She's got legs...

I took ballet, tap, and jazz lessons throughout middle and high school, and even continued dancing in college through my university's fine arts college, taking ballet and modern classes for three years. I am by no means a trained dancer, but I truly appreciate the beauty of the art form and love to bust a move whenever I can (although this doesn't usually include pirouettes and my moves are far from choreographed). 

There is recent hubbub contrasting Free People's dancer ads and those of Under Armour (see http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/trained-dancers-are-completely-appalled-ballet-ad-free-people-clothing-157682 and http://jezebel.com/leg-envy-alert-ballerina-misty-copelands-fierce-new-u-1512457209), and while I can see both sides' perspectives, I wonder what these conversations say about feminism and women's body images. 

The Free People ad shows a woman who says she has been dancing since she was three. She explains that she loves moving and dance has helped her be aware of her body. I would argue that these are both positive messages for girls and women to hear. Implicit in her message is encouragement for females to live active lives and reassurance that you should be attuned to your body. However, there has been backlash arguing that the company should have hired a professional dancer for the spot. I, personally, love that they hired an "every woman." Not every little girl will be a professional ballerina, but I hope that little girls (although not the ad's target audience) might see this ad and be inspired to express themselves through dance. 

The Under Armour ad, on the other hand, depicts a muscular Misty Copeland. I think these images could be construed as both positive and negative for women's body images. On the positive side, I think it's empowering to see a strong female body in the media. Females are far from weak, and this ad shows that we, as females, do not need someone to rescue us. On the flip side, the author of the Jezebel article posted above bemoans her own leg muscle mass stating, "I really need to do more of squats and calf exercises, guys, I'm slipping." While inspiring, these images do not make clear that Misty's career as a ballerina requires quite a bit of work on her body... not many of us can say that as we sit at our computers at work day in and day out. I would need to do leg exercises all day every day for quite a few months to get legs like Misty's. Misty Copeland, therefore, may not be the best target for me to aim for in the way of desired physique. How about some realistic bodies, Under Armour? Why should we sit here and wish we had Misty's legs? Why can we not be told that we should appreciate our bodies for all they allow us to do, instead of wishing they looked differently or were better in some unattainable way?

What I'm saying is that there has to be a happy medium and we need to watch how we talk about other women. Ladies, we are in this fight together. Instead of cutting the woman in the Free People ad down for having weak ankles and a sickled foot, let's commend her for trying and encourage her to continue on her journey to becoming better. Let's inspire future generations of young women by celebrating ALL female bodies, from the every woman to the professional ballerina.

Let them eat tacos!

I consider myself an advocate of social justice for all and wish to fight against inequality and injustice wherever I see it in the world. However, this can be a tricky situation, especially on social media. Classmates, friends, family members, acquaintances, friends of friends all post things that are on their minds. When is it appropriate to confront someone about something they posted? How is it best to do this? I would argue that our goal should always be to educate, never to condemn. I'm passionate about issues related to race, sexual orientation, language, religion, ability, age, and gender. Given that my career aspirations revolve around doing the work of promoting social justice, I may be more sensitive to/conscious of issues involving these subjects. Sometimes it can be hard for me to contain my enthusiasm, therefore I am creating this blog as an outlet. I'm not saying I will be 100% right, 100% of the time. I'm bound to have typos, so don't bother copy-editing my posts, I know I'm not perfect. Also, I'm not saying that my way is the only correct way to think about these issues, and my reasoning may have flaws in it at times, but this is my attempt to promote social justice, one post at a time.

This article from the Western Journalism Center recently came up on my Facebook timeline (http://www.westernjournalism.com/serio)sly-eating-food-now-considered-racist/#6hkJoAza8Cxl2wZU.01). The Western Journalism Center is self-described as "a blogging platform for conservative, libertarian, free market and pro-family writers and broadcasters" (http://www.westernjournalism.com/about/). In the article, one account of what happened surrounding the event Pi Phiesta is given. What appears to be an irrelevant stock image of aisles of food at some kind of convenience store is featured at the top of the article. Throughout the article, the word "some" is used several times. For instance, "some radical leftists," "some thought the trend could not get more bizarre," and "what some considered an offensive gesture." I'm sure we all use the word some in daily conversation. However, do we ever stop to think about what this word does in instances such as the ones highlighted above? Who are these elusive "some?" Are they credible? What stake do they have in this discussion? Exactly how many "some" are there? 

The "outrage" mentioned in the article is described as "manufactured," suggesting that it has been invented or fabricated and that it is not real. The philanthropic event's charitable roots are highlighted, promoting the idea of the event as good and the backlash as bad. It is said that the event raises a "significant amount of money for charity," however the amount and the charity are not mentioned. The fundraiser is said to be "under fire," creating a metaphorical image of a war zone, effectively dramatizing the current situation. We hear from one individual, a writer from The College Fix; however, the voices of those opposed to the event and members of the involved sorority are silenced or at least disregarded. 

The Stanford Daily, the campus newspaper at Stanford University, one of the main sites of this confrontation, posted two articles about the Pi Phiesta debate (http://www.stanforddaily.com/2014/05/06/cincOo-de-mayo-observances-cause-student-protests/ and http://www.stanforddaily.com/2014/05/07/pi-phi-fundraiser-opens-up-culture-minded-dialogue/). These articles featured the voices of those involved in the protest, as well as witnesses of the confrontations that occurred related to the protest, and the Pi Beta Phi president. These articles focused more directly on what occurred on Stanford's campus related to this event and the hopeful resolution that was reached as a result of conversation between the sorority and those concerned about the event's cultural sensitivity. One of these articles (Cinco de Mayo Observances Cause Student Protests) even featured a picture of one of the student protesters with her sign which read, "Our culture is not a costume."

Now I love tacos, margaritas, tamales, enchiladas, tequila, and salsa as much as the next person, and the good news is that you get to keep loving these amazing foods and drinks! I'm going on the record here saying that it is not racist to love Mexican-inspired food. Phew! Thank goodness for that! One of the Stanford Daily articles (Cinco de Mayo Observances Cause Student Protests) offered a definition of cultural appropriation. "Cultural appropriation refers to actions that trivialize aspects of a culture by not respecting a custom's symbolic significance or the history of a style of dress or other artifact." The issue is not with non-Mexican people eating Mexican-inspired food... in fact, most of my friends from other countries LOVE to share their food and customs with others. The problem lies with how we treat others and their beliefs. We wear sombreros, ponchos, and fake mustaches pretending to be a caricature of another person. I know quite a few people from Mexico, and I can honestly say I have never seen them dress this way. We get drunk and act stupid and say we're celebrating Mexico, yet we have very little concern with what actually occurs in our neighboring country and are currently involved in a fight to keep Mexico's people out of our nation. We speak Spanglish, but when our nation's epidemic monolingualism is challenged we maintain that English is the only language that matters and even argue that our patriotic songs should never be sung in any other language. The problem is not tacos. The problem is disrespect and ignorance. So next year on May 5th (or better yet, this year on September 16th, Mexico's actual independence day), have a taco, but please do so with only your real facial hair and your regular clothing... and while you're at it, make a friend from Mexico and learn what it really means to be Mexican.