In the new film The Runaways, Kristen Stewart and Dakota Fanning play Joan Jett and Cherie Currie, musical pioneers who broke down gender stereotypes as members of the eponymous band. A sex-charged rejoinder to the argument that men rock harder than women, Jett and Currie found their strength even as their producer and promoter, industry luminary Kim Fowley, took advantage of their youth and feminine appeal. Unlike the characters they play, however, Stewart and Fanning aren't letting anyone exploit them, even if it's in the guise of empowerment; the actresses have spent much of their careers redefining the limits of roles young actresses can play, and the women offer equally powerful turns in this film, proving that even a downbeat ending, such as the one that eventually befell The Runaways, can turn into triumph later on.

At a recent press day in Los Angeles, Cinematical spoke to Stewart and Fanning about both The Runaways and the exploits, both good and bad, of the band that inspired the film. In addition to talking about the influence the real women had on the way they played their characters, Fanning and Stewart reflected on their own process for playing different roles, and offered a few insights about acting against a seemingly unstoppable wall of analysis coming both from the public, and occasionally, from within themselves.

Filed under: Interviews

Continue reading Interview: 'The Runaways' Stars Kristen Stewart And Dakota Fanning

Permalink | Email this | Comments

TummyTieÂ@ was designed to allow women to continue wearing their own clothes comfortably throughout pregnancy, post pregnancy, fluctuating weight, bloating and menopause.Unlike anything else on the market, TummyTie’s unique patented design is made from a simple elasticised strip and is fastened to your clothes using the existing button and buttonhole - NO bulky fabric panels needed, as your zipper stays locked in place! Pack comprises two sizes in both black and white; the elastic expands with the waistline without restricting you or causing discomfort. Machine washable, the TummyTie sits flat on your stomach and is simple, discreet, effective and very affordable; making it every woman’s essential wardrobe accessory.Perfect for every season, and affordable for every woman (rrp$19.95)...Expand Your Wardrobe and Make It a Perfect Fit with TummyTie!Visit WWW.TUMMYTIE.COM for a full list of stockists or to purchase securely online.http://www.youtube.com/user/TummyTie

Auteur : YummiGurl
Tags : Tummy Tie Advertisement Button Play Tummies Tummybutton Belly Bellybutton Stomach Navel Bloated Bloating Maternity Pregnancy Pregnant Post Swollen Water Weight Gain Chubby Mommy Television
Envoyé : 19 mars 2010
Note :5.0
Votes :1

*****

When we were driving out of town I said, "I hate the corpses of empires, they stink as nothing else. They stink so badly that I cannot believe that even in life they were healthy." "I do not think you can convince mankind," said my husband, "that there is not a certain magnificence about a great empire in being." "Of course there is," I admitted, "but the hideousness outweighs the beauty. You are not, I hope, going to tell me that they impose law on lawless people. Empires live by the violation of law." (Rebecca West, from Black Lamb and Grey Falcon)

Strange week this week. All Marvel and Vertigo. And lots of sex. Weird. And yes, I'm aware the fourth issue of Daytripper came out last week. I didn't get it, for some reason. I should have it this weekend. Dang. Let's move on!

Avengers vs. Atlas #3 (of 4) ("Hulk Smash!"/"Hey, Venus!") by Jeff Parker (writer, "Hulk"), Paul Cornell (writer, "Venus"), Gabriel Hardman (artist, "Hulk"), Leonard Kirk (artist, "Venus"), Elizabeth Breitweiser (colorist, "Hulk"), Brad Anderson (colorist, "Venus"), Tom Orzechowski (letterer, "Hulk"), and Joe Sabino (letterer, "Venus"). $3.99, 30 pgs, FC, Marvel.

Everyone reading this should know what I'm going to rant about. When Thor transports the Avengers and the agents of Atlas to Norway, he says, "But I know of one place on Midgard I can bring us all to!" Sorry, Thor - it's TAKE!!!!! Seriously, poor "take." No one loves it. So sad.

I love how Parker casually makes Hank Pym a dick even when he's not really trying. When the old-school Avengers find out that Bruce Banner is the Hulk (because Venus sang to him and calmed him down, turning him back to Banner), Pym says, "That's Dr. Bruce Banner! He's maybe the top physicist in the world -- well, besides me ..." Ha! And Parker makes Tony Stark a bit of a wuss, too - Marvel Boy telepathically informs Pym about what's happening, and Stark says, "He could have put the knowledge in me ... I would have gotten it." If that's not enough, in the next panel, Stark looks down at himself and says to no one in particular, "I built this suit ..." Whenever a writer is clever enough to drop stuff like that into his fairly standard superhero team-up (which this is), I appreciate it, because it just humanizes them and makes it easier to deal with the wackiness of a team from the 1960s (or a decade ago, according to Pym) joining up with a team from the present thanks to some time anomaly. They all fight the Hulk, Bob figures out what's up, and everything is set up for the final showdown. It's good, clean fun!

In the back-up story, Cornell and Kirk bring us Venus, love advice columnist. It's pretty hilarious (see the panel of awesome below), as she answers questions from Hercules, Deadpool (which is particularly hilarious), I assume Jocasta, the Hulk, Norman Osborn (more hilarity!), Kitty Pryde, and Clint Barton. It's very dependent on knowing Marvel continuity (unsurprisingly), and the only one I didn't get was the letter from Miss Dean. Help me out, more knowledgeable readers! It's a fun little tale.

Sex in this comic? Hoo-boy, you bet. It stars Venus in both stories, for crying out loud! In the first, Venus has to sing to calm Bruce down, and two superheroes get caught in the sound wave. Macking commences! And in the second, well, Deadpool's letter is the highlight, and I won't spoil it.

One panel of awesome:

Oh, Hulk, no one understands you!

Fables #93 ("The Little Murder Part Two of Two") by Bill Willingham (writer), David Lapham (artist), Lee Loughridge (colorist), and Todd Klein (letterer). $2.99, 22 pgs, FC, DC/Vertigo.

It's been two months since the last issue of Fables. Strange. Anyway, I always dig the short stories of this series because they seem to contain standalone stories, but Willingham always makes sure that things get tied into the main story later. In other words, I doubt we've seen the last of the some of these characters. The story itself is not great but not bad, as Ambrose needs to figure out a way to deal with the serious transgression from last issue in a way that doesn't rip his kingdom apart. He does it, of course, but there's still some restlessness among the subjects, and that can't be good. I do like the only witness for the defense - at first, I thought it was absolutely idiotic, but once John started expanding on his story, it made better sense. And hey - those people who wish to read political intent into writers' books can kind of have a field day here, as Willingham tackles the death penalty and the idea of culture leading to what some would call crime. I honestly don't care when writers inject their political beliefs into comics (if, indeed, that's what Willingham is doing here), because this issue, while not superb, does show how much difficulty Ambrose is going to have moving forward. That's what makes this such a neat series.

Sex in this comic? Definitely. Off-panel and after the issue ends, but oh yeah, someone's getting lucky!

One panel of awesome:

Won't someone think of the ... squirrel children!

Hercules: Fall of an Avenger #1 (of 2) (Hercules main story/"Greek Tragedy") by Greg Pak (writer, "Hercules"), Fred van Lente (writer, "Hercules"), Paul Tobin (writer, "Tragedy"), Ariel Olivetti (artist, "Hercules"), Reilly Brown (penciler, "Tragedy"), Jason Paz (inker, "Tragedy"), Wil Quintana (colorist, "Tragedy"), Simon Bowland (letterer, "Hercules"), and Joe Sabino (letterer, "Tragedy"). $3.99, 30 pgs, FC, Marvel.

There are a few writers that I simply will not read. I've read their stuff, disliked it enough to know it's kind of a pattern with them and not an anomaly, and won't try it again. There are some writers who I dislike so much that even if they hook up with a fantastic artist, it's not enough to get me to buy it. However, if I like the writer, usually I can take lousy art, because I'm much more interested in the writing in comics than the art. If the art doesn't make my eyes bleed and tells the story serviceably, I can deal with it. Very rarely will the art on a book I want to read by a writer I like keep me from buying it. Let me tell you, I had one of those moments on Wednesday, when I looked at this book and Ariel Olivetti's art.

I can't really put my finger on why I don't like Olivetti's art. I didn't always dislike it. A decade ago, when he was still drawing using heavy lines rather than whatever the hell he's doing now, it wasn't great art but it had a kind of mad energy to it. Then he started doing more and more delicate line work, it appears he's given up on inking, and I don't know what's going on with the coloring (an Irene Y. Lee is credited with "production" on this book; does she do the coloring or does Olivetti?). It's that faux-"realistic" look that, to me, is ridiculously static and, at times, downright creepy. It's kind of the same thing that Salvador Larocca has done in the past five years or so, with color washes that drains everything heavy from the page but makes the art far too ephemeral. It's not a good look. Olivetti is fine telling a story, but the art just repels me. But I bought this anyway, because I knew that Pak and Van Lente wouldn't let me down. And, heck, they didn't. Well, except for one brief exchange. I'll 'splain.

