Allusion Two: XKCD

Take a moment and revel in the fact that this allusion is host to another allusion. It’s like a mirror reflecting a mirror.

Okay, now picture this: you are standing on a stone wall, blocked from the edge of the mountain by massive ramparts that seem both as sturdy as the earth and shockingly sparse as a barrier between you and the open air that whips around your face and hair. You can see for miles in every direction. Look one way and forested land brings you to the beginning of the ocean, which eventually, in something resembling a horizon, falls off into the sky. Look the other way and you see hills and forests and towns sprawling out as far as your eye can manage. Look down and you see a lush flowering of trees dotted with chateaux, monasteries, and palaces. (Just don’t look behind you, or the German tourist doing the can-can over the edge might change the source of your breathlessness from exhilaration to fear.)

The castle was built into the mountain nearly a thousand years ago by the Moors. Unlike the kings who used this place as an artistic royal hang-out in the 1800s, the builders of the castle didn’t want the beauty of the view. They could see potential enemies approaching from any and all directions. As romantic as an “ancient castle on top of a windswept mountain” sounds, the structure was built to be the opposite of romantic: a purely utilitarian defensive endeavor. Both the Captain and I have visions of people plummeting to their deaths -- including the German can-can girl. We are shocked and delighted by the lack of ropes, rails, and warnings.

When we visited one of the palaces of the village -- not one of those dotting the forest below us, but one facing us on an opposing hilltop -- we found a similar child-like delight. As fascinating as it was to wander through the ornate rooms of the palace and imagine myself living in the lady-in-waiting’s chamber (less rich, but more charming than the queen’s), I loved best the climbing into (decorative) turrets and creeping along the walkways that hug the outside of the palace, dropping off into the brush clinging to the mountainside.

We are also delighted, in an unromantic way, by the wind turbines that speckle the tops of many of the hills we can see. We took a train ride out to the castle village of Sintra, as well as a few bus trips across Portugal, and we found the wind turbines everywhere. Not enough that they feel ubiquitous or overwhelming, but enough that they are part of the landscape -- surprisingly modern in a country that is still very much in touch with the beauty of its history.

On each bus trip we took -- a shorter one to and from Fatima and a longer one to and from Porto -- I watch the wind turbines, expecting them to come alive. I wanted to bring both -- the wind turbines and the bus -- back to the US. The public transportation, inter and intra-city, tended to be both affordable and convenient. We took trains, buses, boats, and cabs for all ten days and never once wished for a rental car. In fact, the driving patterns were difficult to follow. And the parking patterns even more so. More than once, we were almost hit by a parking car whose driver decided to jump his car onto the sidewalk and back up until it seemed like a good patch of sidewalk on which to leave his car.

Allusion One: The Arm of the Starfish

Madeline L’Engle is one of my favorite authors. Besides the fact that I enjoy her writing and stories, she has a talent for setting her worlds just next to ours -- everything is exactly the same and exactly right, except that she adds in a tad of history or geography that is not quite real. Her characters all inhabit this world with six degrees of separation, giving it a realistic texture.  This particular novel is set in Portugal and has a chase scene that winds through the streets, museums, and monasteries of Lisbon. So, of course, when I found myself running through the streets, museums, and monasteries of Lisbon, I thought of Adam and Joshua.

Two things from the book stuck out in my memory. First, that Portuguese is a difficult language to learn, even if you know Spanish. It was a true God-send the amount of English that had permeated the culture in Portugal. Most young people we encountered spoke English at least passibly, some very well. We learned please and thank you and a very few other words before reaching Portugal, but they have a whole bunch of sounds that don’t resemble English or Spanish. So I ended up being able to read it enough to get by, to understand it enough to feel like I almost should be able to know something, and to speak it enough to look like a fool.

One of my favorite linguistic encounters came with a nun in Fatima. We wanted to go on a tour of the gift exhibition (they display votive gifts that people have left for Our Lady of Fatima). We asked the nun at the desk, “Fala ingles?” She did not, but offered us French, Italian, and Spanish as alternatives to Portuguese. So I got the information for the tour in Spanish, which was clearly not a native tongue for either of us.

My next favorite linguistic encounter was with a taxi driver who spoke no English. He was clearly a boisterous and friendly man, however. The Captain pointed to a map to show where we wanted to go -- “Oh, monasterio -- Geronimos!” He then began a conversation about how cold it was outside. It contained more laughter than substantial communication. When we approached our destination, he pointed out to us where we wanted to eat pastries and coffee as well as how to get to another historical site nearby -- all with hand gestures, sound effects, and our half-dozen words of Portuguese.

The second aspect of Portugal that stuck out to me from L’Engle’s book was the warm, light, airy feel of the country. This feeling was partly true. The warm is a thing. We only had temperatures in the mid-50s, but a few people we met assured us that this was cold -- January weather. Which means that plants stay alive because there is little, if any, frost. Flowers were still bravely in bloom, oranges were ripening on trees, and markets had planters of herbs springing into the walkways. The wind whipped away whatever heat might make it out of our (wind-proof) jackets, but the sun reassured us that it was not as cold as we thought.

As for the lightness and the airiness… we were in cities and they felt like cities -- just with narrower roads (and sidewalks) than we were used to. And many of the roads and sidewalks were limestone cobbles -- prettier than pavement at home, but worse on ankles that bricks. I saw many many women braving them in high heels, which seemed to be a very particular talent. In both Lisbon and Porto (the two cities we got to know), we embarked on lengthy walking tours across this sidewalk and saw houses in an array of light colors. Many sported the colored tile that is a hallmark of Portuguese architecture. Almost all were roofed in red clay tiles. So while the city seemed city-ish when walking through it, when looked at from above or afar, almost every Portuguese town or city we passed looked light and airy.

I want to reread The Arm of the Starfish and see which monastery hosts the end of the chase scene. We visited one monastery in Lisbon and looked at one from afar. The monastery was a huge, ancient stone building that held ornate religious art and the earthly remains of long-gone monarchs. The tabernacle was large enough that Jesus’ earthly form could have been inside it, holding His cross -- and it still would have looked too big to do the job. But I’ll get into more details about monarchs and monasteries in another allusion. (Teaser: the First Amendment.)

