Lily Allen Is Back...

...And making us think and dance at the same time.

Lily's new song and video, Hard Out Here, takes aim at the bullshit that women have to go through to be "successful," gender stereotypes, the pop culture use of the word "bitch," slut shaming and insane body expectations. It starts with Lily undergoing liposuction, while her agent and the doctor question, how anybody could look let themselves go like this, with Lily protesting, unheard, that she has had two kids.The video pokes fun at so many videos with scantily clad women simulating not sex but porn, but in particular the video for the rapey Robin Thicke song, Blurred Lines. Spelled out in balloons in the Robin Thicke video: Robin Thicke has a big dick. Spelled out in balloons in the Lily Allen video: Lily Allen has a baggy pussy. Just awesome.

Here are a couple of great lines from the song (apologies if they aren't 100% accurate or that there is so much -- it's just soooo good):

Don't need to shake my ass for you
Cause I've got a brain
If I told you about my sex life, you'd call me a slut
But boys be talking about their bitches, no one's making a fuss
There's a glass ceiling to break, there's money to make
And now it's time to speed it up, 'cause I can't move in this space
...
You're not a size 6, and you're not good lookin'
Well, you'd better be rich, or be real good at cookin'
You should probably lose some weight, cause we can't see your bones
You should probably fix your face, or you'll end up on your own 

Don't you want to have somebody who objectifies you
Have you thought about your butt, who's gonna tear it in two?
We've never had it so good, we're out of the woods
And if you can't detect the sarcasm, you're misunderstood

The song is fun, but it's also true (which is the case with most of Allen's work). I hope that some people who might not normally pay attention to Lily Allen's music, really listen to this one. It deserves it because it's good. And it's got a message more people need to be paying attention to.

PS - I can't wait for the album!

Globe and Mail Concerned That University-Educated Women Will Not Find Husbands

Earlier this week the Globe and Mail ran a serious article titled, "When women outnumber men on campus: What it means for marriage." When I first saw the title of the article, I thought it was a joke piece and it was something from The Onion showing up in my Facebook feed. No, it is indeed a serious article written by a newspaper claiming to be Canada's national newspaper. I had to read it.

The article talks about how more and more women are attending university and that the gender balance is now thrown off. By the time the current freshman graduate the ratio will be 156 females to every 100 males. The rest of the article is about how this will bode for marriages. Not all women will be able to marry a partner with the same education as them; not all women will be able to marry a partner with the same earning potential as them. It discusses the advantages of being a less-educated women on the marriage market. And the willingness of educated women to "marry down." 

Yes, this was indeed a serious article, and yes, it is still 2013. Here's a quick taste: 

There may be a relative abundance of less-educated men, but the increasing willingness of educated women to marry down, and of less-educated men to marry up, in terms of education has created a shortage of men who have the means to support a family.

I have so many problems with this short article that I don't even know where to begin and will probably only end up scratching the surface.

1. Women don't go to university to find a husband. 
2. Not all women (or men) are heterosexual. 
3. Not everyone is interested in getting married and having children.
4. Marriage is (or should be) based on love and respect, not how much someone earns. 
5. The term "marriage market" sets feminism back by decades. 
6. The entire basis of this article is insulting to both men and women by essentially saying all we can bring into a relationship is earning potential. 

The author seems to be trying find a reason for lower marriage rates. Okay, here's the deal. I'll spell it out for you. Younger people are indeed putting off getting married and having kids until they are older. But many are choosing to not do either of those things at all. Or just one of them. My generation watched their parents and 50% of their friends' parents divorce. They don't want to go down that road and many are simply choosing to live with a partner rather than sign a piece of paper. And people today also understand that marriage and kids is not the only path available to them. Many men and women in the 60s got married right out of high school because they simply thought, "well, that's what you do." Well, it's not what we do. Families, marriages and partnerships are all changing. And that ain't a bad thing.

We need to be inspiring today's freshman to study hard, enjoy themselves responsibly, and explore and change the world. Not making them wonder whether there will be an engagement ring waiting for them after graduation.

Halifax Mall Gets in on the Sexism Too!

This time it's not a t-shirt -- though I fear there will be yet another terribly demeaning t-shirt slogan before the back-to-school season is over -- now a mall taken up the call where clothing manufacturers failed. A mall in Halifax just pulled ads that they somehow didn't realize would upset people (Are girls people too??! Who knew?). Here are the ads:

WTF?!! Frankly, I'm running out of creative things to say about this shit. I'm just fed up and tired. Advertisers, why are you making me so damn tired? Seriously, what human wouldn't see the problem with these ads? What advertiser worth their salt would come up with a such a tired and sad campaign in 2013? What ad company if presented with such an idea, assuming they were smart enough to not come up with it, would not say to the mall, in the past few years similar campaigns have been called sexist and the ads/clothing has had to be pulled? Who is doing this?

Sigh. Statement from the mall's marketing director, Rebecca Logan:

“We’ve heard what our customers have to say and we understand why you’re angry. It was never intended to be offensive.”

I'm guessing you didn't intend it be offensive, but how could you realistic think otherwise? What did you think the reaction would be? Unless Ms. Logan became a marketing exec by shopping, I'm guessing the statements don't hold true for her. The ads are now down and the only good thing to come out of this is that the mall is donating  $5,000 to a charity for empowering girls. Hopefully all the girls who saw the ads will be attending seminars from the charity.

Disney Princesses Want Equal Pay Too!

How can a princess live happily ever after making $0.77 for every dollar a man earns? She can't. Disney Princesses want equality too!

This song and video, Disney Princesses for Equal Pay, sung by "the Little Mermaid" and featuring some of the other Disney Princesses, is both hilarious and true. A bit of fun for a boring afternoon courtesy of the Tex Pats. Hopefully we'll see more from them soon. Enjoy!

