

Comments

( 36 worms — Feed the birds )
applez
10th Feb, 2004 10:10 (UTC)
Comments
1. Shocking icon/photo ... going for a GI Jane-angry/pissed off look?

2. French schools are still trying to ban the veil;

I have to admit to being very much on the fence on this matter. On the one hand, it is a direct antireligious policy by the State that is otherwise responsible for protecting those religious freedoms. On the other hand, it is an even-handed secularising policy for tax-supported education. Under such cirumstances, I think it is fair enough that the government demand a secular ceiling on its own funded education, and in what should be an equitable and shared civic experience for all future citizens.

I therefore also generally worry that this policy will produce social schisms regardless, as families choose to remove their children and put them in religious-sponsored schools. Negating the very common-ground value of the whole matter.

So my undecided conclusion...

3. I also hate t-shirts which say "stop staring at my tits" on them and kitten heel trainers. Should these signifiers of sexual difference also be banned?

I also dislike those artefacts, and the 'porn star' t-shirts for pre-teens ... largely out of a combined belief of their inappropriateness, and the wearers are often ignorant of what these artefacts represent (so they do not really 'choose' the message = ignorance, which I generally abhor).

However, I do not equate religious symbols with sexual/gender symbols.

(snip) Men don't need more reasons to despise women. Women don't need to show more contempt for men.

You have points there for sure, but wouldn't that then be an argument for standardised secular dress for students regardless of sex/gender/religion?

4. Saturday will be Jo's unvalentine party, where I will drink champagne and try and come to some conclusions about being single. Batchelor. Batchelorette. Spinster. It's funny how the first two hold the expectation of a different future, while the third firmly does not. Unci.

Well, have fun, and don't drink unto depression and anger please. Your creative spark is much more interesting. Say 'hello' for me.
cleanskies
11th Feb, 2004 02:13 (UTC)
Re: Comments
1. Shocking icon/photo ... I don't use it often. I had it out to show someone what a no. 2 looked like. My hair is usually very short nowadays.

2. Uh ... yeah, my general disapproval of veiling as a concept does not extend to wearing religious signifiers in school (turban, scarf, cross, that cutesy skull-cap whose name I can never remember) which is both legal and supported in this country providing these things are not being forced upon the children in question and that they are not causing a disruption. Some places have scarfs in school colours for example.

3. > I do not equate religious symbols with sexual/gender symbols Wee-eell, unfortunately the veil is a gender symbol. Like having your hair up and wearing a bra, it's about preserving feminine modesty and not distracting the men. "For shame, cover your face."
Re: Comments - applez - 11th Feb, 2004 06:01 (UTC) - Expand
Re: Comments - badasstronaut - 11th Feb, 2004 06:33 (UTC) - Expand
cleanskies
11th Feb, 2004 02:15 (UTC)
Re: Comments
Men don't need more reasons to despise women. Women don't need to show more contempt for men.

You have points there for sure, but wouldn't that then be an argument for standardised secular dress for students regardless of sex/gender/religion?


... sorry, I didn't make this especially clear. This statement specifically refers to hiding your face.

"standardised secular dress" --- how puritan!
Re: Comments - applez - 11th Feb, 2004 06:03 (UTC) - Expand
some UK schools - cleanskies - 11th Feb, 2004 07:00 (UTC) - Expand
Re: some UK schools - applez - 11th Feb, 2004 09:03 (UTC) - Expand
Re: some UK schools - badasstronaut - 11th Feb, 2004 10:06 (UTC) - Expand
er.... - cleanskies - 12th Feb, 2004 03:54 (UTC) - Expand
Re: er.... - badasstronaut - 12th Feb, 2004 04:13 (UTC) - Expand
badasstronaut
10th Feb, 2004 10:18 (UTC)
If there was going to be veil related legislation, in my view it should be against forcing someone else to wear a veil, not actually wearing one. But then I'm no fan of any sort of uniform imposition by schools, or any organisation that those involved with it have no choice but to be there.

I am redefining spinsterhood. It's time for an update. Spinsterhood shouldn't need to imply never getting laid or compulsory one-sided conversations with cats. Batchelorette? Sort of cute-ish, but sounds shiftless. Spinsters seem more industrious.
cleanskies
11th Feb, 2004 02:23 (UTC)
I'm not talking legislation -- I'm with the bil of human rights on that one
I'm coming to a clear emotional attitude about veiling for myself.

Little girls wear what their parents tell them to, what their teachers tell them to (and, in some cases, what the caretaker tells them to). Women ought to wear what they wish to (though I'm sure than many a "surrendered wife" would disagree) and wear their hair as they please. The icon I used was deliberate, and relevant to the argument.

What I needed emotionally, I think, is a logically consistent way in which I can disapprove of veiling, in the same way that men who believe women should be silent, veiled and modest disapprove of me.
badasstronaut
11th Feb, 2004 02:58 (UTC)
Re: I'm not talking legislation -- I'm with the bil of human rights on that one
Little girls wear what their parents tell them to, what their teachers tell them to (and, in some cases, what the caretaker tells them to).