Portugal in Allusions

It has recently come to my attention that I have been silent longer than I guaranteed in my last post.  To honor my promise to be back for Advent, I am making it for the... last day of Advent (more or less).  I have been writing a series of posts so that I can stick them up one at a time and start stockpiling some more posts and ideas for posts.  And here is your beginning: 


As you know, I recently got married.  And, though work took me out of town right away, the Captain* and I did get to embark on an adventure of a honeymoon, just a little delayed.  We flew across the ocean to a little country called Portugal to visit a part of Europe that he had not yet seen.  I had not yet seen any of Europe -- it was my first time using my brand-new passport.

I could spend the next few weeks going on and on about Portugal, but one of my goals is not to bored my 3.14 loyal readers.  So instead, I will have a few posts chronicling our adventures in a series of allusions -- because we understand everything new in terms of what we know.  If you ask me in real life, I will tell you stories and show you pictures… once they make it off my camera and the Captain’s phone.



*Yes, he has been pseudonymless up until this point.  He is remarkably difficult to name.  I hope this makes you think of the Sound of Music.  When I told our DJs that we wanted to be introduced as Captain and Mrs. von Trapp, one of them took notes.  The other one got it and laughed.  Like Captain von Trapp, he can sing and dance.  Unlike Captain von Trapp, he has no children.  Like Mrs. von Trapp, I have an affinity for nuns.  Unlike Mrs. von Trapp, I cannot sing or dance.

Honey-Mooning

Here's the problem with sporadic blogs -- people don't read them.

Since that happens organically, it's likely that my 3.5 loyal followers have already given up on me.  If, however, there is still one hanger-on, I want that hanger-on to know that the last three weeks and the next three weeks are my official honey-mooning (yes, I just got married!) and getting life settled anew period.  I will be back in time to catch most of the Advent season.

Dating Advice for Men and Women

I'm going to take a slight risk with this post.  Recently, this blog about dating advice for men has been floating around Facebook.  And, men, read it.  Women, go ahead and read it too.  It is good dating advice for men.  But I want to offer a counterpoint to women, because, quite frankly, we don't always do things better than men do. So, with further ado,

Five Notes on Dating for the Ladies

1) Be clear.

If men need to be intentional, so do women. We often can get away with playing games, with blowing hot and cold, with sending mixed signals and misleading hints.  If we don't want guys equivocating, playing that pseudo-dating game, or defaulting into relationships, rather than straight-up asking us out, we've got to start straight-up answering.  Be honest with the men in your life, especially when they are being honest and vulnerable with you.

Part of the ability to be clear and honest comes from a deep self-knowledge.  How can you let someone else know what you want from a relationship, what you need in life, where you see yourself going through the year, unless you know can answer these questions?  How can you tell if someone shares your values and priorities, unless you can identify them for yourself?  The men I have seen be most hurt by women are wounded by women who don't know their own desires well enough.  For example, more than one man in my life has been told by a woman, "I don't want to date; I want to court/be courted" -- yet she could not tell him what she mean by "courtship."

We don't need to have it all figured out -- we none of us have it all figured out -- but we need enough to recognize ourselves in an internal mirror and communicate some of that image, so to speak.

2) Be rational.

That being said... be honest, but don't overdo the analysis.  I have two subpoints under this point 2).

a) Don't overtalk/overdiscuss it.  Yes, it is good to know where your relationship stands.  Sometimes this will require a DTR, depending on how the relationship started/progressed. But you don't need a DTR every day or every week, or even every month.  Let things grow and progress; let the relationship take its course.  You may need to reevaluate after a few months if it is not clear to you how things are progressing.  That's okay -- and it's okay to bring it up if you have a strong reason to think something has changed.  It just should not be an every single day discussion.

b) Don't overanalyze.  Some of the best advice on communication between the genders is simple arithmetic.  Men, when a lady speaks, take what you think she means, and multiply it by 3.  Ladies, when a man speaks, take what you think he means and divide it by 3.  Most things he says/does are not veiled hints, secret messages, or hidden meanings.  When he says he doesn't want to hang out tonight because his football team is playing and he wants to watch it with the boys, that does not mean he doesn't like you.  It doesn't mean he doesn't want to date you.  It doesn't even mean he's tired of you.  It simply means that he wants some beer and wings and to watch the Patriots play.  If your mind is going crazy over-analyzing things, you are going to have a hard time holding yourself to (2)(a).

3) Let him lead. 

If you have read anything on this blog (including that little bio of me on the side), you will have figured out that I am a self-professed feminist and a strong Polish woman.  That should tell you two things about number (3).  First, that I have a hard time writing it for fear of how some people may interpret it.  Second, that I don't mean look down and be a doormat.  I don't mean he has to make all the decisions or run your life.  In fact, stay away from those models!  Instead, find where and how he is a leader and affirm him in those areas.  Figure out intentionally how to incorporate these things into your relationship.

As a corollary: let him do those little chivalrous things that melt female hearts, but don't demand them!  This is a tricky balance to reach.  I had a couple of male friends who taught me something about the balance when I was too far on the other side.  They did things like run in front of me to open doors and flat-out refuse to go through lines before me.  Eventually, I learned to accept these gestures with grace, rather than rolled eyes. I also got to witness how this small, token affirmation of their masculinity helped them develop it in other ways.

On the other hand, many men are not taught to do these things, or are taught by the women in their lives NOT to do these things.  So judge a man by a greater picture of his heart than whether he takes the outside of the sidewalk.

4) Guard his eyes.

Okay, so guys were told to help guard our hearts.  Ladies, we have got to guard their eyes.  I tend to hate soapboxes on modesty and I am not going to tell you what to wear or how many inches below your neck your neckline should sit.  As I walk through the mall with my fiance, I find myself jokingly covering his eyes at times -- but only half-jokingly.  Because the fact is, I don't want him to see those parts of other ladies!  And as a general rule of thumb, the parts of other ladies that I don't want him to see are the parts of me he should not be seeing till we are married.  If I want him to entertain only pure thoughts about me, I need to be presenting myself in such a way that I encourage only pure thoughts.  It's not about blaming women for men's thoughts -- it's about love.  If I love him, I want to make it as easy as possible for him to keep his mind full of pure thoughts.

5) Girls struggle with lust too.

This is a direct answer to number 5 for men, on physical touch.