The Thin Pink Line

It has begun. Last weekend after a playdate with a few of my daughter's preschool friends, my daughter cried at me, "You forgot my nail polish!" Several times. Each time with more energy and disappointment in her voice. Her little friend was wearing nail polish. The peer-to-peer girly indoctrination had begun.

As someone with super short I'm-trying-desperately-not-to-bite-them nails, I don't wear nail polish. Or at least so rarely she would have no memory of the last time I wore it. And let me state that I have no problem with nail polish. But my daughter is three. And I think, though clearly some would disagree with me, too young for make up, which nail polish is. I know people who have taken their daughters, younger than mine, for manicures and spa days. For me, this sends the wrong message; for others, it's okay. Clearly her friend's mother had no qualms about painting her daughter's nails. I do.

And I don't.

On the flip side, there is nothing wrong with being girly, whether it's a little or a lot, IF it is tempered with other things -- books, science, math, etc -- basically anything that reminds her that it's what she does with her brain that defines her (though she should defy definition), not how she looks.

But she going to be bombarded with the opposite message for the rest of her life. I had hoped for more time.

Part of me wishes that I had been raised in a more girly household. Make up, shaving my legs, hair styles, nails, jewelry, foot care, facial hair -- these are all issues that I tackled on my own, because I had no guidance on them. In fact, at times when I was a teenager and in my early 20s, I felt like I was teaching my mom about these things (in her defense, she was in a house filled with boys for many years before I came along). I admire the fact that my mom wasn't a slave to the feminine commercial engine and that we didn't have a house filled with fashion magazines. But sometimes I wish she'd taken me for a manicure, to have my "colours done" or just out to dinner to chat about ladies' stuff. But I wished for these things when I was 13, not three.

From my daughter's perspective, all she saw was that her friend had brightly coloured nails and she did not. Those nails must have looked fun, and she would have thought nothing of seeing a boy with same nails (yet), so it can't really be chalked up to her wanting to be girly. And it's okay if she does want to be girly. She already likes dresses and skirts, and play bracelets and rings. Is nail polish so different? She also loves trains, superheroes, books, cars, cooking, learning about animals and the Science Centre. And her favourite colour is green, not pink.

I think I had play nail polish when I was about seven or eight years old (Tinkerbell brand, if I'm not mistaken). I have not bought my daughter any nail polish. I have also not ruled it out completely.

Another clothing season, another t-shirt in poor taste

It seems every time a new season is upon us, another t-shirt is released that demeans girls and their abilities. Are the designers not following the news? Is the same idiot designer jumping from store to store every season in a moronic plot to beat down the self-esteem of girls everywhere? And, what mom or dad do they this is actually going to buy these things?

The latest offender is Children's Place. I wasn't a fan of the store before, but I'm steering clear for sure now (add it to the huge and growing list). The t-shirt says:  "My best subjects" and has a checklist with shopping, music and dancing checked off. Fourth on the list, and not checked, is math, with "Well, nobody's perfect" underneath.

I'm sick of writing about this. We wonder why there is a lack of women in STEM careers. We've been bombarded with this shit our whole lives and we are continuing to do it do our children. Children, not just girls, need to be encouraged to study, to grow and to value themselves and their talent.

And I feel like I need to shout this from the rooftops, NOT ALL WOMEN LIKE TO SHOP. Many women hate it. And many men enjoy it. Argh. Enough with the damn false gender roles, people. We're done now.

(I just read in the Toronto Star that the t-shirt has been pulled. Let's hope none were bought.)

Mom Discrimination in the Workplace

An article, titled "Half the mothers I know have been driven from their jobs," in today's Guardian brought back many painful memories for me. This headline/quote is true for me. Many women that I know/knew had babies around the same time as me. Approximately half of those women lost their jobs. Now that my daughter is three and those women's children are older, many, including myself, are back in full-time employment. But not with the employer that we were with when we got pregnant.

My former employer was very supportive of my pregnancy. When I went on mat leave, I felt there would be no problem with my return -- a great person was hired to take over while I was gone and my job would be waiting for me when I returned. It was. But I learned on my second day back that I had essentially been demoted. The department of one that I had turned around and worked for years to reform and make very profitable had changed. The atmosphere had changed. I was no longer supported in leaving to pick my daughter up at daycare or take her to the doctor (though she was so sick she was hospitalized at one point). My former ability to work from home and work flexible hours was taken away. I complained. A week later I was let go.

A close friend working in a similar position was made redundant from her unionized job (which we all thought was safer) a month before she was due to return to work. The guy who replaced her happened to be bilingual. Though that skill was not needed her position, her job description was changed to include bilingualism as a requirement so that the company could keep her replacement full-time.

Another mom from my neighbourhood found out she was being let go a few weeks before her maternity leave was up. Downsizing. Several other professional women I know were downsized out of their positions while on mat leave. Much easier to downsize someone who isn't there, especially if no one replaced her while she was gone. If two people can do the work of three, why bring back the third?

I realize that the economy hasn't been at the top of the cycle for the past few years, but this problem seems to be systemic and international (judging by the Guardian article). Workplaces are run on men's timing, men who either don't have children or aren't involved with their children; that needs to change. We have the technology and the capability to offer all employees, including fathers, work/life balance with shared hours, flex time, telecommuting and good old empathy. But so many employers aren't doing it. We have to stop assuming that mothers are going to be less focused on their work or that moms will be happy to be out of a job they love. Mothers can bring fresh perspective to a position and a workplace. Yes, we want to be with our kids, but we also want meaningful work. And a little understanding.