The premise of the book is that Amadues Cho and a bunch of heroes congregate at the Parthenon to honor Hercules. Amadeus is peeved at Athena and wants her to show up, but instead the heroes do. So they all tell stories about how groovy Hercules was. Thor talks about the time he and Herc had to outdrink a bunch of giants, while Namor tells them of the time Herc beat on him to get him out of a funk. (I wonder why Namor is wearing his new, "I'm so cool" outfit in his flashback when he's wearing his old-school, "I'm so cool I can look UNcool" underpants in the original comic. I mean, will people reading this comic be that confused that he ... changed his clothes?!?!?!?) These are not bad stories, and Thor's is quite funny. Then the babes show up, talking about how hot Herc was (it's true - they all say it!). Snowbird says that they all "lay" with him, then continues: "I know there are others in the crowd who should join us ... don't be shy." At which Northstar says, "Is that the time? Gotta go!" while Namor looks on, a question mark above his head. Ha ha, Jean-Paul had sex with Herc and he's embarrassed about it! Now, this bugged me. First of all, Herc is a god. And he's, you know, Greek. I always assumed he was kind of pansexual, so the idea of him having sex with men isn't that strange. Second, Northstar is (wait for it) gay. And everyone knows he's gay! Who cares if he had sex with Herc? It felt, to me, that Van Lente and Pak were saying that a gay man would be embarrassed that he had sex with a man, while the women aren't. This would have, actually, been a perfect opportunity for another Marvel hero to come out of the closet - the joke would have been funnier if Snowbird had said that and someone like Warren or Logan had shrugged and said, "Hey, it weren't no big thing." But it's weird that Northstar is embarrassed about it. This weird feeling continues on the next page, when Alflyse starts talking about her time with Herc (see the panel of awesome below). Wolverine and Fandral looked shocked. After she's done talking, Namor too looks shocked (and Thor looks like he's fondly remembering his own experiences with the Elven Tickler, which isn't too surprising, given that he's, you know, Thor). Logan is older than a century, and he knows how to get with the ladies. Fandral is a freakin' god. Namor, I suppose, is the most stuck-up of them, so him I can forgive. But the idea in mainstream comics, it seems, is that men like the sex as long as it's not too weird, while the women kind of tolerate the sex but certainly don't do anything wacky. Pak and Van Lente are subverting the second assumption, but reinforcing the first. Are you telling me Logan never got really weird with any of the seriously crazy women he hooked up with? Are you saying Fandral never did anything bizarre to mix things up after a thousand years of the missionary position? I've seen this attitude before in Marvel and DC comics, and it's a bit strange. If someone who looks like Alflyse starts talking about how much she enjoyed Herc's mastery of the Elven Tickler, I wouldn't looked shocked, I'd be breaking out the instruction manual to figure it out!

And then Athena shows up and tells Amadeus that he's the new leader of the Olympus group, which leads into next issue. And the back-up story has Venus and Namora going around telling people that Herc is dead. It's a clever idea by Tobin - apparently Herc invested money in stuff and then forgot about it, so he has all sorts of weird holdings all over the world, some of which have done very well for him (he was an early investor in Stark Industries, for instance). It's a nice little story that features a hydra. Which is never a bad thing to see.

Sex in this comic? See above. Plus, Venus get naked in a totally non-sexual situation (one of Herc's holdings was a nudist colony), and all the people who lived in homes that Herc owned happened to be women. I wonder why?

One panel of awesome:

I love Wolverine's expression!

Joe the Barbarian #3 (of ВосемБ) ("The Dying Boy") by Grant "Yes, this is just propaganda to get you to keep rats as pets, why do you ask?" Morrison (writer), Sean Murphy (artist), Dave Stewart (colorist), and Todd Klein (letterer). $2.99, 22 pgs, FC, DC/Vertigo.

Morrison unveils a few more secrets in this issue, as Joe is shown something that makes his journey through the strange world of more import than it already was, and a new adventurer joins the team. And of course, because it's a Grant Morrison comic, the very odd bad guys (well, I'm just going to assume they're bad guys; they could be kindly monks for all I know) are revealed at the end. There are typical Morrisonisms sprinkled throughout the dialogue, and it all moves along at a nice clip. Murphy remains the absolutely stunning star of the comic, though. The chase at the beginning of the issue is terrifically exciting, and when Joe and Jack arrive in Draka's town, Murphy gives us a full-page drawing that is simply gorgeous. When Joe collapses near the end of the issue, Murphy looks downward through his house, almost giving us vertigo. The book itself continues to get better, writing-wise, but Murphy's art is so staggering you almost don't need to read the text. That's so rare with a Morrison comic that it's almost unbelievable. But there it is!

Sex in this comic? It's about a boy in a fantasy land. Let's hope not!

One panel of awesome:

So portentous!!!!!

Marvel Boy: The Uranian #3 (of 3) ("Man of Two Worlds") by Jeff Parker (writer), Felix Ruiz (artist/letterer), and Val Staples (colorist). $3.99, 22 pgs + 18 pgs of 3 back-up stories, FC, Marvel.

This isn't a bad comic, and it looks great, but it does feel more like Parker is filling in the gaps of the characters from Agents of Atlas (or, I guess, Atlas) than telling a standalone story. He fleshed out some crucial points about Bob's past, namely his connection to Uranus and what his overlords really want (and if I call them "overlords," they can't be too benign, can they?), but this feels a bit trifling, as if it could have been told in a flashback in the regular series over the course of an issue or possibly two. Three issues is a bit much. I mean, we get to see a giant 1950s Marvel monster (see below), some nice parts about Bob's life, and a groovy mad scientist, but it still feels a bit too slight. Oh well. The art is fantastic, Parker's writing is fine as ever (even if the book itself is slight), and we get to see a bunch of reprints drawn by Bill Everett. If you're a fan of Jimmy Woo's team or Parker's writing, it's a fun book. For four bucks a pop, though, it's a bit steep.

Sex in this comic? Bob gets busy in a rocket with Violet. There's nothing better than zero-gravity sex! (Or, you know, so I'm told. By my astronaut friends. Of which I have many.)

One panel of awesome:

Jeff Parker + Felix Ruiz = awesome!

Spider-Woman #7 by Brian Michael Bendis (writer), Alex Maleev (artist), and Cory Petit (letterer). $3.99, 35 pgs, FC, Marvel.

Bendis writes at the end of this book that it's over, because it's way too much work for Maleev to do it, motion-comic style. Why they specifically had to do it motion-comic style isn't addressed, but apparently putting together a motion comic takes a lot more time and effort by the artist, and it was killing Maleev. KILLING HIM!!!!!! So they pulled the plug. Oh well.

I'm not that put out by it, because I was probably going to drop the book anyway after the first arc. I will defend the Bendis/Maleev Daredevil to anyone who tries to put it down (which, to be honest, isn't many people), but this just never got good. It had a nifty hook but Bendis simply didn't do anything with it, and in the end, he had to bring in the Avengers to bail Jessica out. This issue is just a big ol' dumb superhero fight with a few clever Bendisisms, but mostly, it's dumb. And Jessica is a total bitch. She's not a bitch in a charming, fucked-up way that Jessica Jones was in Alias, she's a bitch in a "Gosh, I really hope that Skrull kills her" way. She keeps calling the Asian girl "dumb" because she claims that her Skrull boyfriend is Spider-Man. Now, the way Maleev draws her, it seems like she's blind. Second, the Skrull is, you know, a shape-shifter, so even if she's not blind, he could look like Spider-Man. Jessica points out that Spider-Man "famously" lives in New York, but she's only been dating him three weeks, meaning he could be on vacation or something. So, um, Jessica? Shut the fuck up. As Abigail points out, your track record so far in this comic isn't great in the intelligence department, so if the girl from Madripoor believes she was dating Spider-Man, you're the last person in the world to call her dumb. And then, later, the Skrull tells her that the queen chose her form because "of all the people in the world ... we discovered that no one on this entire planet cares enough about you to notice you at all." Really, Skrull? Okay, from the way Jessica behaves in this comic, I see Skrull dude's point, but that's a bit extreme, isn't it? I mean, she has plenty of friends, after all. It's one of those things that sounds cool the first time you read it but then, once you think about it for more than a second, makes absolutely no sense. And then Wolverine tries to stab a shape-shifter to death. You'd think he'd know better.

So I would have ditched the book anyway, but now I don't have to. If you've been thinking about getting the trade, I'd skip it. Spend it on something, you know, good.

Sex in this comic? Not a bit. Jessica finds the Skrull in a strip club, though.

One panel of "awesome":

Really?

Vengeance of the Moon Knight #6 ("Shock and Awe Chapter 6") by Gregg Hurwitz (writer), Jerome Opeña (penciler), Jay Leisten (inker), Paul Mounts (colorist), and Joe Caramagna (letterer). $2.99, 23 pgs, FC, Marvel.

And now, Moon Knight And Me: A Love Story.

I have never made my love of Moon Knight a secret. I dig him. I love the whole multiple personalities thing, I love the whole weird network of operatives, I love the Doug Moench/Bill Sienkiewicz run with a love that is probably a little unhealthy, I love the Doug Moench/Kevin Nowlan run that followed it, I love the "Fist of Khonshu" series that followed that only lasted six issues and wasn't very good, I liked the 1990s series that also wasn't very good but lasted longer than any Moon Knight series ever, I loved the James Fry issues in the latter part of that run that were really bizarre eye candy, I loved the Stephen Platt issues that ended the run ... okay, that's a lie. I hated those issues. They're AWFUL. I loved the late 1990s mini-series that brought the character back from limbo, with Mark Texeira and then Tommy Lee Edwards on art. I loved the new series that launched a few years ago, which made our hero truly insane for, really, the first time (as much as Moench explored the idea of multiple personalities, you never got the sense that Moonie was all that crazy). And I loved the first few issues of this series, which returned Moon Knight to New York and brought back Bushman (okay, that wasn't too great an idea) and featured out of this world art by Opeña. I bought the first Moon Knight Essential volume because I didn't have the early appearances of the character. I'm going to buy the new hardcover of the Moench/Sienkiewicz collaborations before the first series launched even though I own some of them, because I love the character so much. I think that the first series is wildly underrated, as it was one of the first (if not the first) series to be released through the Direct Market, bypassing newstands and therefore allowing Moench and Sienkiewicz to tell more mature stories than mainstream comics before it. I think the character has a ton of potential that has been tapped a bit, but not enough. But that's just me.