One day, I stumbled across a couple articles (I'm not sure that these were the ones, but they are good ones I found in retrospect) that focused on the fact that women struggle with physical desire. I was shocked at how freeing I found this point.  When we believe that we should not be having a particular struggle, there are two consequences: 1) we tend to deny that we are having that struggle, which leads us unable to combat it; and 2) we tend to think we are particularly alone and particularly awful for having that struggle. We are too often led to believe that lust is a struggle unique to men, that only men desire more physically than is allowable before marriage.  This is just not true.  We were born with the same original sin and the same concupiscent desires as men.  So ladies, read point number 5 for the men, and apply it to your own lives.  And maybe click the links in the first sentence.

Fun Fact of the Day

Fun fact of the day: you can set Word's grammar check options to identify not only passive voice, but also cliches and gender-specific words.

I have not yet used this function, so I cannot tell you how it works.  However, I am fascinated by its existence. 

Day-Maker #83

Overheard in the office: "No, we do not have the Pope's cell phone number."

Divorce and the Pill

Here's an interesting take on the Pill from a surprising source.  Scientific American seems to be claiming that the Pill leads to higher divorce rates.  Here's the two ways that happens, according to this article:

1) The Pill leads women to be attracted to men with major histocompatibility complex (MHC) genes that are more similar, rather than less similar to their own.  Couples with similar MHC genes report less sexual satisfaction.  Less sexual satisfaction could contribute to divorce.

2) The Pill leads women to be attracted to men with major histocompatibility complex (MHC) genes that are more similar, rather than less similar to their own. When a couple decides to have a baby, the woman goes off the Pill and finds herself less attracted to her husband, while simultaneously more attracted to other men.  This change in attraction could lead to divorce.

Let me put in a few disclaimers and explanatory notes here:

*Just because widespread use of the Pill might lead to a higher divorce rate, it does not necessarily follow that an individual woman should not use the Pill for contraceptive purposes.

*I think that (i.e. women should not use the Pill for contraceptive purposes) for other reasons.

*If there is a correlation between use of the Pill and divorce, it should be enough for most women to think twice about the decision to use hormonal contraception.  I don't want to be less attracted to my husband at the exact moment we want to have children.

*The changes in attraction from the use of hormonal contraception might be a social scientific explanation of divorce rates, but they are not an excuse for any individual divorce.  It might be harder to make a marriage work in these circumstances, but (barring abusive situations) divorce should simply not be an option.

The thing that interests me most about this article is that it comes from a source without a Christian bias. The point isn't to convince women not to use hormonal contraceptives, but to draw attention to an interesting scientific fact.  And whatever we disagree on, I think most people of good will agree that women should have all the facts before making decisions about the drugs we use.

Breaking News: Syria

Breaking News: Majority of Americans Approve of Sending Congress to Syria.  Thanks to The Onion for covering this story.

It amused me so much I had to share, though there is nothing amusing about the situation in Syria.  I've been following it via NPR.  At the time of the chemical weapons attack, they talked with a doctor at a hospital in Syria, who described the thousands of patients coming in.  I was so horrified I nearly changed stations, but I don't want to be that person who turns a blind eye to the sufferings of others.

Over the next two days, I heard Kerry's and Obama's comments from NPR and tried to form an opinion on what we as the US should do.  I reached the impasse that I always do when pondering foreign policy.  On the one hand, I hate war and know the US does not have a good history of intervening in other nations' civil wars.  On the other hand, listen to descriptions of the people hit by the sarin gas.  By our common humanity, each person holds a certain responsibility for every other person on the planet.  And if we don't do anything, who will?

NPR reassured me that these feelings are normal and gendered.  More men than women support US military action in Syria -- not because women are more likely to oppose it, but because they are more likely to be undecided.

We Need Feminism Because....

Lately, I've been antsy to start running again -- I stopped in June due to health issues and now that they are resolved, I am preparing to get back to it.  So it's not surprising that as I wander through the neighborhood that will be mine in November, I sometimes think about where I will run.

I haven't just been thinking about it -- I've also talked to my fiance, who lives there now, about running routes in his neighborhood.  The conversation went something like this:

"The running path down by the river -- is it safe?"
"I think your greatest danger is being hit by a bike." [Brief excursus about runners being hit by cyclists.] "I like running towards town better."
"Yeah, but I don't like running along main roads."
"There's a bridge over the highway so you won't get hit.  There are some roads back here too that might be good.  There's a big hill and lots of stairs that lead you to a park."
"That doesn't look like it'd be long enough.  I'll probably go by the path."
"I don't like it in the winter.  It's not very well lit."
[Moment of revelation for both of us: we are talking about different dangers.]
"Of course, I don't have the same concerns as a lady runner..."

I need feminism because my concerns when choosing a running path should not be dictated by my gender.  That conversation brought to mind this collection of students explaining why they need feminism.

Color Me Beautiful

I missed last week by a day -- oops.  Here's one of my favorite links in my "Blog Me" folder by way of apology.  It's part of  Dove's Real Beauty Campaign.  Imagine describing yourself to a sketch artist.  How accurate do you think the picture would be?  How much would it vary from a picture he would draw based on someone else's description?  That's what Dove did.

I love the idea, and I know the message hits a lot of young women in a place they need some comfort.  However, the rational, skeptical side of me wants to try it with men.  Do men see themselves differently than other people do?  We focus a lot of attention on women and body image.  I would love to see some evidence that (if) the gender-bias reflects a reality.

The Prophets of Oak Ridge

I'm going to give you lots of reading and little commentary today.  This is a piece by the Washington Post about a social justice group working for nuclear disarmament.  "A nun, a drifter, and a house painter," as the article characterizes them, broke into what was considered one of the most secure nuclear facilities in the US.  It's a long read, but let me tell you, well worth your while.

Day-Maker #82

Seeing a small girl at Trader Joe's getting her picture taken with a bouquet of flowers.  She had obviously been to the Post-Office early that day: she wore a Priority Mail sticker.

Visual Sociology

Via Unequally Yoked, here is a fun bit of sociology. (Yes, this came from my file of "cool, I should blog this" bookmarks... and about 5 months ago.)  The map shows where "Missed Connections" happen, broken down by state.  It also has some numbers about age differences and who is seeking whom.  Before you look below, can you guess which state has the highest percentage of women seeking women?  (And what that number might be?)

