feminist blogs

Ah, it’s Halloween. Surely you have a favorite scary film list rattling around in your brains (mmmm...brains)...here are some sites to help you jog your memory.

I’ll share a few…

• The Exorcist (1973). I didn’t get to see this film at release (I was 10), so I saw it on video and it met all my expectations regarding nightmares. The scene where the beast rises in a shadow in Regan’s room freaks me out.
  
• Night of the Living Dead (1968), Dawn of the Dead (2004), Day of the Dead (2008). Zombies rule. I saw the original on the big screen for the first time at one of the old revival houses in NYC in the 80s; that it was shot in black and white made it very effective. Dawn and Day are unmercifully doom, gloom and gore, a perfect fit. The Day remake’s ending creeped into my nightmares for days.
  
• The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974): OK, this low-budget Tobe Hooper film felt so authentically deranged, and the acting borders on laughable to terrifying (jesus, the sounds and affect of Leatherman and those family members make are so gross and horrible) that my brother and I kept repeating their lines after watching it. I think I’ve see this one at least 5 times. I didn’t bother with any of the remakes.
  

• Jaws (1975): I was 12 when I went to see this (what was my mom thinking?), and between Spielberg’s direction, the John Williams score and Verna Field’s editing, you really believed the shark was real (the infamous malfunctioning shark “Bruce” forced Spielberg to creatively work around it). Best creep/scare scenes: Hooper (Richard Dreyfuss goes underwater to explore a sunken boat and a head pops out of it; Quint (Robert Shaw), talking about the sharks feeding on the crew of the USS Indianapolis when it sank; Brody (Roy Scheider) tossing chum overboard to draw the shark in an “Bruce” leaps out of the water suddenly. Everyone in the theater with me screamed when that happened; the brilliance is that your heart is racing then you immediately switch to laughing out lou when Brody tells Quint ”You’re going to need a bigger boat.”

. She takes on the perennial cheerfulness, perkiness, and optimism that characterizes (to use Terry Eagleton's beautiful phrase) "the genetically upbeat Americans."

Positive thinking, says Ehrenreich, is "beginning to be an obligation imposed on all American adults." Ehrenreich describes the constant efforts to promote positive thinking within companies that, according to her, are now seeping into the academic world. I don't know much about the corporate world and whether the cheery mood is obligatory there. I do know, however, that Ehrenreich is completely wrong when she says that cheerfulness and positive thinking are becoming popular in academia. Academics are the whiniest bunch of people you will ever meet. We love bitching, complaining, moaning, and sighing. Recently, I have been feeling simply ecstatic about my new job, but I can see that even the people who gave me the job in question are being repelled by my enthusiasm. Everybody expects me to complain and when I don't my fellow academics seem a little disoriented.

Ehrenreich believes that human beings are nothing more than tiny little objects at the mercy of blind forces beyond our comprehension. She is a fierce materialist who believes that our circumstances are the only thing that defines our lives. She is consequently very annoyed by any worldview that believes in the possible victory of spirit over matter. In her opinion, thinking that you can achieve anything you want if you work really hard at it and want it really badly is wrong because it obscures reality. Apparently, she cannot accept that everybody's version of reality is very different and that some people might be justified in shaping their own reality.


Ehrenreich's one-dimensional materialism seems boring and overly aggressive. She insists that your happiness depends on your income, an idea that is profoundly alien to me. I accept her right to be an atheist and a materialist. I don't think that any one deserves scorn and ridicule for possessing this worldview. It would be nice to see Ehrenreich respond in kind to people who are religious and/or seek other explanations than the purely materialistic type that she promotes. I, for one, do believe that human beings have a lot more agency in the world that Ehrenreich allows for (I mean, I have a lot more agency. If Ehrenreich doesn't want this agency, then she definitely shouldn't try to exercise it.) I believe that my financial problems (mine only, I am not extrapolating this on anybody else) are caused exclusively by my profound need for them.