The issue here being the clash between parents and school (or the state - assuming we're talking about state provided compulsory education). Who should have the final say? It depends on how you view the role of each. If I was a parent (heaven forbid!) I'd like to think I'd be trying to encourage my offspring to develop its own sense of aesthetic/interest in what to wear and how it wants to present itself. However, I was allowed to do that when I was little, and tended to combine things like red wellingtons with long floral dresses, and other dire mockery-attracting decisions. I also frequently chose the most disgusting glasses frames it was possible to stumble across. Maybe some more guidance might have been helpful. I don't know. But my bad taste is a trivial matter...

Women ought to wear what they wish to (though I'm sure than many a "surrendered wife" would disagree) and wear their hair as they please. The icon I used was deliberate, and relevant to the argument.

I'm in favour of deconstructing artificially gendered characteristics. I still think part of the problem is the way in which people teach binaries - good/bad big/small masculine/feminine, it's artificial, exaggerated and unreal, and yet so much of our early thinking is developed based on these. I started thinking about it a lot when observing preschool teachers getting little kids to discriminate between opposites. They learn they're important early on and become coded in their gender schemas. And then reinforced through so much of the popular media people engage with. Now I'm rambling completely off the topic of veiling, but I suppose my point is... um... did I have a point? Well, I suppose my point is that veiling is a visual symptom of that binary thinking, it perpetuates it, but it isn't it in itself. The challenge is to develop ways to get people to challenge their own binary assumptions without getting them so pissed off they just don't want to know. Maybe.
the binary nature of gender ... - cleanskies - 11th Feb, 2004 03:43 (UTC) - Expand
similarly - cleanskies - 11th Feb, 2004 05:31 (UTC) - Expand
Re: similarly - badasstronaut - 11th Feb, 2004 05:32 (UTC) - Expand
crazycrone
10th Feb, 2004 11:40 (UTC)
Batchelor. Batchelorette. Spinster
I kinda like "Quirkyalone", which seems to be catching on.
Rather like the grouchy icon, too. Have you been to my grotty barber?
badasstronaut
10th Feb, 2004 13:56 (UTC)
Re:
Actually that icon is hot, and looks a bit like Terry Hall years ago in some way.
like whoooo? - cleanskies - 11th Feb, 2004 02:26 (UTC) - Expand
Re: like whoooo? - badasstronaut - 11th Feb, 2004 02:39 (UTC) - Expand
would you stop - cleanskies - 11th Feb, 2004 02:47 (UTC) - Expand
Re: would you stop - badasstronaut - 11th Feb, 2004 02:50 (UTC) - Expand
cleanskies
11th Feb, 2004 02:17 (UTC)
It goes with the statement
"I've just cut my hair. I look like a fucking marine."

Quirkyalone is too Amelie for my taste. Cute n' Wacky! Er .... no.
Re: It goes with the statement - crazycrone - 11th Feb, 2004 04:06 (UTC) - Expand
Re: It goes with the statement - badasstronaut - 11th Feb, 2004 05:17 (UTC) - Expand
Re: It goes with the statement - crazycrone - 11th Feb, 2004 07:24 (UTC) - Expand
Re: It goes with the statement - cleanskies - 11th Feb, 2004 05:36 (UTC) - Expand
oxfordhacker
11th Feb, 2004 06:31 (UTC)
Fantastic
For some reason, this story pleases me greatly. Thanks.
cleanskies
11th Feb, 2004 06:39 (UTC)
coo coo
If you live on Pigeon Street
Here are some people you would meet
Here are the people who would
Hullo Goodbye Good day

(er, no, you probably didn't watch Pigeon Street when you were a kid, did you?)
badasstronaut
11th Feb, 2004 06:43 (UTC)
Re: coo coo
Um.... no.
elleblue
11th Feb, 2004 08:49 (UTC)
pigeon-following
.. what the article didn't mention is the bit about them all suddenly stopping with the road-following behaviour, which really puzzled my colleagues who were analysing the data, till the biologists explained that the place they were doing that lined up exactly with a road-side cafe :-) There are also pictures of the flight paths overlaid on some maps on the press release off this page.
jinty
14th Feb, 2004 02:53 (UTC)
Burkhas....
I'm always amused by the women who go on about how a Burkha stops you having to worry about what you're wearing. No-one in my area dresses as elaborately as the women who have to concentrate all their glamour, status and beauty into an eyespace and the occasional flash of ankle.
In Pakistan I saw a couple of women wearing burkhas with sequins (black, naturally) and other black beady-effects. Very striking in a subdued, 'look, I'm following the rules' kind of way. I also saw another burkha-clad woman with vaguely translucent patterned areas around the wrist of the garment.

All of us visiting Pakistan were really keen on the idea of buying a certain kind of bottle cover that we were told about -- it's a cover you put on, for instance, a litre bottle of water, and it's shaped like one of those really severe burkas ('shuttlecocks' they call them) where the bit you look out of is just a sort of trelliswork effort. Unfortunately we never did manage to buy one at all.

Seeing burkha-clad women crossing the really busy dangerous streets of Karachi, kids in hand, is a rather worrying experience. Although seeing whole families on the backs of motorbikes, the woman riding side-saddle, is more worrying overall, as they weave excitingly through the traffic.
( 36 worms — Feed the birds )