Updates and a Game Plan

I have had a variety of happenings to keep my life interesting and keep me away from the blog lately: wedding planning (yes, that's happening), moving back home, starting a new job (yay!), health issues (prayers please!), and generally other people in my life.  So I am coming up with a new plan of attack.  Here are the rules for the next stage of Beth's Blog:

1) One post a week.  It end up happening Sunday evening, but maybe not all the time.
2) No life updates.  I have a lot that is not internet-appropriate, especially considering my No Emotions rule.
3) I can't promise posts will be on new occurrences.  I have a folder of old but interesting links that I might work my way through on Sunday evenings.
4) Keep reading!  The posts will still be interesting!
5) Find me in real life if you want to know anything about me.  Electronic communications of any kind are kind of running away from me right now.

Rape Culture and the Christian Perspective

As a woman who is Catholic and identifies as a feminist, I reach some awkward discords at times, and one of the most glaring is simply that people use different languages.  When Catholics write about things, they write with a Catholic vocabulary and assume their readers share a knowledge base and a world-view that many people simply do not.  For example, I was listening to a speaker on Monday who based a "secular" claim on the fact that "what we do with our bodies means something."  He was going for something as simple as "sex means 'I love you,'" but even that cannot be taken for granted in dialogue.  

The same thing happens from the other perspective.  I find wonderful articles that use language I don't want to share, or terms such as "het/cis," which can be off-putting to a more conservative religious crowd.  I try to bridge the gap at times, but other people are better thinkers and more articulate writers than I am, so I really want to share their thoughts.

Then, every now and then, something like this appears.  It brings together issues like rape culture, feminism, porn, purity, sin, misogyny, and solutions -- but from a Christian perspective.  Take a read and let me know what you think.

In Case I Needed More Reason...

... to be madly in love with Stephen Colbert, this came up on Facebook lately.  His mother passed away last week, and he did a tribute to her on the show.  Watch this and you will cry.  I did.

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Indecision Political Humor,Video Archive

A Parable of Apples

Before I end up on another feminist rant (I just found a Christian article about rape culture that will make it here soon), I want to take a moment to speak to a problem with feminist rants that a friend brought to my attention.  Hopefully, this is not a problem for men in my life, but it's important, so I am going to tell a story.   I may have told this story before, but this time, it's an allegory.

Last fall, I went apple picking with a group of grad students.  One of the kids with us reminded me of a character in a book I was reading, which was really awkward because I kept wanting to call him Sonny, which was not his name, and then I'd have to explain to him, "Oh, it's just that you remind me of a fictional character," making a great first impression. 

Sonny (not his real name) was from New York and didn't like apples.  (I promise, these two facts are related.)  He came for the pumpkin patch and the hay ride.  However, as we wandered through the apple orchard, he caught some enthusiasm from the rest of us and tried an apple.  And exclaimed, "I didn't know apples could taste like this!"  Having only ever eaten mushy, flavorless store-apples, he didn't know what an apple really was.  But when he found a real one, he liked it.

There is a danger in feminist rants to identify men with the mushy, flavorless store-apples and see the orchard-picked variety as the outliers, who are an exception to what men really are.  To define men and generalize masculinity by the negative choices that lead to the problems we see.  This approach leads us to devalue the honorable masculinity with which some men live their lives.  

No matter which is more common in our lives, the fact is that orchard apples are more truly apples than mushy, flavorless store-apples.  Men who live noble masculinity live it more truly than those who live the stunted version of masculinity (if it even can be called such) that leads to things like rape culture.  We as women need to make sure that as often as we attack the latter, we affirm the former and let the men we love know that they show us what it means to be a man.

Day-Maker #81

Take a look at this video of the Pope talking to a group of children.  Spoiler Alert: they give him a sheep.

Return

Hello again, friends!  I'm not sure if I feel comfortable calling you loyal readers, since that might highlight my lack of loyalty as a writer.  However, I am back -- partially employed (30 hours a week) for a pro-life group 30 minutes up the road from my parents' house, where I am living for the next few months.  As counter-intuitive as it might seem, unemployment is horrible for my productivity, so I am anticipating that you will hear from me somewhat more often, now that my days have an outside structure imposed upon them.  We'll see; I'm learning a new swing if things.  But now that I have a steady job, my days can settle into a routine of some sort.

For your entertainment, I'm going to reach back into my "Blog Me" folder and pull out a story that came up a while ago.  This story came up in a local paper a few months ago, but, since it takes readers on a walk into the past, it is still relevant.  It talks about "Story Book Land," a "children's amusement park" that made fairytales and nursery rhymes real.  It used to exist right up the road from me, but was gone before I could add it to my memories.  I do remember the talk of reopening it and wishing that it would happen.

Day-Maker #80

After a brief hiatus, I return to share this day-maker, which brightened my morning Facebook stalking.  Which Supreme Court justice are you?  I'm Kagan!

Before My Final Final

According to this Lifehacker article, rereading, highlighting, and summarizing note are poor methods of studying.  Instead, you should use good methods: taking breaks and spreading out studying.  Please tell me I don't have to explain the entertainment value of these statements.  Maybe today should be a day of one, long, effective study break...

Addendum I: Vocabulary for Frank

Frank asked me what the phrase “gift of self” might mean, with the disclaimer that as my “token non-christian reader” he didn’t know.  First of all, I want to give a shout-out to the other non-Christians who read this blog – I know that at least one other of my loyal 3.5 readers shies away from any religious persuasion.  Secondly, I want to give a shout-out to those Christians/Catholics who might read this and think, “Well, I don’t exactly know what ‘gift of self’ means either.”

It’s a hallmark John Paul II phrase, lifted especially from his Theology of the Body, so there is no way I will do justice to it in one post.  If you really want to understand the phrase, read Man and Woman He Created Them, JPII’s audiences on the theology of the body compiled into one book.  And read it with a competent moral theologian by your side.  (Ooh-ooh-pick-me-pick-me!  I’m looking for a job!)  I’ll do my best, however.

Gift of self, or self-gift, describes how persons relate to each other.  It means giving of oneself in a full and free manner, an openness towards the other that says, “I am yours,” and does not hold back.  It is a self-offering that is love.  For JPII, the preeminent example is the Trinity: the Father pours Himself out to the Son, the Son reciprocates this love to the Father, and the love bursts forth to be the Spirit. 

For my non-Christian readers, or the Christians who haven’t pondered the Trinity in this manner, the primary earthly example is marital love.  Husband and wife give themselves to the other in a love that encompasses all aspects of their being.  In the words of Scott Hahn, “this love is so tangible that nine months later you have to give it a name.”  It is total (hence, no divorce) and life-giving (hence, babies) and consists of an orientation of oneself to the other and a strong will for the good of the other. 

