Chicks, flicks, and more microagressions

Despite being the canine persuasion, Humphrey is not what you’d call outdoorsy. He’d much rather spend an afternoon sprawled on his favorite chaisse with a bag of Humpty Dumpty Party Mix and some good television shows (including, of course CTV News).

With all his recent contemplation of microagression, he’s found himself applying the Bechdel Test to his viewing to identify gender bias. Now, the Bechdel Test (created by Liz Wallace and popularized by artist Alison Bechdel who featured it in a comic) is pretty simple to use. To pass it, the movie or television program….

1. must have at least two women characters with names…
2. who talk to each other…
3. about something other than a man.

Sounds simple, right? But surprisingly few movies pass this threshold!

Humphrey’s highly unscientific tests have actually confirmed others’ research and reporting – that there’s a lot of gender bias in the media!

Of course, passing or failing the test is no guarantee of good gender representation but it is indicative of problems. And those problems, are of course, the acts of microagression he talked about in a previous post.

 
In the past week, he has applied the test to New Girl, Don’t Trust the B in Apartment 23, Big Bang Theory, The New Normal, and 30 Rock. Most of these shows are predominantly about women – and yet, they didn’t pass! Think about it - even shows with strong women, like 30 Rock, are reduced to un-Bechdel discussions because of patriarchal structures. For instance, the recent storyline in which Tina Fey's character was involved in presidential politics meant that most of the dialogue (especially with Jenna) centred around presidential candidates that are men. Had the presential candidates been women, it might have passed! Similarly, in the recent New Normal, several of the conversations among women were about Jesus - again, the patriarchal structure of the religion meant that the conversation necessarily failed the Bechdel test.

Humphrey will keep on watching his favorite stories - but with a far more critical eye.

Humphrey's bone to pick with J.Crew

Humphrey looks forward to the arrival of the colorful J.Crew catalogues passed his way every couple of months. For the past year or so, he has been fascinated by the unique styling and color combinations! But he has begun to notice a trend…and now he has a bone to pick with J. Crew.

Now, on the one hand, he is impressed with the creativedirector Jenna Lyons, whose personal style is said to be reflected in the retailer’s rebranding. She posed for some gender atypical catalogue photos, including painting her son’s nails (which stirred up quite a bit of controversy in 2011)! Their deliciously appealing catalogues are master-minded by Gayle Spannaus, the company’s fashion director and head women’s stylist.

But Humphrey noticed something alarming in the past year's catalogues…

 

The male models are not only named, but their careers are listed! November 2012’s catalogue features Joe Carlucci, Contemporary Art Business Dealer; Armando Cabral, Shoe Designer and Model; Spencer Lyons, Financial Advocacy Director; Justin Marquis, Photographer; snow-roofed Pedro Gomez, Artist (in the photo above). They are different colors, shapes and sizes, and some even have snow on the roofs!

Humphrey flipped back to the beginning, searching for the women’s names and careers. He searched. And searched. He got a magnifying glass and searched some more in case there was fine print. Nothing! Not one name, nor a single career! But he did notice uniformity in their makeup and hair.

As a critical feminist canine, Humphrey gave this some thought. The message he was receiving was that if you’re a man, of course you have a name, an identity, a job, and your physical appearance can be diverse and imperfect. But if you’re a woman in the J.Crew world, your only worth is your appearance – and a very specific one at that. Don’t bother with a name or a career or accomplishments. Just look pretty and do what you’re told.

And just as he was drawing his conclusions, the Winter 2013 issue of Fashion (the magazine) arrived – featuring an interview with Gayle Spannaus herself! He noticed two rather interesting statements that confirmed his suspicions: “I had a very specific instinct for what the J.Crew girl should be,” the woman (who has name! Gayle!) said. And, “I will never work with a girl with plucked eyebrows.”

The sum total of Gayle Spannous’ direction, Humphrey realized, are acts of microagression on women. That’s a big word for a little dog! What could it mean?

For those new to this concept, Chester Pierce coined the term ‘microaggression’ in 1970 to describe how specific interactions between genders (and other points of intersectionality) can be interpreted as mostly non-physical aggression. Just as regular-sized aggression and assault are two different things, so are microaggression and microassault.

Gender microassaults are forms of overt sexism, like being called a “girl” when you’re old enough to be a grandmother, a man refusing to wash dishes because it’s women’s work, or men’s unwanted sexual advances toward women. Acts of microaggresion are far more subtle, like the nameless models in the J.Crew catalogue when their male counterparts are celebrated as humans. Another example is a female doctor is mistaken for a nurse at the hospital (with the message that women should be in nurturant jobs, not competent enough to be doctors).

Microaggressions usually seem like no big deal. Each event, observation and experience posted is not significant or shocking. Usually, the aggressor doesn’t intend to hurt others and isn’t even aware of the consequences. But, their slow accumulation of microaggessions over time adds up, and has important outcomes. A Psychology Today article cites this example to show how acts of microaggression influence women’s standard of living and quality of life: White American males constitute only 33% of the population. Yet, they occupy approximately 80% of tenured positions in higher education (something Humphrey’s guardian wishes for!), 80%-85% of federal elected officials, and a whopping 92% of Forbes 400 executive CEO-level positions.