So why am I explaining this? Well, as much as I dug what Hurwitz did in these first few issues (even though I didn't agree with bringing Bushman back and turning him into Bane), I thought this was a terrible way to end this arc and it makes me wonder if I will even buy the next arc. It makes me sad, but that's the way it is. In the first issue, it seemed as if Hurwitz was poking fun at the silliness of superheroes, but doing it subtly. I can deal with Moon Knight as satire, because it's an interesting take, especially as he's a bit, you know, out there. But as we got further into the arc, Hurwitz stopped doing that and this became much more of a straight-forward superhero comic. And I'm just not that interested in that anymore. I mean, Hurwitz brought Bushman back. So what? What happens to him? He ends up in an insane asylum. So what? Bushman's death was interesting because it pushed Moon Knight even further over the brink and set the stage for the previous series, which was excellent. Now he's back, and he's just another boring villain. Even in the mediocre 1990s series, he ruled a country, which added a bit of tension to his dealings with our hero. Now, he's dull. And we get another joke about Crawley getting hit on the head and changing his personality, back to what it was. This wasn't funny when it happened to Guy Gardner twenty years ago, and it's still not funny. I realize that I'm too close to the situation and I should be able to laugh at head injuries just like those uptight [insert ethnic group here] should be able to laugh at jokes at their expense, but it's not the fact that Crawley sustained a head injury and it changed his personality. It's that this book isn't a comedy, so tonally it was all wrong, and it's also that nobody seems to care. That's what bugged me when it happened to Guy - wouldn't someone think, "Hey, maybe we should check him out?" even if they liked his new personality more? Shouldn't Moon Knight have suggested that Crawley ought to get an MRI? It's too fraught with potential pitfalls to make it really funny, and Hurwitz didn't do(...)

If you thought that wearing fur was outdated - what with all those green movements and animal rights activists who put this cruel sense of fashion in its right place with the likes of Cruella de Vil - fashionista's say, think again.

Last month the fashion world went literally “wild” in New York, Paris and Milan during the unveiling of their fall collection. They had models strutting the catwalk in so much fur, it was scary enough to make animal rights activists and environmentalists jump out of their skins.

In this era of global warming and dwindling animal species, one would think that we humans would come to our senses and rethink our actions. Not so, it seems, as there is a whole other world out there - the fashion industry of the west - whose endorsement and use of fur and exotic animal products simply encourages the mass slaughter of many endangered species.

A dealer's bounty at the Quartzite annual show for art and crafts. Image by Flickr user cobalt123. Used under a Creative Commons License

To name a few, the Chiru or Tibetan antelope, whose underbelly fur is used to make “Shatoosh” the world's most expensive shawls, also known as “shawls of death”. It takes 3 dead antelopes, to make one shawl, so fine it can fit through a finger ring, and each one can cost between $5000 to $20,000 in the international market. Even babies, and mother's who have just delivered, are not spared.

According to WWF, the population of this species has declined by over 50 percent in the last 20 years and the Tibetan Plateau Project says that it was the fashion-driven demand for Shatoosh in the U.S that resulted in as many as 20,000 antelopes being slaughtered. It is alarming to know that the animal could become extinct in the next three years at this rate.

In a blog run by Uma and Hurree called Animal Rights India, they argue how farming of Chiru's - like Eider ducks in Iceland for eider (as an alternative), will not make a difference to the dwindling numbers.

But hello: Eider ducks are now a protected species, and farmers in iceland use a technique of collecting the down without harming the bird. And no, it is not possible to obtain the shahtoosh wool without killing the chiru.

They go on to say:

It's impossible to justify killing three beautiful wild animals every time you want to push a length of shawl through a ring, blah blah. And to farm them just to kill them for shawls?

Raja Basu, another blogger said:

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) – which controls the trade in endangered species products – has completely banned international trade in Tibetan antelope products (including Shahtoosh). It is illegal to import Shahtoosh into many countries, including the USA (ironically, Shahtoosh products are so popular in the US fashion industry). Unfortunately, despite such laws being in place, the Shahtoosh trade is going on in full swing. This is because it is not enough to have laws. There must also be a strong public protest across the board against every person who is by any means related to the Shahtoosh trade. There should be a widespread public sensitization campaign to educate the common people.

Bloggers in the west, however, were giving this some thought and debated:

Rachel Menashy wrote on her blog:

1. People eat rabbits at restaurants. These rabbits have been killed to provide ‘dinner' for people like us (I would like to point out that I have never eaten rabbit and by ‘us' I mean people who eat in restaurants). Why is it right that rabbits can feature on a menu in a restaurant but wrong to wear a fur coat? These rabbits inevitably are skinned in preparation to be cooked - what else should we do with the fur?

2. Is it more acceptable if the coat is Vintage? Why?

3. Is rabbit fur better/worse than Mink? Some argue that rabbit fur is not as bad because rabbits are not in danger of becoming extinct, unlike mink which is. Then again, people keep rabbits as pets so is it more cruel to wear rabbit than mink?

4. If a fur coat is hanging on a rail at a store and one customer refuses to buy it, somebody else will…

5. Should role models such as Kate Moss be seen wearing fur? Kate's style is copied by millions of girls (and women) - is she giving a bad impression?

To which Denise replied:

1. I would personally be more likely to wear rather than eat rabbit. The eating of it seems less acceptable somehow.
2.Vintage coats have been around for a while and should be recycled - which I'm definitely into.
3. Mink are feral creatures and even though their fur is more desirable, mink are not aiming for extinction, so why not wear it?
4. Agreed.
5. I don't mind fur being worn by anyone, and Kate Moss is just showing that this is acceptable. Too many people are on the “fur is bad” bandwagon. I bet most of these people eat meat and wear leather, so what's the difference?

But there is a difference as Barry Williams responded to a thread: Wearing Fur is not immoral on www.helium.com

If we go around killing cattle for leather, alligators for shoes, deer for chamois and see nothing morally wrong in that , why it is immoral to wear fur. What I see as immoral is the killing of animals simply for the fur alone. It really is such a waste, isn't it? Apart from the leather we obtain from cattle not much of the animal is wasted. Beef cattle supply our meat.

There are a multitude of arguments out there, but in the meantime the Humane Society for the United States, says that Canada will slaughter 388, 200 harp, grey and hooded seals this year, an increase of 50,000 from 2009. This, because of the overall demand for fur. The site of the Fur Council of Canada shows styles and celebrities modelling various furs in what it describes as a fashion trend of 2010.

And unfortunately in the U.S, and much of the west, where Global Fashion trends are set, laws don't seem to be enough to curb their greed. According to the International Fur Trade Federation Blog:

..the shift in the attitude towards fur can be attributed to “changes within the fur trade, such as the introduction of the new Origin Assured initiative, which guarantees that fur bearing the label comes from a country with animal welfare regulations”. This shows that the fur trade efforts and initiatives to challenge the outdated ideas of our industry have been noticed. We are a transparent and well-regulated industry that supports high animal welfare standards and we welcome the confidence and support shown by the fashion designers as well as the European Commission, who recently recognised the importance of the Origin Assured label.

Fashion designers who have been courted by Furriers say they are “confident using fur after examining the chain of production and finding it humane. But could this confidence be based on a lack of investigation or knowledge? According to an endangered species handbook :

The New York luxury department store, Bergdorf Goodman, advertised shahtoosh in 1995 as a “royal and rare” fabric, making incorrect statements about the wool having been obtained from the Mountain Ibex goat of Tibet which “sheds its down undercoat by scratching itself against low trees and bushes” from where it is gathered by local shepherds (Schaller 1998)

And if the clubbing of baby seals and mass slaughtering of Chiras, mothers and babies, is “humane” then its sad to think of what “humane” means anymore, and what we are willing to condone in the name of “Fashion”.

This week, Donna Simpson announced her plan to be the fattest woman in the world. But are 'gainers' who purposefully overeat risking their health or liberating themselves?

There isn't much that Emma Allen doesn't know about dieting. She once gave up solid food for four months. It didn't work out. She tried the weight-loss programme NutriSystem, but needless to say, they didn't help either. She was even one of the first generation of Atkins devotees who were required, among other things, to test their own urine.

Yet while she was publicly attempting to shed the pounds, secretly, Emma liked being overweight. As a child she had fantasies of taking a pill that would make her fatter and fatter until she eventually just floated away.

She never told anyone, but when she got pregnant 18 years ago, everything changed. "It was like a religious epiphany," Emma says. "I remember having this incredible feeling that I could think about what was good for me, instead of calories. The possibility of thinking about food differently was a big turning point."

Over the next 10 years, Emma immersed herself in the world of size politics. She paid closer attention to the size liberation movement: a political movement that started in the 1970s and made size an axis of oppression. Groups such as Fat Underground and Fat Activists Together (FAT) fought for anti-discrimination legislation on the grounds of weight. Then three years ago she finally took the decision to do something she had always wanted to do. "I'd had these fantasies all my life and had been restraining them all my life. There came a time when I wanted to explore," she says. "I wanted to know more about what they were about. How would I feel about actually gaining weight, would I enjoy it?" In spring 2007, she took the plunge and gained 33lb, to reach a total weight of 17.5st.

Emma is a 49-year-old professor at a university in the north-west of England. She is also a "gainer" – sometimes known as a "feedee" – who overeats in an active attempt to put on weight. Although there are no statistics on the number of people doing this, gaining is more common than one might think. "They are everybody: every age, every country, every size; I mean, tiny, skinny people wanting to gain . . . it really is a case of, look around you, somebody is having these fantasy scenarios," says Emma.