I feel like I’ve been talking around it for long enough now that hopefully this sheds some life on self-gift.  If not, question away, and I will revisit the topic – possibly while studying for my Theology of the Body exam!

Thoughts after Comps Season

Normally, I let exam grades fade into the past without comment, and the good disappear with the bad.  Since I made comps such a big deal on here, however, I figure I should mention: scores came out!  Everyone passed!  Even this girl right here, who managed to impress her professors some.  Thanks for the prayers and encouragement, loyal readers!

What I Have Taught My Feminism, Part III

(Go do your catch-up reading if you've missed Part II!)

The discomfort of my feminism as I write that who I am as a woman makes no sense except in relation to man (and again as I type it, and again as I post it) is palpable.  I have, for years, been on a quest to find the true meaning of femininity.  As a good feminist, I set out to find the definition of woman without reference to man.  I found two extremes: defining woman by a certain cultural/historical set of behaviors and values or collapsing gender differences to create a false equivalency.  I was unsatisfied wherever I turned.  If we can define man without reference to woman, shouldn’t we be able to do the opposite?

When I read the beginning of JPII’s Theology of the Body, it hit me.  I’d been getting it backwards.  Man was defined in isolation, woman with reference to man.  I knew woman was misdefined, so surely the approach to defining her was wrong; I needed to imitate the definition of man.

But what if the definition of man was wrong too?  What if man only makes sense in reference to woman?  This is the claim I make: masculinity and femininity are mutually referential and only make sense in relationship with each other.  Bodily, this makes sense.  Our physical bodies anticipate the opposite as complement.  I propose, once more following JPII, that our physical bodies give exterior shape to our interior selves.

In this case, it does woman no wrong to explain who she is with reference to (and in contrast to) man; it does man no wrong to explain who he is with reference to (and in contrast to) woman.  Indeed, any attempt at an isolated definition will do an injustice to femininity or masculinity,  It cannot but be a reductive view.

Does this mean that I have reached a perfect understanding of femininity, which I can now fully explicate for you?  Alas, no.  That is still a work in progress (though I hope to continue talking around the question here for a while yet).  A lot more work and research are necessary before I get there.  I am, however, making progress in developing the proper framework for asking the question, which is necessary for finding the answer.  

What I Have Taught My Feminism, Part II

Housekeeping Notes:

1. Read Part I first, if you have not already done so.
2. If you read Frank's comment (or if you are Frank!), do not fear!  I am writing an answer to his question... It will come at the end of Part III.

The necessity of vulnerability does not mean we must be completely open and vulnerable with everyone we encounter to be fully human.  Prudence allows us to respond to human sin.  Our relationships with other require a balance of prudence with openness, always guided by caritas.  It does mean that vulnerability is bad, is not something to be avoided.  It is a beautiful expression of our humanity.  And, because of the inherent risk, it requires a certain courage, a certain strength to live it out.

Now, you may have noticed an implication in this discussion of vulnerability, which leads to the next lesson I taught my feminism. 

If self-gift is essential to humanity, then no human being can truly exist in isolation.  We can only fully realize our selves as persons if we do so in relation to other persons.  What a blow to my ideal of self-sufficiency!  I like to imagine myself capable of complete independence.  Alas, JPII tells me otherwise. And it gets worse.  The ultimate self-gift – the opening of self and reception of other – happens in marital love.  Not only do I as a person not make sense except in relation to another person, but I as a woman do not makes sense except in relation to man.

What I Have Taught My Feminism, Part I

Now that you have done your assigned reading, it is time for the next chapter of Beth's feminist musings, "What I Have Taught My Feminism."

[Read the first series here.]

Now that I have begun, I might as well continue to develop a few more thoughts on vulnerability and gender. Again, I want to put these musings into a wider context; this time, “What I Have Taught My Feminism.” My feminism has taught me valuable lessons, but on occasion, I have had to instruct it, especially when I try to make it play nicely with my Church. There are two lessons in particular that I want to focus on, because of how crucial they are for correcting misunderstandings between my feminism and my Church.

First: Vulnerability is not a bad thing. The opposite assumption comes not just from my feminism, but from our society as a whole. And I am, as a stubbornly independent woman, perhaps particularly susceptible to it. As a basic, working definition I give, “the potentiality to be hurt.” It need not imply an actual being hurt: a newborn child, with the wisest, most doting parents, is extremely vulnerable. We don’t like vulnerability: it implies helplessness, weakness, and passivity. What about that sounds good?

The helplessness, I suppose, is part of the definition of vulnerability, but I mean to contend that the other two are not, or need not be. Vulnerability can be accompanied by an active strength, because it is can be primarily a factor of opennesss.

Or, to use the words of everyone’s favorite Polish Pope, it is about gift of self. The meaning of our humanity – of being a person – is the ability to make a gift of ourselves and to accept the gift of another. This is a huge starting point for his theology of the body. We are our bodies. In the beginning, this gift was safe because no one would think of harming another. Now, however, the gift involves risk – risk of exploitation or rejection. Thus gift of self = vulnerability. The catch is: gift of self = only true way to be a person. Vulnerability is intrinsic to our personhood and inescapable for our humanity.

Assigned Reading

... or rather viewing.  I don't watch things online -- I prefer to take in information through reading.  It goes at my own pace, allows me to skim, and doesn't make noises.  So this video sat in a perpetually opened tab for about two weeks before I watched it.  Now it's your turn: you need to see it as preparation for my next installment of "Beth the Feminist."  Oh, yeah, and it's a TED video, so it's good.  It's Brené Brown on "The Power of Vulnerability."

Day-Maker #79

Today, I got sunburned and Starbucks, two things that do not normally happen in Steubenville.

Thoughts During Comps Season, Freedom Edition

I left home this morning armed with three pens, an unmarked Bible, chocolate-covered blueberries, and coffee, ready to receive the Eucharist and take on the world.  Or at least comps.

Six hours later, I emerged, triumphant.  And now comps are over -- we are free!

Thanks for the prayers and the support!

Thoughts During Comps Season, VII

I know all the things ever.  Or, all the things I will ever know.  Or, as much as I plan to learn before comps.

Friends who are taking comps with me, do not be afraid.

Friends who are not, pray for us -- from 9am to 3pm tomorrow.  Then pray for our professors to be merciful.

St. Joseph of Cupertino, pray for us.  All you holy men and women, all you angels and saints, pray for us.