This is a recent bit of correspondence that I received from an anonymous victim-blamer through my online contact form. Apparently in response to my post from October 2007 on Officer Dan Gilroy, a grown-ass man who has no problem using his position as government police to repeatedly punch 15-year-old black girls in the face over allegedly walking outside after midnight. Our anonymous correspondent thinks that Shelwanda Riley — the 15-year-old victim of Officer Dan Gilroy’s sado-fascist power-trip anger management problem — is the one whose conduct ought to be at issue. And would like us to know, I guess, that she ought to feel grateful that the pig didn’t break her ribs or something:

From: Anonymous (no e-mail address provided)
Date: 10/28/2009 10:47 AM
Subject: Shelwanda Riley (radgeek.com feedback form)

I know this is old. I just saw the youtube video of the cop and the resister. That girl was fortunate to only have been beaten as badly as she was for the terrible behavior she exhibited. Police brutality is different with each situation, and if I was that cop… The cops will not mess with anyone who is not acting stupidly.

Oh, O.K., what with the girl walking alone at night and not doing exactly what this hyperviolent control-freak ordered her to do, well, obviously she was asking for it. Of course.

CBN.com – Halloween—October 31—is considered a holiday in the United States. In fact, it rivals Christmas with regard to how widely celebrated it is. Stores that sell only Halloween-related paraphernalia open up a few months before the day and close shortly after it ends. But is Halloween a holiday that Christians should be observing?

The word "holiday" means "holy day." But there is nothing holy about Halloween. The root word of Halloween is "hallow," which means "holy, consecrated and set apart for service." If this holiday is hallowed, whose service is it set apart for? The answer to that question is very easy—Lucifer's!

Lucifer is a part of the demonic godhead. Remember, everything God has, the devil has a counterfeit. Halloween is a counterfeit holy day that is dedicated to celebrating the demonic trinity of : the Luciferian Spirit (the false father); the Antichrist Spirit (the false holy spirit); and the Spirit of Belial (the false son).

The key word in discussing Halloween is "dedicated." It is dedicated to darkness and is an accursed season. During Halloween, time-released curses are always loosed. A time-released curse is a period that has been set aside to release demonic activity and to ensnare souls in great measure.

You may ask, "Doesn't God have more power than the devil?" Yes, but He has given that power to us. If we do not walk in it, we will become the devil's prey. Witchcraft works through dirty hearts and wrong spirits.

During this period demons are assigned against those who participate in the rituals and festivities. These demons are automatically drawn to the fetishes that open doors for them to come into the lives of human beings. For example, most of the candy sold during this season has been dedicated and prayed over by witches.

The word "occult" means "secret." The danger of Halloween is not in the scary things we see but in the secret, wicked, cruel activities that go on behind the scenes. These activities include:

* Sex with demons
* Orgies between animals and humans
* Animal and human sacrifices
* Sacrificing babies to shed innocent blood
* Rape and molestation of adults, children and babies
* Revel nights
* Conjuring of demons and casting of spells
* Release of "time-released" curses against the innocent and the ignorant.

Another abomination that goes on behind the scenes of Halloween is necromancy, or communication with the dead. Séances and contacting spirit guides are very popular on Halloween, so there is a lot of darkness lurking in the air.

Halloween seems like a good day to discuss a book I just finished reading: Don’t Stop Believin’: How Karaoke Conquered the World and Changed My Life by Brian Raftery.  I picked this book up because I was a fan of karaoke long before it was cool, back when it was distinctly not-cool, and people couldn’t understand the appeal of a bunch of amateurs gathering around to sing popular songs to each other.  And so was Raftery, so this memoir of a karaoke addict was really appealing to me, because he saw what I saw from a similar perspective---what was once your dorky hobby back in the 90s (I started singing karaoke in high school with my aunt who took me to karaoke bars with her) has now become a mainstream form of entertainment, and when you say, get a group together to sing karaoke to celebrate your birthday, you’re not going to have many people whining that they’re scared or this is dorky.  Most likely, you’ll have the virgins being anxious but willing, and everyone else will be picking their songs. 

Raftery decides the switch is due to three factors: the emergence of late 90s/early 00s super-singable pop songs by Britney Spears and the Backstreet Boys that are easy enough to sing that anyone feels comfortable trying, the popularity of “American Idol”, and the normalizing karaoke scene in “Lost In Translation”, a scene that really captures how karaoke works a lot better if people involved take their performances seriously, instead of doing a performance whose whole point is how you’re above all this.  I think he’s on to something, but he doesn’t go far enough, though part of the reason is the culture changed even more since he was writing this book, which came out in 2008.  I think it’s because Americans are increasingly putting a premium on fantasy and performance as valuable things, when in the past, these things were considered children’s fare that proper adults grow out of. (Unless they’re professionals, like actors or musicians.) And even though Raftery and I agree that “ironic” karaoke performances---where the person mocks the process of karaoke while performing---are stupid, I will say the ironic bent of American culture since really the late 60s on has a lot to do with this.  It’s about playfulness, at its core, and once you start allowing and even requiring adults to be playful, then fantasy and performance are not far behind. 