This week Donna Simpson, a 42-year-old mother from New Jersey who weighs 43st, made headlines by revealing that her ongoing weight gain was part of her plan to become the fattest woman on earth. Pictured with an enigmatic smile and a burger in her hand, the press coverage showed varying degrees of restraint in highlighting the £400-a-week food shops, fast-food binges and unrepentant bid to hit 73st.

Gaining is often linked to feederism; a topic that occasionally pops up as freakshow fodder in magazines, chat shows or documentaries such as Fat Girls and Feeders: a 2003 Channel 4 documentary. This focused on the relationships between men and the overweight, vulnerable women they chose to fatten to immobility and beyond. Yet many women actively seek to gain weight of their own volition.

There are many websites and groups dedicated to gaining but Fantasy Feeder (FF to its members) is perhaps the most comprehensive. There are forums, stories and photographs that show unbuttoned blouses revealing pot bellies, wobbly tummies and impressive mounds of flesh cascading over waistbands. Large bosoms escape the confines of their bras, and rolls ripple beneath over-stretched T-shirts. Before and after pictures show the usual weight transformation journey, but in reverse. The poses are proud, matter-of-fact and often sexual.

There are lots of men on the site, but it is the images of female gainers that catch the eye. In our present landscape of body blandness, they stand out as controversial, bold and visually political. Fat is still, most definitely, a feminist issue for some female gainers."I think being a feminist has affected my relationship to my body and gaining in several ways," says Emma. "I started, very young, bucking the trends of beauty norms, like bra-wearing and shaving and makeup. I always thought that these practices were ridiculous; so that made it easier to go against the norm. Gaining is very liberating."

Others say they like making a statement with their weight because it challenges our stereotypical notions of beauty. Some, like Helen Gibson, a 40-year-old nurse from the Midlands, gain weight simply to please themselves. "It is my right to be fat; nothing about making a point." Yet even she concedes putting on weight after her marriage made her feel free: "Those three months were the most liberating of my life; I could feel the fat going back on. My tummy returned to its former glory – fat, soft and flabby, just how it should be."

Helen's husband knows she is a gainer, as do friends, who are well aware of how much she "adores being fat"; understandably, though, being an NHS employee, she cannot come out of the gaining closet completely. At the latest estimate, 57% of women were classified as being overweight, including 25% who were obese. Overall, obesity and related health issues now account for 9% of the NHS budget. As a nurse, says Helen, she cannot be seen to publicly advocate being overweight. For others, anonymity is the result of not wanting anyone to know, which might explain the profusion of headless pictures on the FF website.

As any gainer will tell you, life outside the community can be harsh. There is still a huge amount of derision and discrimination towards the obese, so the decision to keep their gaining a secret isn't really a surprise. Lauren, a 20-year-old American gainer, says she does not want to offer more ammunition to people by explaining the predilection. "As a fat woman, I have experienced fat discrimination almost on a daily basis," she says. "It's usually not so glaring as an intolerant jerk screaming, 'Diet, fatty!' but smaller, more painful ways: going to parties and no one talks to me, being glared at while I'm eating in restaurants, the snickering in changing rooms in department stores."

For many non-gainers, the practice seems strange because of the health implications – both physical and psychological. Even organisations such as the US-based National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance (Naafa) dismiss gaining on health grounds. Obesity experts say that being overweight can cause everything from heart problems and diabetes to high blood pressure and gall stones. The message is that fat and health don't mix. But Emma disagrees. She says that it would be more useful for people to consider the multimillion-pound diet industry and its "95% failure rate", and feels overweight people are instead blamed for all the world's ills. "I think people worry about health because it's the easiest place to hang fat hatred. The data actually suggests that it has to do with activity, and not size. People respond badly to anything that asks them to reconfigure their presumptions and preconceptions."

Psychologically, gaining is still a grey area. While one would assume purposefully overeating to gain weight is as much of a disorder as not eating, Susan Ringwood, chief executive of Beating Eating Disorders (Beat), says that isn't the case. "It isn't an eating disorder as such, because there is no morbid fear of fatness, or weight gain. In its extreme forms it is more likely to be a personality disorder that is organised around submission/domination and sexual fantasies."

Another theory, says psychotherapist Phillip Hodson, is that intentional weight gain for women could well be an avoidance tactic: they don't want to attract the unwanted attention of men, so they transform themselves into something deemed conventionally unattractive. Most women don't feel this way, but it could be true for a small minority. "I have come across cases where it's quite obvious that women deliberately become large, or remain large, for psychological reasons," he says. "These include trying to avoid attention and becoming sexually invisible. Some women use food to become so different from the stereotype and to avoid all that is involved in fitting that stereotype: from wolf whistles to being propositioned."

It's a thought, but it doesn't appear to mean anything to Emma or Helen who define weight gain in very sexual terms. Although Donna Simpson's press coverage glossed over the sexual aspect of gaining, for them, more fat means more sex appeal; the extra flesh that everyone else is attempting to shed fuels their desires.

Emma goes one step further to say that gaining is an intrinsic part of her sexual identity. She cannot gain at the moment because of MS and diabetes, but still calls herself a gainer.

For most of us, weight gain seems simple: a bit too much butter on your toast and one chocolate biscuit too many can mean the difference between zipping up your jeans or not. But the question of how to gain weight is quite a hot topic on Fantasy Feeder. There are "Eat Yourself Fat" tailormade diet plans to increase your weight, and the advice ranges from eating ice cream before bed to homemade milkshakes and lots more pasta.

While some favour junk food overload, others, like Emma, say that it is the very antithesis of what gaining is about. "For me, it's all about a kind of hedonism; it's about opening the doors and allowing in fleshy pleasures, whether it's food itself, or what happens to my body, or what happens to somebody else's body. I need a big variety, because what's appealing to me are contrasts of textures and tastes and aromas and colours . . . if I have to eat a big bowl of pasta, I'm not interested. I mean, I love pasta, but I'm not going to eat four servings of it."

Instead Emma maintains a healthy eating regime. "I know no one will believe this, but I eat lots of wholegrains, fruit and veg; probably a bit too much cheese, and chocolate – although I now only eat sugarfree candies. Fish, if it's fresh . . . of course. My diet isn't primarily McDonald's and KFC; in fact, it almost never is." Likewise, Helen's love of gaining is as much about the act of eating as the result. "It's the pleasure of food that is the biggest pleasure for me; followed by each extra roll of fat that comes with the amount that I eat," she says. "I adore how I look naked – and I have been known to spend far too much time admiring myself in the mirror."

The presence of online gaining communities has provided people with a support system. Many say it is like coming home. "This is our small part of the world where we are surrounded by people who say, 'You're not weird; it's perfectly fine to feel as you do, in fact, we think you're great because of it,'" says Lauren. "To virtually everyone, it is a liberating, wonderful feeling." Emma says that she is in the privileged position of "coming out" because she has little to lose: her partner will not leave her because of it, and she is unlikely to lose her job. Colleagues don't know, but she doesn't think they will be too surprised, given her outspoken views on fat issues.

As a moderator on the FF site, she comes across a lot of people who on the one hand are desperate to be fat, on the other, desperate to be thin. "Real desires need attention, not curing," she says. "Lots of people in the community want to understand why they have these fantasies and desires, and there's sometimes an undertone of; 'so that I can cure them'. Not always, but there are definitely people who feel that way."

Some, she says, are just as unhappy with their bodies as those trying to lose weight. "Most people who tell you that they're happy with their bodies are lying. There are people who are like, 'Yeah, I'm cool: fat is beautiful – I'm having weight loss surgery . . . certainly, there are women on FF who are dieting."

Being a gainer isn't as straightforward or easy as it might seem, she says. "One comes into contact with messages about weight loss, health and beauty, about, I don't know, 20 times a day. Every time you open your email, a magazine, every time you turn the television on . . . so any attempt to do anything different, takes incredible strength and courage – and we all fall down," including Emma. "Of course it gets me down! I often feel like all men – and women – believe that stereotype is beautiful, even though I know better," she says. "I hammer myself over not being that stereotype, but only when I'm having a bad time and am already vulnerable because of other things going on around me."

If we look around us, says Phillip Hodson, it is clear that regardless of increased pressures to be thin, we are getting fatter as a nation. "The natural figure of the hunter-gatherer has returned: good childbearing hips and a good abdomen," he says. "But I would be worried about people who are saying they want to get fat."

But Helen is not worried. At 16st she still only considers herself to be pleasantly plump. She has a picture in her head, she says, of what she will look like when she is fat. "I am a long way off that, although I am on my way," she says. "With each mouthful, calorie and year, I am on my way to achieving it."

Some names have been changed

• Women
• Obesity
• Health & wellbeing

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Filed under: Blogging, Humor

I'm going to file this one under "social commentary", actually. Linkbait Generator is a pretty interesting tool I found over at the always-interesting MakeUseOf. It does one thing, and does it quite well: generate titles for blog posts that will probably get clicks.

For some reason, people seem to be obsessed with lists. If you go to Digg's "Popular" page, you are sure to find at least one list (right now I see "10 Ways Women turn Men Off"). But it's more than just lists; there seems to be one simple formula that gets clicks. I think that's kind of sad, really, but it's true. Linkbait Generator lets you capitalize on that formula by generating titles (and ideas) for posts that are likely to get clicks.