Thoughts During Comps Season, VI

Shelly gave me advice from a friend/fellow-sufferer: pray through each question and come up with a litany of saints for each.  I did this and I have lots of friends in high places.  [Side-note: I was surprised at how often JPII came into my litanies.]  However, I kept feeling that someone was missing.  At last I realized that we had read oogobs (a technical theological term) of Joseph Ratzinger.  Who is still in the pilgrim Church with us.  Unfortunately, it is too late to write to him to ask for his prayers and he is no longer Tweeting.

Thoughts During Comps Season, V

I am starting to have comps dreams.  Last night, someone took my seat -- sitting on my jacket! -- while I went to get a pen.  This created a huge problem because it was the only place in the room with proper feng-shui.  If someone does this in real life, I will sit on that person.  I still regret that I did not do this in my dream.

Thoughts During Comps Season, IV

We all have questions we hope we get and questions we hope we do not get.  I realized this once more as I talked to myself like a crazy person for two hours outside the student center today.  An example of how I answered part of a question I hope I do not get:

"We -- yeah, Gregory -- gender...." That's all I've got.

St. Joseph of Cupertino, pray for us.

Thoughts During Comps Season, III

Studying so many classes at once is a problem, because I want to go over the things that I like, but I already know the things I like, because I find them interesting.  So I over-study fun things and ignore the hard ones...

Thoughts During Comps, II

I've done all the hard work -- taking the classes, compiling study guides for the questions.  They should just collect my notes and grade me on those.  They can even have all nine questions, instead of making me answer four.  Doesn't that seem more comprehensive?

St. Joseph of Cupertino, pray for us

Thoughts During Comps Season, I

[I considered an official hiatus (rather than the unofficial one I've been taking) for the next week as I prepare for comprehensive exams.  Instead, I will entertain you with the inside of my head during this time.]

One of my questions requests that I "thoroughly and accurately" discuss a topic.  Does this mean that when a question does not state accuracy as a requirement, it doesn't matter?  Because that would be hugely helpful.

Stephen Colbert, You Own My Heart

In a frenzy of personal, emotional, and academic happenings, I have been sorely neglecting this blog.  Now, at the beginning of the Triduum, I don't quite have time to catch up, though I can promise (or threaten) another feminist manifesto coming shortly.  To keep you entertained in the meantime, here is a recent discovery of mine.  Stephen Colbert + Oprah.  Check out the interview in all its 4-minutes-at-a-time glory here.  He drops character and talks about his life, his joys, his tragedies, and his family.  One of them includes his wife.  Shelly and I both fell a little more in love with him after seeing Colbert and his wife interact.    That struck me (I want that after 19 years of marriage!) as well as his great humility, which is astounding for someone with such a cocky on-screen personality and so much cultural influence.

All in all, this is my Holy Thursday treat to you.  Watch it today, go to Mass tonight, and your day will be complete.

GetReligion on Abortion Case

I normally poke around my (dying) Google reader at breakfast time, catching up on friends' blogs and the happenings of the world.  One of my feeds comes from GetReligion, a blog that critiques the media's coverage of religion.  And it's not much trouble -- easy morning reading.

Today, however, I stumbled across an article that made my stomach turn so much I couldn't click the link to the story being critiqued.  It is about Dr. Kermit Grosnell, who is on trial for murder due to horrendous practices at his abortion clinic.  While I understand pro-choice people who might say, "This isn't what all clinics are like," the sympathy with his practices -- including the murder of children born alive -- is almost as horrific as the facts of the case.

I'm posting it in hopes that my three faithful readers will read the GetReligion piece and take note especially of the lack of media coverage of the story and pass it on.

Habemus Papam!

I know I am late as far as news goes, but this event occurred during spring break, and I was taking off to make times for family and school work.  However, I am posting this on the day of his installation, so maybe I still win.

Happy Feast of St. Joseph!  (A day when Lenten resolutions don't count.)

Gendered Thoughts, Part IV

Here's the fourth & final part.  I hope you enjoy the ending... There's another series coming soon with more about vulnerability and gender!

I am not yet willing to shift from the world of “is” to the world of “ought.”  I do want to note a scene the vulnerability-dynamic can draw.  A man and a woman stand face to face.  As a female body before a male body, she has a vulnerability that she cannot help and he cannot have.  However, he has just told her that he finds her fun and charming (not to mention pretty) and would love to take her out to dinner.  He has a vulnerability before her that she does not have – he has no idea what she thinks of him.  If she accepts him, both will have made an implicit agreement to accept and guard – at least to a limited extent – the vulnerability of the other.  He is guarding her physical vulnerability and she his emotional vulnerability.  This dynamic, though by no means the only one at play here, sets the stage in an interesting manner for “traditional” gender roles in marriage, where the husband provides materially for the family and the wife acts as emotional caretaker.  Often times, behavior that seems to fall to the other gender is constructed to fit the acting gender’s norm, a tendency that fascinated my sociologist self in undergrad.

Again, I do not wish to move from the realm of “is” to “ought” or to insist that any particular gendered interaction fits this perfectly, especially since it relies on purity of intention.  I also do not mean to imply that a marriage with “traditional” gender roles necessarily follows from the date scenario described before it.  I merely wish to explore these as interesting gender dynamics that are largely ignored, or, when discussed, inextricably conflated with other ideology.  

Thoughts on Gender, Part III

(To make sense of this, be sure to read parts one and two first.)

I’m not sure how to transition here from female vulnerability to male vulnerability.  Part of the trouble is that up till now I have been concerned with physical differences, and now I need to turn to social norms.

Social norms are always difficult to deal with, not the least because they tend to be amorphous and variable.  However, again simply based on my recent life, let me offer two norms in our society: malefold ask out femalefolk; malefolk propose to femalefolk.  I propose merely that this is the way, by and large, that things are done – not the way things have to be done or should be done.

Now I not something interesting: asking another person to go on a date with or to marry you puts you in a position of vulnerability.  (This assertion assumes that the other person is reasonably free to answer in the negative.  If refusal is not a viable option, this, of course, changes the power dynamic.)  In asking a woman out, a man says, “See?  I am an interesting person.  Please consider investing some time in me.”  Rejection can’t help but be personal – it is, in a small way a rejection of his person.  A marriage proposal all the more so.  I heard a young man describe his proposal as offering “everything” of himself and, on one knee, waiting to find out if it was enough. 