Humphrey’s observation about the J.Crew catalogue by itself may not seem like a big deal. But he is worried that his female guardian, being exposed to yet another instance of microaggression, will continue to feel a little less, and keeps her that much further away from making tenure. On the flip side, as Humphrey reported earlier, there is definitely a social benefit to providing public examples of women in nontraditional positions!

 

He hopes J.Crew will reconsider their strategy of microagressions, which he realizes are probably not intentional on the part of Gayle Spannaus and her colleagues. Nonetheless, he believes he could appreciate a nap on their soft, soft cashmere sweaters with a lot less guilt if they would change their ways.

Neo-Soviet Romanticization?

Zdravstvuj comrades! Humphrey has noticed a recent trend, and officially coins the term to describe it here: neo-Soviet romanticization.

Readers will surely recall that he reported on the debut of Arquiste's odd fragrance, Aleksander, designed to recreate the olfactory sensations of Pushkin's last day. Then, this week Banana Republic's new Anna Karenina capsule collection dropped - a far cry from last year's capitalism-gone-wild Mad Men capsule collection! Now, Humphrey knows that these are examples of romanticizing pre-Soviet Russian icons.

Detail from BR's website

He took these things to be coincidence. But then today, the news reported that Russian president Vladmir Putin thanked presidential candidate Mitt Romney for proving "the correctness of [Russia's] approach to missile defence." The statement was made after Romney named Russia as America's "number one geo political foe."

Now if that's not romanticizing the Cold War, Humphrey has no idea what is!

Then, Humphrey made his second trip to the market for groceries this week. The first time, shelves were empty, he had to wait in line for a rain check for parmagiano reggiano, then wait again in yet another line to pay for a piece of bread that happened to be in stock. Everyone spoke Russian and he had little idea what was going on (this is a frequent occurance in Willowdale).

Upon his return to the store today to use his rain check, the other things he needed were not in stock! So again, he made his way to end of the loooong rain check line, and of course had difficulty getting what he needed since his Russian is a little rusty. Then back to the loooooong payment line to cash in his rain check on the reggiano. Fortunately, they took hard currency since he was completely out of rubles.

Just as he was getting into his car - which might as well be a Lada - it dawned on him! Late capitalism in North America is just simulacra of Soviet-style society! And those who own the means of production (Banana Republic, Arquiste, Holt Renfrew, Mitt Romney) are making efforts to romanticize all things Soviet (and Russian, since North Americans probably don't know the differnce) to gain compliance via nostalgia!

In keeping with this new trend, Humphrey decided to feign the attitude of a Russian poet, quietly brooding and staring out the window into the abyss, the air freckled with gray sleet on that cold, dark afternoon.

Humph's Hallowe'en House o' Horrors

Boo!

Humphrey got a pre-Hallowe'en surprise in the form of a squeaky jack o'lantern!

It's that time of year again - and rather than jolly tricks and treats with cute costumes like last year, Humph has decided to have a scaaaaary celebration! To set up his house of horrors, he decided to display the most terrifying things known to dogs!


All the things you need to create a terrifying house of horrors

Next, he had to choose a costume. He first considered disguising himself as a ghost...

...but he was mistaken for an adorable lamb-bat. So he thought he'd better get a scarier costume.

After thinking and thinking and thinking some more, he came to a decision. What's the scariest thing you can think of?

A zombie? Not quite. Too much over-exposure in the mainstream media.
A vampire? No, they're actually desirable these days thanks to R-Pat.

What could he be????

Here comes Glitzy, tiara and all, ready to scare passers-by. But despite all the "scary" that comes with this costume, there's also a positive spin! Inclusive attitudes towards difference (including LGBT), a surprisingly supportive family environment, and an absense of some of the damaging body image discourses present in so many other reality shows (Humph's looking at your, Kardashians!).

Happy Hallowe'en everyone! Holla for a dolla, yo!

Parasocial Pups!

Zelig hangs out with Woody Allen and Scarlett Johansen on the beach! (Maybe)

A strange thing seems to be happening – many people and dogs (like Zelig and Humphrey) form attachments to media personalities as a substitute for “real” inter-personal relationships. These so-called “parasocial relationships” occur when people feel as though they know their favorite television characters or celebrities – and sometimes take on a bigger part of life than the real relationships. It’s the way Humphrey hangs on every word television dog Wilfred said during the program’s debut season. It's like Humphrey knows him! He is sure to never miss an episode.

Humphrey meets Santa Claus *and* George Clooney! (Or did he?)