If you already have something you'd like to write a post about, you can feed it in a textbox (not shown in the screenshot above), and get ideas. I put in "jogging" and got "The top 7 scariest videos of all time about jogging". I am positive that if I'd write a post like that, it would get tons of clicks. Sad, yet very useful for bloggers who rely on clicks for a living (or extra income).
Share

8 reasons to love furries, and more, on Linkbait Generator originally appeared on Download Squad on Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments



Download Squad - Blog - MakeUseOf - Digg - Social commentary

After decades of selling tampons and "sanitary products" with ads containing nebulous, euphemistic images and language, Kotex launched a new product line, 'U by Kotex' and a 'Declaration of Real Talk Campaign' to encourage girls and women to speak about menstruation without embarrassment. Ironically, their ad was rejected by the major US television networks for mentioning the word 'vagina'. Here's the 'safe for the viewing public' version. / YT channel.
For every person who signs up at their website, Kotex will make a $1 donation to Girls For A Change.

As we’ve seen in the past, a music video can launch a band into the indie stratosphere when shared in the online space — YouTube even got hip to the trend with its Musician’s Wanted program. This state of affairs got us wondering: How do some of today’s up-and-coming indie acts use online music videos in their quest for stardom?

To answer said query, Mashable reached out to an array of SXSW’s finest — bands both on the the brink and over. Some gave us serious answers about how music videos fit into their artistic scheme, others — not so much (ahem, Das Racist).

Check out their answers below. We hope to add more as the musicians we contacted find their way to computers. Note: Some of these vids are slightly NSFW.

The Pains of Being Pure at Heart

What’s your favorite music video?: [Kip Berman, lead singer] I like the “Everything With You” video because it feels really natural and good. [Keyboard player and Buzzfeed editor] Peggy and her BFF Carlen are hanging out and doing fun stuff together. It fits nicely with the song, which is about hanging out with your BFF and doing fun stuff together. It doesn’t seem phony, yet it’s not careless or entirely haphazard, either.

How important are online music videos when it comes to publicizing a band? How have they functioned for you?: It’s easy to say videos don’t matter as much as the song itself or the live performance, and I’ll say that, too. A lot of bands I really like have sort of not-so-awesome music videos or videos that seem at odds with their actual aesthetic. Still, when a band has a really embarrassing video, it’s hard to shake that image from the song itself — so we try not to have overtly terrible videos.

But I don’t like when a really cool video becomes more important than the song — though some over-the-top stuff is great when paired with the right kind of band. I really love the new Yeasayer video for “O.N.E.,” MGMT’s “Time to Pretend” and Lady Gaga gets more and more fantastically epic with each release.

I guess from a “press” point of view it’s good to have the most sensational video possible (Buckcherry, “Crazy B*tch” — but again, that makes sense [for] Buckcherry). But we’ve never wanted to just gain views for views’ sake — we’d rather (a lot) less people see it, but actually appreciate it as a visual complement to the song, not in a pure spectacle way. We’re not all that “spectacular.”

We recently shot a video with a lot of “furries” (or more politely, “fur suiters”) in it… it’s pretty funny, I think. Maybe not as exciting as female prisons or post-apocalyptic lord of the green screen fantasies, but for us — it’s a start.

French Horn Rebellion

What’s your favorite music video?: [Robert Perlick-Molinari, lead singer] Definitely the “Broken Heart” video. That was our first collaboration with Dax and Barry from the Sniper Twins. It’s so simple — we’re dancing and Barry’s in the corner being weird. That doesn’t sound a lot different than most of the dance parties we throw, actually. But the entire video is one shot. And our dancing is actually choreographed. Felt like we were a boy band a little bit. Thankfully Barry was there with his ketchup and mustard bottles so no one would confuse us with The Backstreet Boys.

How important are online music videos when it comes to publicizing a band? How have they functioned for you?: Our music videos have been great for us. We have more views on YouTube of our songs than anywhere else our music is posted. They came from a really fun and creative place, so we’re really proud about the videos, and feel they are a good representation of how we wanted to start out a group.

The Happy Hollows

What’s your favorite music video?: [Chris Hernandez, drummer] Our newest video is just amazing and our friend Ben Hoste put so much work into it (he had to animate it by hand!); it’s called “Death to Vivek Kemp.”

How important are online music videos when it comes to publicizing a band? How have they functioned for you?: With YouTube and Vimeo and all these other online video outlets, it’s definitely been amazing to have such access to not only our fans, but to people who’ve never even heard of us before! So it’s been a really amazing experience for us to know and be involved with so many creative and supportive people who have helped us out with videos in the past. It’s really become a great collaborative effort to help each other stand out and make a name for ourselves!

Das Racist

What’s your favorite music video?:

[Victor]: Can’t pick a favorite, but our most recent one is Jordan Fish’s “Rainbow in the Dark” video. [Video above.]

[Himanshu]: Bob Weisz’s “Shorty Said” video.

How important are online music videos when it comes to publicizing a band? How have they functioned for you?:

[Victor]: The act of making online music videos provides handfuls of people with something to do with their leisure time (afforded to them by a system of global economic domination by the wealthy few) that feels slightly more productive than other more passive forms of entertainment like watching TV, going to the movies, purchasing a roller coaster ride, etc. Somewhat ironically, the end product is a form of passive entertainment.

[Dap]: Music videos allow men and women to feel sexy and fancy-free. Transcend.

[Himanshu]: Tweens love YouTube.

Bear in Heaven

What’s your favorite music video?: [Jon Philpot, frontman] We’ve made a few music videos and we like them, but it’s nice when a fan makes something… especially if it’s strange. Here’s a favorite. [Video above.]

How important are online music videos when it comes to publicizing a band? How have they functioned for you?: They’re important us. We make them on the road to entertain ourselves and our listeners. I guess we could just make songs… but videos are fun!

The Coathangers

That's the official title. Blame DC!

So, in order to celebrate John Constantine's first appearance (in Swamp Thing #37, which came out in 1985), DC has produced this original graphic novel, written by Jamie Delano, who was the writer on Hellblazer when it was launched in 1988, and drawn by Mark Simpson, who like Frank Quitely works under a pseudonym, in this case Jock. Clem Robins goes along for the ride as the letterer. It's 25 dollars, and given that it's Jock, it's a really handsome comic book.

This is a strange book, because it's tough to review. I mean, it's a John Constantine story, written by the man who had more to do with creating the John Constantine we know today than even his creator. So Delano knows how to write a John Constantine story, and there's nothing really more to it than that. So on the one hand, it's a pleasant enough comic. On the other hand, Delano doesn't really do much more with it. He does a nice thing by taking John out of his comfort zone (London) and sending him to Iraq, where his trenchcoat kind of clashes with the setting (especially when the soldiers make him wear a bulletproof vest), but overall, the story is a fairly standard story. John sees a woman on the tube wearing the full, black burqa, and he's intrigued by her. He follows her to the British Museum, and when a bomb goes off in their vicinity, he gets her out of there and back to her flat. There, she drugs him and sets him to take the fall for the bomb. It turns out it's a grand scheme by British Intelligence to get John to work for them. In Iraq, a prisoner has ... done some strange things. Weird, mystical things that drive men mad. They want John to help, and the only way they can do that, as they can't appeal to his patriotic nature, is to blackmail him. So John goes along, even though he tells them flat out that they can expect a "hefty bill" for it.

There's a lot more to the plot, as John figures out what the deal is with the prisoner, gets closer to the woman who drugged him (she's an agent for the Brits), and gets involved with the usual stuff - demons and the like. That's why the book isn't great - Delano relies too much on the standard supernatural stuff, and there's nothing here that's terribly fresh. Delano relies a bit too much on gambling, which isn't visually exciting and therefore robs the climax, as well drawn it is, of some tension, and he doesn't get too much into John's psychological issues, so there's no interest there. It's mostly a puzzle box of a book, and while there's nothing wrong with that, it's not that clever, so even as a mental exercise, it falls a bit short.

The best part of the book is John's relationship with Aseera, the woman, because Delano keeps peeling back layers of her personality, and John has to adjust to them and move on. She's an interesting character, full of contradictions and hidden depth, and it would have been nice to see more of their relationship. Really, the best thing about Constantine, usually, is how he relates to the women in his life, because he simply doesn't know how to do it right. So the parts with Aseera are very well done, and while the rest of the book isn't bad, it stands in stark contrast to the parts with Aseera.

Jock is good, as usual. Unlike a lot of artists who work in the "Vertigo" milieu, he seems much more comfortable with wide-open spaces than dark, enclosed spaces, so the scenes in the desert look tremendous, even though the rest of the book looks good as well. His unfortunate coloring choice for Hell - lots of red - robs that part of the book of some of its power, as the linework is drenched in the colors. I don't mind the red, but it's somewhat overwhelming. Perhaps that's the point, but it doesn't work too well. The rest of the book, however, is very nice.

Delano actually ties some plot points in with his original run on the book, but the nice thing is that if you've never read those issues, it doesn't really matter - it's more of a fun Easter egg for long-time fans of the character. It reminds us how long John has been around, carrying his own series (22 years and counting!). Delano knows John very well, and there's a lot about the book that works. For 25 bucks, it's a bit expensive, mainly because it doesn't do anything new with John. It's just a good, solid John Constantine book that looks great. I hoped for a bit more, but if you're just looking for a decent supernatural tale starring Mr. Constantine, you might want to give this a look.

Chantel Brunel, of ruling party, says licensed bordellos would protect women from violence – and polls say the public agree

France must bring back the brothel to protect its prostitutes from exploitation, trafficking and aggression in the street, an MP from Nicolas Sarkozy's rightwing party has said.

Chantal Brunel, a member of the ruling UMP, called on French authorities to study the possibility of legalising centres where sex workers could serve clients within a regulated and protected framework.

It was time, she said, to move away from attempts to stamp out prostitution and instead focus on making the sex trade more safe and transparent.