(Incidentally, this scenario illustrates why I dislike the pre-engagement decision that “we should get engaged.”  It’s like showing someone his Christmas gift and proceeding to wrap it anyway.  You don’t half-give gifts or commitments.  Either you are committed to marrying each other (engaged) or you are discerning (dating).  If you are both done discerning,  you need to be either engaged or broken up.)

This scenario (before my parenthetical aside) assumes that the man is seeking an actual relationship and not just a hook-up.  A relationship says, “I want to give myself to you.”  A hook-up says, “You will be fun for me.”  It is also complicated by the idea of the “waiting woman” – a common complaint that women are trapped sitting around waiting desperately to get asked out.  Doesn’t this change the dynamic?  Only if we assume that women need men to be complete – and I offer as a counterpart men who ask out dozens of women in a short span of time, yet do not find that any of them stick it out beyond a second or third date.  

Simply a Pilgrim

I interrupt my regularly scheduled Gender Series to bring a brief Catholic sidebar.  As of yesterday, non habemus Papam.  Here is Papa Benedicto's farewell:



On a related note, I know the title is "Pope Emeritus," but that sounds too formal.  My vote is for "Grand Papa," and I intend upon calling him "Grand Papa Benedict."

Gendered Thoughts, Part II

If you haven't read Part I yet, go back and do that first.  It's short & I'll wait for you.  Ready...
...
...
...Okay.  Here's the next piece!


The gender-vulnerability-based fears that women have are heightened by two factors: negative masculine gender norms and instructions given to women. The “male” behavior associated with the patriarchy/ hegemonic masculinity/ rape culture (also, read this blog and links from this post; all these are distinct, yet present similar concepts of masculinity) teaches men to act in a way so as to objectify and degrade women. This lesson should not happen. Women are taught a different lesson: how not to place themselves in danger. While this lessons are not, in themselves, bad, they teach women an awareness of vulnerability – so that it is difficult to tell what fear is a response to male behavior and what fear is learned from these instructions. Either way, the fear is there and it is real.

Because of this dynamic, a healthy male-female relationship must include the communication, “I am not a threat to you.” My guess is that we have tons of social cues mean to communicate this message and that it happens subconsciously. Small things: tone of voice, word choice, posture, gestures, and physical proximity – along with things less subtle, from choice of meeting location to explicit words. I read an article recently wherein the author attributed this meaning to chivalry (read to the middle of the article; you are looking for Christina Hoff Sommers, but the whole thing is a good read). Thus, its gestures assure a woman that the man, who physically could harm her, has no intention to. Like a handshake, they guarantee that he comes in peace and respect.

(I can hear the protests now: “But men did not actually respect women more in the days of chivalry! Those were the days of misogyny and chauvinism!” Or those just the voices in my own head? Either way, I am toying with the hypothesis that this exact hypocrisy led to the eventual demise of chivalry. Women killed it because they recognized its lie. Perhaps – perhaps – if it actually communicated this reassurance, women would not mind it.)

I feel a need to interrupt myself to offer a disclaimer. Learned helplessness is, for a very good reason, a concern for feminists. I am starting to feel that I might sound like I am feeding into it. Let me be clear: women do not need to rely on men to “rescue” them and are capable, in a variety of ways, of protecting themselves without male cooperation. They just should not have to.

Gendered Thoughts, Part I

I recently started writing out a brief synthesis of gender-related thoughts that have been bouncing through my head lately.  Six pages later, I realized it would have to be more than one blog post.  Bits will appear in manageable chunks over the next few days.  I hope at least one of my faithful three readers enjoys reading this as much as I enjoyed writing it.

I hope here to throw together into coherence some thoughts and ponderings I have had recently regarding gender relations and vulnerability. I will weave together several themes that have emerged in the past few months, in incidents, anecdotes, encounters, articles, and classes. It won’t be a fully developed system, but I hope it will be a consistent beginning of things. Please nitpick my assertions and my logic, so that I can see if this framework holds water and deserves to be developed.

Let me start with some initial premises, assumptions that will undergird my further thoughts.

1) First, I will be assuming that we all live gendered existences. I mean to leave out the question of which parts come from social constructs versus biological predispositions. No matter how gender is formed, we all live lives informed by how we do and experience gender. The vast majority of us live in the male-female/man-woman dichotomy and, although I recognize that exceptions exist, I will be working with a two gender system.

2) This gendered existence affects our daily lives and interpersonal interactions.

3) Women, based on their biological make-up, are physically more vulnerable in comparison to men and especially vis-à-vis men. This premise seems commonsensical to me, and I don’t have research to back it up, but if you want to challenge it, I will gladly go off questing for some. In other words, as a vast generalization, men pose more of a threat to women than women to men, physically.

4) Gender norms exist. I will be speaking about them in sweeping generalities. I realize that these generalities will have counter-examples; these examples do not prevent them from being norms. If I have misidentified or misrepresented a norm, please call me out on it. Just be sure you are certain of the definition of “norm” before you contest one. Then contest away.

Working with these basic ideas in mind, I propose: women, on a daily basis, experience a vulnerability that men do not. This particular experience informs how we live our lives and how we see the world. It colors our gendered interaction. This does not mean that women are, most of the time, in danger. (I leave that assessment to others to make.) It does mean that, as a rule, women experience a greater potentiality for being in danger than men do. Consider: a solitary female motorist stops to pick up a lone male hitch-hiker. For whom are you instinctively concerned? Why?

BXVI in Photos

The Washington Post has put together a lovely photo collection of Pope Benedict XVI's life.  If you ignore the editorializing in the captions, it is quite beautiful.  Have a look at our Papa.

A Short Story about Childbirth

Today I presented my research on the ethics of maternal elective cesarean deliveries to some other theology students.  I enjoy exchanging knowledge with other students (part of the reason I love school and hated distance learning classes).  My favorite part came outside the official presentation and Q&A.

One writer worried that as the number of c-sections rises women will stop exchanging stories of normal childbirth and only have surgical stories to tell, which will increase feelings of incompetence surrounding birth.  Tonight, people told birth stories.  Hard births, easy births, regular births, surgical births, heroic births.  ("The sonogram missed a baby!  She gave birth -- after a past c-section -- to surprise twins, breach, by the side of the road!")  We still have stories.  Beautiful, diverse, empowering stories that women share -- and, tonight, men too.