The concept of parasocial relationships is used to describe the way that people attach themselves to celebrities in modern times. In his article, “Identification as a Mediator of Celebrity Effects” (Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40 no. 4), Michael Basil discusses how celebrity endorsers establish credibility for consumer products (as the likes of Cesar Millan, Ellen DeGeneres and Rachel Ray attempt to do with their lines of dog food!). This strategy, Basil argues, is effective because of parasocial relationships. In other words, late modern diaspora leads people to have a sense of “knowing” celebrities and relating to them as if they were friends. Research suggests that (in humans, anyway) this is a function of people’s need for belonging in a culture where ties to others are very much diminished (see, for example, the synthesis of research by Wendi Gardner and Megan Knowles in their 2008 article, “Love Makes You Real: Favorite Television Characters Are Perceived As “Real” In A Social Facilitation Paradigm” in the journal Social Cognition, 26, no. 2).

Think about it – families are less connected, intensification of work and 24/7 use of technology means fewer “in person” relationships. These parasocial relationships are simpler than “real” ones, especially when you’re a dog! Parasocial relationships require no obligation, effort, or responsibility on the part of the spectator, and can be cancelled at any time. Yet, they can be very powerful in influencing people. 

These parasocial relationships have an interesting connection to dogs. Philsopher Donna Haraway and cultural critic Heidi Nast argue (in various places) that dogs fulfill a similar relationship functions for humans in that they also compensate for people’s increasing isolation from other people. Maybe even blog readers feel a parasocial connection to Humphrey! You never know....

Stephen Colbert's canine friend, the late Finnegan, several Christmases ago.

 

Epicurean Adventures

Epicurus said, “when I live on bread and water, I spit upon luxurious pleasures not for their own sake, but because of the inconveniences that follow them.”

Zelig knows what Epicurus was talking about! Civilized coffee breaks are a simple pleasure for him.



Cake is a form of bread, right?

The original Epicureans, readers probably know, were a group of Greek philosophers. Led by Epicurus and his teachings, they were concerned with trying to understand the good life. Epicurus taught the importance of being frugal about things external to the individual (knowing your “point of enough”), providing for the necessities of life (food to eliminate hunger and bring enjoyment, shelter, and companionship), putting inner happiness in the center of life, and working daily to overcome fears and unnecessary desires. Despite their beliefs about frugality, Epicureans believed that occasional luxuries should be appreciated to the fullest. They also placed a lot emphasis on inter-personal relationships above those luxuries.

In other words, Epicurus believed that an individual should live a happy, self-sufficient life surrounded by friends. He recommended the path of the small pleasure: “Send me a small piece of cheese, so that I may indulge myself whenever I wish.”

Humphrey is especially fond of this philosophy. Epicurus had him at “small piece of cheese,” and Humph was beyond convinced when he heard “surrounded by friends.”

As a puppy, Humphrey was faced with a seemingly insurmountable assortment of food intolerances. In fact, he was a vegetarian for quite some time. The day he arrived in his new home five years ago, the humans made a roast beef dinner for everyone, reasoning that it would be a pleasing aroma and a nice welcome for any dog. “It will smell homey,” they reasoned. 

The humans quickly noticed something unusual. Upon receiving his first meal, Humphrey picked at some roasted sweet potatoes, and skipped the meat altogether. Puzzling, they thought. Is this little fellow a vegetarian?

The next day, he refused all the food they offered him. Late in the day, he expressed interest in some baked potato chips and milk, but that was it.

The humans waited and waited for him to eat the high-end, organic, meat-based dog food purchased from the local pet shop . Humph waited until he was so hungry he couldn’t stand it any longer, then reluctantly consumed the dog food. What followed was an offending odor from his hindquarters, uncontrollable heaving, and all sorts of other awful things during the late hours.

Most days of his puppyhood, Humphrey had no desire to eat. He couldn’t even imagine Epicurus’ piece of cheese being anything but a source of great discomfort! When it came to meal time, he would usually hide under the big bed.

After months of trial and error (more error than anyone can possibly imagine) and in consultation with the vet, he was put on a home-cooked diet that did not include meat. His people produced all kinds of nutritional charts, and had to work around a very limited range of ingredients (strawberries, spinach, sweet potatoes, apples, cottage cheese, yogurt, milk, and fish).

Humphrey’s requirements were triangulated among his veterinarian, the Subcommittee on Dog and Cat Nutrition, the Committee on Animal Nutrition, National Research Council’s book, Nutrient Requirements of Dogs and Cats (The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2006) and David Basin, Jennifer Ashton and Grant Nixon’s Better Food For Dogs: A complete cookbook and nutrition guide (Robert Rose Inc., Toronto, 2002). Human nutritional requirements were triangulated using the Council for Responsible Nutrition: Recommended Intakes of Vitamins and Essential Minerals (Annette Dickinson, 2002) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and World Health Organization (FAO/WHO) Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) guidelines.

 

Over time, Humphrey's range of food tolerance increased, and all of a sudden his people were eating home-cooked “dog food”!  This is the resulting cookbook that Humphrey put together ...
 

Who's that wiggling in my kitchen? by Laura Elizabeth Pinto | Make Your Own Book

Fall days at Don Mills

Humphrey was delighted to have a return to summer temperatures in late October! To mark the occasion, he visited Shops at Don Mills and made some new friends! The shops are all dog-friendly, so he had a good browse, though nobody gave him any recycling which was the single disappointment of the day.