According to a CSA opinion poll, Brunel's stance is supported by a majority of French people: 59% of respondents supported the reopening of so-called maisons closes (literally, closed houses).

While that number has fallen slightly in recent years, the number opposed to the reintroduction of brothels has dropped from 26% seven years ago to just 10% now. Women remain markedly more against the idea than men.

In 2003, Sarkozy, then interior minister, made passive solicitation a crime punishable by a jail term or hefty fine. Brunel voted for the law at the time, but now says the crackdown failed. She is urging the government to look at other countries, such as the Netherlands and Switzerland, in which licensed brothels are legal.

"Prostitutes are finding themselves even more badly treated and damaged than before," she said. "We have to stop their exploitation."

Amid the shame of wartime "horizontal" Nazi collaboration and growing concern for women's rights, 1,400 maisons closes were shut in 1946 under what is known as the Marthe Richard law. Richard, a prostitute turned politician, fought to have brothels outlawed out of a desire to kill off the sex trade for good.

Accused by some activists of encouraging a return to the bad old days, Brunel, author of a new book entitled Putting an End to Violence against Women, insists she is not calling for the resurrection of brothels as they were once known, but envisages maisons ouvertes in which shelter and medical care would be provided.

"The idea is not to return to the situation before 1946," she said. She would like to see prostitutes working in groups "like in professional offices, like accountants". A boss figure or "landlord" to whom the workers would give part of their earnings would not be "essential", she added.

Françoise Gil, a sociologist and member of a women's rights association, agreed the distinction was crucial. She said she would be against the return of maisons closes, but would be in favour of reopening maisons ouvertes in which sex workers could gather without a boss or a pimp.

Other activists, however, are outraged at the proposals irrespective of caveats. "What kind of a society is it that shuts up its women for the pleasure of its men?" said Bruno Lemettre, president of the Mouvement du Nid anti-prostitution association. "Allowing such a thing in the country of human rights would be unacceptable," he said.

There are thought to be between 20,000 and 30,000 full-time sex workers – male and female – in France, 80% from abroad. A working group, of which Brunel is part, is due to meet next week to discuss the country's approach to prostitution.

• France
• Prostitution

Lizzy Daviesguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

She don't give a damn 'bout her bad reputation.

NATHANIEL ROGERS
...would live in the movie theater but for the poor internet reception. He blogs daily at the Film Experience.

YOUR FEATURE PRESENTATION
If you've seen any music biopic you know the plot of THE RUNAWAYS. Talented musicians struggle, rise to the top, then come undone from messy emotional lives involving everyone's favorite cocktail: sex, drugs and rock n roll. Usually there's a redemptive epilogue (in this case the band's MVP Joan Jett went on to great success in the 80s). But plot isn't everything. The hook of The Runaways then (the band) and now (the film) is that they were girls when girls weren't rock stars. And at least one of them (Cherie Currie played by Dakota Fanning) was underage. Both the band and Cherie herself used that in their favor crafting their biggest hit "Cherry Bomb".

Though the film gets repetitive (as all music bios do), it's largely successful, buoyed by committed eyebrow-raising performances from Dakota Fanning, exploiting herself as enthusiastically as Cherie did, Kristen Stewart, who thankfully drops some of her familiar performance tics to take on Joan Jett, and Michael Shannon as their cynical scene stealing Velvet Goldmine-like manager.  But the MVP in The Runaways is the woman behind the filthy 70s curtain. The visually gifted director Floria Sigismondi (who rose up in the music video world with work like "Beautiful People" for Marilyn Manson and "Fighter" for Christina Aguilera) makes sure that The Runaways is always intriguing to look at. There's great use of lighting, color and 70s detail and a refreshing candor about the band's sexuality that rescue this one from the doldrums of the familiar narrative.

Let's hope it's a huge success so that someone will finally get a GO-GOs biopic off the ground. It'd be like a sequel in its own way, only sunnier. 

Also Opening: Delicious Jude Law attempts to toughen up his screen persona in the action flick REPO MEN and Gerard Butler continues to carry the banner of regressive heteronormativity -- watch him make women swoon by treating them very badly (again!) in THE BOUNTY HUNTER

BONUS SCENES
What do Lady Gaga and Elle Driver have in common?

Find out AFTER THE JUMP...

Wildly Speculative Probably Unfounded Rumor Alert! Does Quentin Tarantino wants Lady Gaga for Kill Bill Vol. 3 ? Well, she does love to poison people in her videos. We love Gaga but when it comes to poisonous blonde amazons, Elle Driver will be difficult to top even if Tarantino does return to those DiVAs (Deadly Viper Assassination Squad) for a third volume. This new burst of chatter must have sprung from that Kill Bill "Pussy Wagon" homage in "Telephone".

The cast of The Smurfs movie, which will be a live action/animation hybrid (like Who Framed Roger Rabbit) keeps on expanding. And it sure is gay-friendly. Jayma Mays from Glee, Neil Patrick Harris, Alan Cumming, Katy Perry as Smurfette and Hank Azaria as Gargamel.

The debate about Precious Gabby Sidibe's future career prospects due to her weight rages on. I think she'll do just fine (especially if she goes the comedy route where plus sized bodies are more familiar). But I do think we need to clear up one thing:  Oprah did not discover her as some articles suggest. Winfrey signed on after the movie was already showing at festivals. That's the type of false assumption that will become truthy if it's publicized enough. When you rule the universe, you tend to get credit for everything.

• Museveni criticised for not signing bill into law
• Will new law impact on rural communities?

The Ugandan president, Yoweri Museveni, has been criticised for not signing a domestic violence bill into law.

Alice Alaso, the secretary general of the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), the main opposition party in Uganda, said the president had yet to give the bill assent, despite it being passed by parliament. It was given the green light by the cabinet more than a year ago. Alaso said this meant women's rights were continuing to be undermined in Uganda.

"We have passed several laws which the president has assented to, except for the domestic violence law, yet women have continued to be abused," she said.

During celebrations to mark International Women's Day in Katine last week, the state minister for youth and children's affairs, Jessica Alupo, said the delay was because the president was still studying the bill. Apparently sections of the bill have been opposed, although she did not elaborate on which sections.

The bill will afford legal protection to people in abusive relationships for the first time.

Currently, most women have no say in affairs relating to their home life, and many have lost their lives through domestic violence.

The bill is intended to protect sufferers of domestic violence, punish perpetrators and set guidelines for courts on the protection and compensation of abused women.

The bill defines a domestic relationship as "a family relationship, a relationship akin to a family relationship or one in a domestic setting that exists or existed between a victim and a perpetrator". These relationships include those between spouses, relatives and between householders and domestic workers.

According to figures from the Uganda Bureau of Statistics in 2007, 68% of married women aged 15 to 49 had experienced some form of violence inflicted by their spouse or intimate partner.

According to the 2006 Uganda Law Reform Commission study, domestic violence is most common in northern Uganda, where it was reported to have occurred in 78% of homes. Most women do not report cases of domestic violence to authorities and police rarely intervene or investigate.

Often women are reluctant to file a complaint for fear of reprisal, embarrassment, poverty, ignorance of the law or not knowing where to report abuse.

A report published on the Refworld website, citing figures from various sources, found that 60% of men and 70% of women in Uganda condone "wife beating" if, for example a woman burns food or refuses sex.

In rural areas like Katine, where the African Medical and Research Foundation (Amref) is implementing a development project funded by Guardian readers and Barclays, cases of domestic violence are often handled among the community, rather than by the police. In most cases this means women are returned home to their partners. Often parish leaders are initially brought in to settle disputes between couples. More serious cases are passed on to sub-county leaders or the district gender officer, who may encourage police involvement.

Cases of domestic violence have hindered women's emancipation in Katine, said Christine Agwero, a women's representative on the Katine sub-county council. Often women do not attend meetings or take up leadership positions because they are threatened by their husbands, she said.

Speaking at International Women's Day, Agwero asked the government to protect women and provide them opportunities to empower themselves economically.

At the mid-term workshop held in Soroti last year to discuss progress in Katine, Agwero voiced her concerns about the lack of women in attendance and the threat of violence some face when they want to get involved.

"Seriously, we need to bring women on board to participate in committees. It needs both parties... we need to move together to bring development," she said.

She explained that a major obstacle to women taking a more active role was lack of education, which affected their confidence. "If not well educated, women fear answering questions [in meetings]."

She added: "Women are busy, but not so busy. Some men don't feel women should be at the meetings because they will have to take care of children if women go."

The workshop heard from other attendees that women had been beaten up by their husbands for attending village savings and loans associations, which have had a positive impact on women's lives in the sub-county, given them a means to save and invest money.

Alaso said that the longer the delay in implementing the law, the worse the situation will get for women in rural communities.

Once the law is passed, it will be up to local government officials to ensure it is interpreted correctly in their communities and that men and women know their rights.

• Women
• Governance
• Politics and history
• News
• Uganda

Joseph MalingaLiz Fordguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

The U.S. Postal Service temporarily blocked the mailing of a bulk newsletter from anti-gay group Family Research Institute advocating against the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, saying the content was "obscene" and "incited force-able resistance against the government," KKTV reports:

"Local postal officials sent the newsletter to Washington for review. Wednesday morning, the United States Postal Service Pricing and Classifications board overruled the local interpretation that the newsletter violated guidelines for a non-profit bulk mailing rate. FRI will now be allowed to mail out their newsletter at a non-profit rate, which is 3 cents less than the standard mailing rate."

Read the content of the mailing (I think it's obscene too, but not for any reasons that would get it banned from mailing), AFTER THE JUMP...