"It's Like My Grandfather Decided to Retire"

If I could pick anywhere in the world to be during this next month besides Rome, it would be Franciscan University of Steubenville.  Every other conversation I overhear on campus is about the Pope's decision to retire.  And every one is full of love for the soon-to-be former pontiff.  The classmate who spoke the title of this post into being had it right.  The head of our family, filled with love, wisdom, and grace, is stepping down.

In 2005, as I prepared to graduate high school, the only Holy Father I had ever known passed away, leaving the world mourning the loss of a deeply holy and unbelievably charismatic man.  When Joseph Ratzinger was elected Pope, I had barely heard of him and was sure that I could love no one as much as my Polish pontiff.  A few years later, as I began my M.A. program, I started reading more of the new Pope's writings and changed my mind.  He impressed me as a scholar and a shepherd, a man of sharp intellect and great wisdom, whose love of Christ reached through him to his fellow man.  Now, as I prepare to leave graduate school, I find myself once again awaiting a new shepherd.

Papa Benedict, on February 28th, will join the ranks of retired popes -- making the third one in Church history.  Celestine V retired in 1294 after a five and a half month papacy.  He returned to his beloved ascetic life and, after his death, was canonized.  Gregory XII was one of three claimants to the pontificate in the early 1400s.  In order to reunite the Church, he agreed to retire after convening a council to elect a new pope.  (The two anti-popes were deposed.)  Neither of these stories end well for the retired pope, so we don't have a clear idea of the role of the former pope.

One thing is for certain, however.  He will continue to act under the guidance of the Spirit, as he has done for years. In the words of Timothy Cardinal Dolan:

The Holy Father brought the tender heart of a pastor, the incisive mind of a scholar and the confidence of a soul united with His God in all he did. His resignation is but another sign of his great care for the Church.

St. Peter, pray for us, for the Church, for Papa Benedict, and for our next Pope!

The 98%

With the HHS mandate making all kinds of news (and a compromise being proposed, though I don't have details on that at the moment), a number has been bandied around.  "98% of Catholic women use contraception."  I've spent much time being indignant about this line of argumentation and questioned the number; I even blogged a bit about it.

However, I didn't do one thing that a more serious Catholic blogger did: ask about these women.  No matter what the number, these women matter.  Jennifer Fulwiler writes about her interaction with the 98% and offers an analysis that startled me, although it probably should not have.  Many of these women are not setting out in blatant, pig-headed opposition to the Catholic Church.  They are misled in their thoughts and knowledge about the position and seriousness of the Church on this issue.  Which seems surprising to me, but I come from a very Catholic family in a very conservative diocese.  Other people do not.  As Fulwiler points out, no matter what the other fallout of this debate, at least it is making the Church very clear about her position and thus aiding her in guiding her sheep a little more closely.

Huggies Loves Babies

Every now and then, the pro-life attitude is just so common-sensical that it bursts out in unexpected places, from people who aren't pushing a pro-life message.  Such as the creators of this Huggies commercial.



On a less positive note, it highlights a fundamental discord in our society's view of pregnancy.  A wanted pregnancy is "a human being growing inside your stomach!"  An unwanted one is "a blob of tissue" that becomes "medical waste."

A History of Chocolate Chip Pancake Day

The time of year has come when Facebook, Pintrest, Walmart, and the Dollar Tree explode with red and pink vomit in honor of Valentine's Day, while single women everywhere express their bitterness about said vomit or said singlehood.  In honor of the occasion, I would like to offer an alternate route with this brief history of Chocolate Chip Pancakes for the Romantically Disadvantaged.

In 2006, the women of Nicholson 2nd Upper decided to honor Valentine's Day in all-girls-dorm style.  Chocolate chip pancakes seemed like a perfect way to go, and I led the way to the birth of Pancake Day.  The next year, 2007, a year dedicated to the Rusty Spoon of Vengeance, saw it christened "Chocolate Chip Pancakes for the Romantically Disadvantaged," a bitter, celebratory dig at my hard-won singlehood.  The next two years at the College solidified both my lone wolf status and the tradition, to the consolation of my single friends, both male and female.

When I left the College, I carried the tradition with me to St. Louis and I discovered that my friends carried the fond memories, as I received emails, Facebook posts, and G-chats wishing me, "Happy Pancake Day!"  So of course I continued to celebrate when I moved back to the 'burg, this time making the important discovery that having long-distance girlfriend* counts as a "romantic disadvantage," so that Asher could come to Pancake Day.

This February 14th will mark the 7th Annual Chocolate Chip Pancake Day and the second that Ohio has seen.  I am already getting excited for the occasion.  To those friends who have participated and find themselves far away: you are dearly missed.  To anyone sans Valentine this February 14th: consider Pancake Day as a DIY project to enjoy the best the holiday has to offer (i.e. chocolate and red wine.)



[*Full disclosure: I had to put in the bit about Asher to explain that I am not creating an exemption for myself this year, since I have a beau whose presence in my life does not count as a "romantic disadvantage."  Added advantage: he also does not like Valentine's Day.]

Crazy Love

Facebook led me to this TED Talk today.  I don't really have anything to say about it, other than that you should watch:

War & Forgiveness

Through some link-following, I stumbled across this article on forgiveness in The New Yorker.  Forgiveness, or atonement, though I have to admit to being a tad fuzzy on the meaning of the second term.  If you have a few moments, lend them to this soldier who killed several civilians early in the the Iraqi war... and then sought out their family, to make peace with them and himself.

Hello Again

About a week into Christmas break, I realized I hadn't posted anything on the faithful blog in a while, maybe a week.  I checked and realized that it had been closer to two.  And I didn't want to take time away from my reading (The Brothers Karamazov with Thom) or spending time with awesome Virginia people (too many to name) to give to the wonderful world of the interwebz.  So I embarked on an unannounced Christmas break hiatus.  And now, I have returned!  I might post stories from Christmas break.  I might not.  I haven't decided yet.

For now, I want to share something that appeared in my Facebook world this morning.  It is a short, encouraging piece about femininity and fitting into our female bodies and our female selves.

I read it at the perfect time -- after I read a Buzzfeed blurb bashing Taylor Swift as an anti-feminist.  That might appear later when my frustration has slowed from a boil to a simmer and I can put together more coherent thoughts than !!!adifha uar8wer7y893hefzduyf7igusitr!!!!!  WHY???? adhifahty f f8e6yr7yweh auify7aie!!!!!!!  Oh, the title is fairly catching as well -- here's the link again to "On Skinny Jeans, Daughters, and Singleness."