That’s why Halloween is the perfect day for this.  The explosion in Halloween’s popularity tells you the whole story.  I’d say in Austin, it’s easily the biggest day of the year, barring the time the Longhorns won the national championship.  This is because you have a huge population of adults who have thrown the finger to the whole grow up and get boring process, but the trend is nationwide. The question is no longer “are you going to dress up?” but “who are you going to be?” Performing for others has almost completely lost its stigma, and thank god.  The performer enjoys it, and the audience enjoys it (even if they’re waiting their turn).  It’s a lot like sex---once the taboo comes off for you, you wonder what you were so worried about for so long. 

(A complete aside: In fact, in the bad old days of karaoke, when people thought it was weird, those of us who liked it would often use sex metaphors to describe it.  We took this to often silly lengths---I remember someone saying hilariously, “The big difference is that in sex, groups of women are a good thing.” This was a reference to the absolute worst of the “ironic” karaoke performances.  A lot of women who wanted to do a stupid song so they could laugh about it, but were scared to go up alone, would jump on the stage in big groups and shout the lyrics.  This used to happen at least once a night in the bad old days, and it was a good time to get a drink or go to the bathroom, since the performance had no redeeming value.  I’m not against Teh Funny by any means in a karaoke performance.  But the humor should be the content, you performing in a way that’s funny.  You acting superior isn’t funny.  If you hate it, why are you singing?)

Technology has a lot to do with this shift in public attitudes about performance and emulation.  Social networking, blogging, etc. have created a huge incentive for people to put themselves on display, when previously they may have just kept their opinions mostly to themselves.  Video games helped, too.  They used to be considered something mainly for children, but now it’s completely acceptable for grown adults to sit down and pretend to be someone else doing crazy stuff for long periods of time.  If you think about it, games like Rock Band and Guitar Hero (and now DJ Hero, which we just got yesterday, apologies for the lack of an evening post) were inevitable, and they landed at just the right time to explode in popularity.  Even a few years earlier, I think more people would be wildly ashamed to strap on a plastic guitar and pretend to play it.  Nowadays, though?  People fight to get the chance.  On the negative bent, I think the ubiquitous reality TV shows have also pushed along this further. 

It’s the sort of thing that causes all sort s of reactionary hand-wringing, especially when faced with the incontrovertibly evil influence of reality TV shows, but I tend to think that on the whole, the trend is a positive thing.  And that’s why I loved Raftery’s book.  He’s relentlessly upbeat about karaoke, and he talks about how singing it gave him a place to express himself and helped him develop confidence.  And I think that’s true for a lot of people, whatever their preferred form of performing is.  Being able to put yourself out there and finding out that not only does the world not end, but often people applaud for you can be a huge boost to the self-confidence.  And the reason is that these spaces give us a place to be acceptable even when we’re not the best at something.  I’m sure a lot of people would think that I should feel a crushing shame because I’m not a good singer in any objective sense, but I don’t have to be at karaoke.  The brilliance of it is that you find a way to do it that makes it fun for people while playing to your strengths.  I can’t sing, but I can vamp comically and I usually pick great songs that people didn’t realize they want to hear until I play them.  And I love music, and it’s infectious.  Performing gives you a place to figure out what your strengths are, instead of focusing on the shame of having weaknesses. 

Certainly, I remember back in ‘99, we would hang out a lot at this karaoke bar on the north side of Austin that had a crowd that loved mostly country-western, though my group of friends didn’t sing much of that.  We had one friend who would never sing.  He was too scared, he said.  But he promised he would do it one day.  Then one night he comes in, downs a couple of drinks for courage, and decides to do it.  He puts in the song “Peaches” by the Presidents of the United States, and he’s up on stage singing the first verse, and then when it hits the chorus, he throws all caution to the wind, and takes a flying leap off stage (which was like 4 inches from the ground), and skids across the dance floor on his knees.  Then he proceeds to run around, singing the song and rock starring it up.  He’s now in 3 bands, possibly more.  (I can never keep track.) Once you get a taste for performance and self-expression, it’s hard to give it up.

So what do you think, Pandagonians?  Are you for or against this shift in the public attitudes?