****CONTENT OF MAILING FROM ANTI-GAY FAMILY RESEARCH INSTITUTE****

Dear Supporter,

Well, a Democrat is President, and gays-in-the-military is up again for debate! This month’s newsletter deals with this issue, as do the excerpts of the following Feb. 8 letter from a Captain to Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

“This letter is in response to your shocking statement last week that you advocate homosexuals openly serving in the military services. I seriously question the wisdom of your position... I am a retired Navy Captain... and... in my more than 31 years of active duty, I commanded two ships, served as Executive Officer on two ships, commanded Coastal Squadron ONE (Swift Boats) in Vietnam, and was Chief Staff Officer on an Amphibious Squadron.... I received a Juris Doctorate from the Hastings College of Law. Like you, I encountered homosexuals throughout my Navy career and in civilian life. Unlike you, I do not find they are more deserving than non-homosexuals or that they constitute a viable or necessary body of troops for the defense of our country.

“My experience is Naval... the best analogy to a ship at sea is a prison.... During my enlisted service, homosexuals seemed to be a clumsy lot. They had a tendency to repeatedly fall headfirst down an engine room ladder. Some were even known to trip on deck and “fall” overboard. The crew had a way of policing themselves to eliminate homosexual advances.... It has been my experience that if sexual favors are available aboard ship, some enterprising sailor, petty officer, or officer will find a way to take advantage of the offer. There is usually a senior/junior relationship in such exchanges and the senior partner will reward the junior with preferential treatment, such as duty assignments, watches, leave, liberty, and advancement. Such preferential treatment can’t be hidden from other crewmembers and tends to destroy the chain of command, discipline and morale. If a Chief Petty Officer, for example, is having sexual relations with a non-rated sailor, it will have an adverse impact on those petty officers between the two in the chain of command.... That sexual misconduct in the Navy exists to this day is obvious. I recall that a lesbian ring was discovered on the USS NORTON SOUND back in the late 60’s or early 70’s. At about the same time my wife, now a retired Navy Commander,... was aware of many cases of homosexuality involving the WAVES assigned to the Barracks. I also recall that one of the cruisers returning from the First Gulf War reported 40% of the female crewmembers were pregnant after a six-month deployment.

“In all my years of service, I never encountered a Commanding Officer who ‘asked’ a subordinate if he was a homosexual.... In regard to heterosexual behavior, the UCMJ also proscribes common law marriage under the heading of Unlawful Cohabitation (with or without evidence of sexual intercourse). It sanctions adultery and prostitution (for both the prostitute and the patron). In the case of an officer, merely “consorting with a notorious prostitute” constitutes an offense, again even without evidence of sexual intercourse. The problem is that common law marriage is legal in 11 states and the District of Columbia. I don’t believe that adultery is a criminal offense in any state today. And in my home state of Nevada, even prostitution is legal. I don’t recall you asking Congress to legalize heterosexual sodomy, adultery, prostitution, or common law marriage. There are many punitive articles in the UCMJ that have no relationship to the satisfactory performance of military duties, yet you single out homosexuals for preferred treatment. Again, I must ask ‘why?’

“The argument I hear most often expounded by the homophiles is that the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy deprives the military of outstanding young men and women who want nothing more than to defend their country and that they have the ability to operate a radar, or a gas turbine, or a gun as well as a heterosexual. That can’t be true.... But, even if it were true, are homosexuals really worth the administrative problems they would create by their mere existence? The Navy, today, does not willingly accept GED holders... Minor criminal records are a bar to enlistment. Visible tattoos and piercings are not permitted. Are these aberrations more damning than sodomy? Is it your contention that cohabitors, adulterers, prostitutes, young men and women with tattoos, those with only GEDs, or the obese cannot serve as well as homosexuals? If so, what is your empirical evidence to support such an argument? If we get to pick and choose which laws we uphold, which laws are next on the line to ignore? Carnal Knowledge? I would think a service man or woman who has sex with a minor (Carnal Knowledge) could perform military duties as well, if not better, than a homosexual. At least we don’t have children in combat, or in the military at large, for them to accost....

“Have you considered the likelihood that some of the homosexuals will request sex change procedures... Do you also advocate same-sex marriage or ‘partnerships?’ Will the homosexual’s partner be entitled to dependents’ benefits, including health care, BAQ, military base access, and commissary and exchange privileges? Will they be entitled to military housing? Would they be entitled to sex change procedures at government expense? “While serving as Executive Officer on USS CATAMOUNT (LSD-17) in 1967, one of the Radarmen was arrested by local police. While inventorying his personal effects a photograph of the sailor performing fellatio on another male was discovered. The police turned the photo over to the Shore Patrol, who forwarded it to me. During an investigation it was determined that five of the ship’s Radarmen were involved in a male prostitution ring. They declared that while in Radarman Class ‘A’ School at Treasure Island, their instructors convinced them that they could augment their military pay by providing homosexual services to gays in San Francisco. They took advantage of the opportunity presented and continued such activity in San Diego. CATAMOUNT sailed absent several Radarmen and the Class ‘A’ School lost several instructors. Are these otherwise competent Radarmen the type of sailors you want on your ships? I hope not!

Lawrence R. Jefferis, Captain, U. S. Navy (Ret.), Las Vegas, NV 89117

Last Thursday I posted that openly lesbian Rev. Mary Glasspool had received the necessary amount of consents for final confirmation as an Episcopal bishop.

She has been confirmed, in Los Angeles:

"Mary Glasspool is the first openly gay bishop approved since 2003, when the election of a gay man as bishop of New Hampshire caused such an uproar that the U.S. church, under pressure from other members of the global Anglican Communion, imposed a moratorium on such elevations. The ban was lifted last year. Glasspool is also one of the first two women to be elected as bishops in the 114-year history of the Los Angeles diocese. The other, Diane M. Jardine Bruce, won final approval March 8. 'I'm overjoyed,' Glasspool said in a phone interview from Baltimore, where she is canon, or senior assistant, to the bishop of Maryland. 'It's time to celebrate. . . . I know there are people who might not be overjoyed by this, and I am committed to reaching out with my own hand and my own heart to people who might not feel the same as I do.'"

Glasspool will be ordained and consecrated at a ceremony on May 15.

This article has been published at RLSLOG.net - visit our site for full content.

FQM & DIMENSION released the season premiere of Comedy Central’s “South Park”. They are doing Tiger Woods tonight

EP 14.1 Sexual Healing

The nation’s top scientists come together to put a stop to the recent phenomenon of rich, successful men who suddenly want to have sex with many, many women. After extensive testing, some of the fourth grade boys in South Park Elementary are diagnosed as sex addicts.

Links: HOMEPAGE – TV.com

South.Park.S14E01.Sexual.Healing.HDTV.XviD-FQM
XviD | MP3 VBR | 175MB
NFO – NTi – SiNGLE FiLE DOWNLOAD

South.Park.S14E01.720p.HDTV.X264-DIMENSION
x264 | AC3 CBR | 550MB
NFO – NTi – SiNGLE FiLE DOWNLOAD

more at RLSLOG.net

The open source washing machine project aims to rethink the way we wash clothes around the world, in accordance with economical, sociological, cultural and environemental aspects. Most of the people in this planet, mostly women, wash clothes by hand in harsh conditions related to poverty, lack of sanitation, water or energy.

The OSWash project seeks to develop different technologies for different climates and societal contexts. For instance, one country might have plentiful fresh water but less sunlight, whereas another environment might put water recycling at the top of the list of needs. Part of the problem is that many solutions that are cheap by our standards (for instance, using a Freeduino-based controller) still make the system too expensive for areas that could truly use a DIY washing machine. [via openMaterials]

Read more | Permalink | Comments | Read more articles in Open source hardware | Digg this!

Let's not kid ourselves, Marisa Miller's body is what by all women should be judged. The only way it could be more perfect is if her stomach could stream Netflix while she's riding me. [[ This is a content summary only. Visit IDontLikeYouInThatWay.com for full links, other content, and more! ]]

CA Cancer J Clin, Vol. 59, No. 4. (27 May 2009), pp. caac.20006-249.

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the number of new cancer cases and deaths expected in the United States in the current year and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival based on incidence data from the National Cancer Institute, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries and mortality data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Incidence and death rates are standardized by age to the 2000 United States standard million population. A total of 1,479,350 new cancer cases and 562,340 deaths from cancer are projected to occur in the United States in 2009. Overall cancer incidence rates decreased in the most recent time period in both men (1.8% per year from 2001 to 2005) and women (0.6% per year from 1998 to 2005), largely because of decreases in the three major cancer sites in men (lung, prostate, and colon and rectum [colorectum]) and in two major cancer sites in women (breast and colorectum). Overall cancer death rates decreased in men by 19.2% between 1990 and 2005, with decreases in lung (37%), prostate (24%), and colorectal (17%) cancer rates accounting for nearly 80% of the total decrease. Among women, overall cancer death rates between 1991 and 2005 decreased by 11.4%, with decreases in breast (37%) and colorectal (24%) cancer rates accounting for 60% of the total decrease. The reduction in the overall cancer death rates has resulted in the avoidance of about 650,000 deaths from cancer over the 15-year period. This report also examines cancer incidence, mortality, and survival by site, sex, race/ethnicity, education, geographic area, and calendar year. Although progress has been made in reducing incidence and mortality rates and improving survival, cancer still accounts for more deaths than heart disease in persons younger than 85 years of age. Further progress can be accelerated by applying existing cancer control knowledge across all segments of the population and by supporting new discoveries in cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment. CA Cancer J Clin 2009. (C) 2009 American Cancer Society, Inc. 10.3322/caac.20006
Ahmedin Jemal, Rebecca Siegel, Elizabeth Ward, Yongping Hao, Jiaquan Xu, Michael Thun

A WorldNetDaily article distorted a passage from a book by Rev. Jim Wallis to falsely claim that he "previously labeled the U.S. 'the great captor and destroyer of human life.' " In fact, Wallis, a member of President Obama's faith council, referred to "the powers of the world" that "demand unconditional allegiance and obedience" when he wrote that, for the Christian community, "the modern state is the great power, the great seducer, the great captor and destroyer of human life."

WND distortion: Wallis "labeled the U.S. 'the great captor and destroyer of human life' "

WND: "Obama's new controversial pastor" has "labeled the U.S. 'the great captor and destroyer of human life.' " A March 15 article on WorldNetDaily by Aaron Klein was headlined, "Not again! Meet Obama's new controversial pastor: Champion of communism, socialism called U.S. 'destroyer of human life.' " The article reported, "Rev. Jim Wallis, a member of President Obama's 'faith council' who is described as a spiritual adviser to the president, is a socialist activist who has championed communist causes and previously labeled the U.S. 'the great captor and destroyer of human life.' " Klein appeared on the March 16 edition of Radio America's The G. Gordon Liddy Show, where he asserted of Wallis, "Jeremiah Wright is back in a new form." Klein further stated, " I started looking into him earlier this week and I found out that Wallis is a socialist activist who openly champions communist causes, and he's labeled the United States, quote, 'the great captor and great destroyer of human life.' "

Wallis did not label the U.S. "the great captor and destroyer of human life"

Wallis actually wrote that "the modern state" -- not the U.S. -- "is the great power, the great seducer, the great captor and destroyer of human life." Contrary to WorldNetDaily's distortion of his book, Wallis did not label the United States "the great captor and destroyer of human life." From Pages 72-73 of Wallis' 1976 book Agenda for Biblical People:

When the powers of the world demand unconditional allegiance and obedience that assumes human beings should assign them ultimate value, then the worship of God and the assigning of ultimate value of God's kingdom becomes a radical act, a political threat. In fact, worship is where the vitality of the life of the Christian community is most clearly manifest and where the claims and purposes of the idolatrous powers are most clearly threatened. This is contrary to the political "use" and therefore abuse of worship which is so common to ideological religion. Rather, it is the simple, joyous, purely offered worship and praise of God who alone is the source, author, and giver of life that is the single greatest threat to the powers which worship and serve death. Biblically understood, the worship of God is to be the definition of our lives. Worship is not to be conceived as mere ritual and ceremony apart from ethics, politics, and other parts of life. Instead, worship and praise become the style of life for the gathered community living in faithful obedience to the Word of God in the midst of the blasphemy of the fallen powers [emphasis in original].

The Christian community must always be asking which of the powers are now most aggressively seeking to bring human life under their control. Discernment is the spiritual gift employed to understand where and how a particular power is on the offensive in the effort to impose conformity and slavery upon the lives of men and women. For us, the modern state is the great power, the great seducer, the great captor and destroyer of human life, the great master of humanity and history in its totalitarian claims and designs. The state as a power or principality has subsumed and subordinated even other powers of nation, tradition, racial and ethnic cultures, common and constitutional law, local community institutions and groupings, the media, information, education, religion, the professions, movements and causes, the economic system -- other principalities which would rival and compete with the state and, perhaps, inadvertently limit its power in benefit of human life.

Right-wing witch hunt turns to Wallis

WND paints Wallis as a "controversial" figure who is connected to "radicals." As Media Matters for America noted, the right-wing witch hunt against Obama's advisers has turned to Wallis, a member of the president's faith council who has worked with numerous conservative and mainstream religious leaders. The WorldNetDaily article uses a series of falsehoods and distortions to portray Wallis as "Obama's new controversial pastor" and a "champion of communism" whose magazine "has published a slew of radicals."

Because Jesse James banged this without a condom. I'm not saying all women with tattoos who fuck married man have VD, but I'm also not saying "You just got Blind Sided!" hasn't become the proper medical term for genital... ...read full story

It's no secret that Marisa Miller is one of the hottest women on the entire planet, but every once in a while you might need a little reminder. Thankfully, we have Victoria's Secret around to point out this fact...

There are really only two reasons to set a goal: instrumental reasons and experiential reasons.

When you set a goal for instrumental reasons, it is because the object of the goal will improve your happiness, lifestyle or contribute to some larger purpose.

For example, if you’re incredibly overweight, changing your lifestyle may add several years to your life. And if you see living as a good thing, as I do, that gives pretty strong instrumental reasons to set the goal.

The alternative is to set a goal for experiential reasons. This is where the process of setting and striving towards a goal will improve your happiness, lifestyle or contribute to some larger purpose.

For example, if you’re already in decent shape, increasing your benchpress won’t significantly change your happiness. However, you may enjoy the training, having the additional challenge makes life more exciting and the determination may make you a better person. Benchpressing 200lbs has few instrumental reasons for setting the goal, but may have strong experiential reasons.

Don’t Confuse Instrumental with Experiential Reasons!

Few goals are divided neatly like the examples above. Some you’ll pursue for a mix of experiential and instrumental reasons.

Take this business I’m building, for example. For instrumental reasons I have the possibility to work full-time for myself, not needing a job, which if my past experiences are to be trusted, would increase my happiness.

However, it also has strong experiential reasons. I enjoy running this business, and it constantly challenges me and forces me to improve myself. Even if I never reached my ultimate goal of a full-time income, the experience itself would have given many benefits, both in the moment and for the future.

The temptation in cases like this is to assume the two reasons are the same. After all, we don’t chase goals saying that we’re pursuing it for 30% instrumental reasons and 70% for experiential reasons. We simply feel the motivation to chase. Where that motivation comes from is often disguised.

The danger, is that by confounding the two reasons, you may make yourself miserable. Instead of reaping the benefits of instrumental goals, or even the process of experiential ones, you get neither.

Most Seemingly Instrumental Goals Aren’t

In a recent TEDTalk, Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman, explains that money does not buy happiness:

We looked at how feelings vary with income, and it turns out that, below an income of 60,000 dollars a year, for Americans, … people are unhappy, and they get progressively unhappier the poorer they get.

Above that, we get an absolutely flat line. I mean I’ve rarely seen lines so flat. Clearly, what is happening is money does not buy you experiential happiness.

So, unless you’re in poverty, or your income goal is necessary in some other goal (like switching to a business full-time), most income goals are not instrumental.

I found it interesting, after reading Neil Strauss’s cult-hit, The Game, that many of the people he documented became no happier after learning to pick up women. In fact, many of them became disillusioned and depressed.

Kahneman’s talk also made me wonder how many people want to travel obsessively because they enjoy it, or because the ability to travel obsessively has become a luxury status-symbol, like a Rolex or a Lexus?

Do we deceive ourselves into claiming to pursue goals for instrumental reasons (like money or sex) when their realization doesn’t improve our life? Do we deceive ourselves equally when pursuing goals for experiential reasons (like travel) which may have deeper instrumental motivations we wouldn’t want to accept?

Untangling the Web of Wants

Naive goal-setting tells people to go after what they want. And 80% of the time, I think this is good advice. Goal-setting often has both experiential and instrumental benefits. Achieving goals often improves your life, and even when it doesn’t, the mere act of striving towards goals will usually make you a better person.

My question is what happens in the other 20%?

I believe the only way to avoid the trap is to spend more time untangling the instrumental from the experiential reasons in our daily life. If we at least know why we think we’re pursuing a goal, we can correct for errors.

A Personal Example of Untangling

Over the last several months, I’ve done some effort to untangle my motivations in physical fitness.

I’m not a world-class athlete, but in most respects, I’m in good physical shape. I’m 5′11″, 160 lbs, I can easily run 10 km and I can do ten one-arm pushups in a row. I’m at a point where almost every fitness goal I set can’t really be justified on instrumental reasons.

However, because I’ve never met someone who has ever said to themselves, “done!” with an area of their life, I sometimes get new ideas for goals with my physical health. Maybe I could put on another 10-15lbs of muscle, or train to complete a one-arm chin up.

From an experiential perspective, these goals are still valid. The lesson here is that I make sure I catch myself whenever I start using instrumental reasons to justify setting the goal. Whenever I say to myself that adding muscle would make me more attractive, it would increase my energy levels or it would make me happier, I need to stop myself.

Because, it doesn’t take a lot of reasoning to realize those reasons aren’t particularly compelling. If I do decide to pursue one of these goals, it should be for the benefits associated with striving itself, such as enjoying the challenge or increasing my self-discipline.

Separate Your Motivations Before Starting a Project

Would you pursue a goal differently if you knew winning wouldn’t change your long-term happiness?

I believe the answer is yes.

That doesn’t mean the goal isn’t worth pursuing at all. You may become happier in the process of attaining the goal, even if the final step adds nothing to that process.

But it does mean you should be aware of the different reasons for pursuing a goal. Before starting a project, write down all the motivations you have for starting. Split those into two sections: the benefits of striving for the goal, and the benefits from achieving the results themselves.

Then you can ask yourself whether the reasons are valid, and maybe become a bit wiser about whether accomplishing the goal will actually improve your life.

The 2010 Women In Games Conference has been cancelled, organisers have announced.

Diversity was set to be the theme of the seventh WIG Conference, which had been due to take place at the UK's University of Bradford and Bradford College on March 25 and 26.

“We are very sorry to announce that this year’s Women in Games Conference has been cancelled due to low delegate numbers,” read an official statement.

read more

A Japanese group has opened a new reflexology salon designed to relieve customers of stress with the help of young women scantily clad in police uniforms.