Disqus - Friends of berkleebassist

Re: Why I Won’t Shut Up About Having HPV

lena — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:50:09 -0000

I get what you're saying. The lung cancer example isn't perfect, but even so, I don't think people would throw the decision to smoke in the face of someone who has cancer. Yet we think nothing of blaming -- quite harshly -- those who get STIs. A better example might be cervical cancer. People are unlikely to fault cervical cancer victims, but they will stigmatize HPV, which causes it.

Re: the ch!cktionary - Asian American Female Sexuality A dinner...

lena — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:17:45 -0000

Too bad you can't attend. Perhaps another time?

As for your question about how/why Asian American female sexuality is different: While nuances in sexual attitudes can't be reduced to cultural differences alone, race and ethnicity do impact how you view your sexuality and identity in general. Perhaps other people's opinions and perceptions SHOULDN'T impact you, but they tend to influence the expectations to which you are held, so it's somewhat inevitable that you'll be shaped by external players.

Re: True Love Revolution's Contradictory Claim To "True Feminism"

lena — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:11:35 -0000

Precisely. It's a huge jump to go from "most people on campus aren't having sex" to "most people on campus think you should wait until marriage to have sex."

Re: the ch!cktionary - Banana Coconut Milk Soup (The Elephant Walk...

lena — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:10:18 -0000

Ah, it was quite good. I'm sure you can whip some up at home.

Re: Jessica Valenti, Weddings, & Social Expectations

lena — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:50:59 -0000

Thanks for writing this. I constantly tell newly disenchanted underclassmen that Harvard is not all that it's cracked up to be -- but that's not because they don't belong here and it's not because they're crazy. This place is a pressure cooker that can feel alienating to even the most happy-go-lucky freshmen and even if our peers don't always let it show, I know from personal experience (and from knowing a LOT of super seniors) that many do struggle with being here. Taking my leave has changed my perspective completely. Sometimes, the best thing you can do for yourself is to get the hell out -- and that's neither an admission of failure nor weakness. I'm glad I came to that realization sooner rather than later.

Re: How Feminism Misses The Point When It Comes To Marriage

lena — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:45:35 -0000

My pleasure!

Re: The Harvard Crimson :: Opinion :: The Abstinence Mystique

lena — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 15:38:10 -0000

Teofila1,

It's incredibly presumptuous of you to think that my views result from ignorance and that they can be changed if I "buy a plane ticket". Yes, I've traveled outside of the U.S. before and have plenty of European friends, most of whom do not understand why issues like same-sex marriage and comprehensive sex education are even topics of debate in America when they're just taken as givens in their home countries. If you want to live in a place with a "TLR-ish administration", be my guest. I don't think the resulting "respect and admiration" is worth being branded a whore if I dare to not abide by conservative gender norms. I'm guessing women like me wouldn't be treated respectfully in the country you mention -- and exactly how feminist is that?

By the way, I don't see the hook-up culture as "the only way"; I don't see anything as the only way. That's the difference between me and TLR, and that's the difference between feminism and anti-feminism.

Re: Fridge Cleaning

lena — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:36:27 -0000

That's actually exactly what I did. Turned out great :)

Re: the ch!cktionary - Amsterdam

lena — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:27:17 -0000

Just Cavalli made it :) Thanks!

Re: the ch!cktionary - Amsterdam

lena — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:50:57 -0000

Get back to work ;)

Re: the ch!cktionary - Hamlet as a pig in a blanket

lena — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:46:03 -0000

They're coming back! I halted the giveaways, so I could run them to coincide with the next Sex Ed piece I do for The Harvard Voice/The MIT Tech.

Re: Uhhh ... Halloween?!

lena — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:00:58 -0000

I don't really feel like going to parties either! (Mostly because I will be the only costume-less one.) However, I live on a pretty noisy street which will only get noisier on Saturday night so it's probably better to just join the fun than to resist it.

Re: the ch!cktionary - Chianti Braised Beef Chuck I tried braising meat...

lena — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:24:39 -0000

Who says the two are mutually exclusive ;)

Re: The Harvard Crimson :: Opinion :: The Abstinence Mystique

lena — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:06:39 -0000

Thanks for responding to my op-ed, Rachel. I think your post fails to address the contradictions I bring up about TLR's interpretation of feminism. I've written further about the topic on my blog: http://thechicktionary.com/post/226581012/true-...

Re: How Feminism Misses The Point When It Comes To Marriage

lena — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:41:22 -0000

You realize that women used to be routinely FORCED to have sex -- upon marriage -- at age 14? Funny how when sex is sanctioned by a patriarchal institution, it's a duty, but when women make the choice for themselves, they're sluts.

Re: the ch!cktionary - Jessica Valenti, Weddings, & Social Expectations

lena — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:02:53 -0000

Don't worry -- my bubble hasn't been burst. A single study demonstrating correlation (not proving causation) is insufficient proof for two-parent households being "better". One alternative explanation off the top of my head: single parent households may be less well-off, which means that lack of education and vocational access may be responsible for drug use, unemployment, etc., not the lack of two parents.

It doesn't make much sense to argue that marriage isn't patriarchal, when its customs and laws have historically been determined by men or institutions governed by men (religion). "Giving away" the bride? Proof of virginity? Changing last names? All of these are patriarchal practices. Perhaps you might argue that marriage is LESS patriarchal these days, but granting women more rights doesn't mean social attitudes have changed significantly. Besides, the emancipation of Western women has been a very recent phenomenon, and marriage has been around much longer than free women, so to characterize it as non-patriarchal not only glosses over the entirety of its history but also ignores how the institution manifests itself beyond the West.

Re: the ch!cktionary - Chianti Braised Beef Chuck I tried braising meat...

lena — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:47:09 -0000

If a Chinese store has mushrooms, they're probably shiitake, no? Either way, it doesn't really matter since all mushrooms are fairly porous and absorb flavors well. As long as you like the taste, it should be good! This recipe is ALL about substitution.

Re: How Feminism Misses The Point When It Comes To Marriage

lena — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:16:50 -0000

I actually haven't. Thanks for the link!

Re: How Feminism Misses The Point When It Comes To Marriage

lena — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:15:18 -0000

Capitalism isn't a throwaway insult; the economic system under which we live is the main reason why inequality exists. It's no coincidence that those who are the most powerless are also the poorest. Why else are progressive movements (civil rights, women's rights, etc.) so concerned with securing the ability for their constituents to work? Because it's the most significant means by which people can gain power. Without money, you can't engage in society.

As for divorce, it's actually a misconception that women today have more power. Women continue to bear the brunt of reproductive health costs and child-rearing costs. In custody cases, there is also a tendency to subject women to stricter standards of "good parenting". (Men are not assumed to be able to "do it all and be a parent too".) High-profile, multimillion-dollar payouts are not the norm but they just happen to get the most publicity.

There's no consensus in the "sex blog world" about what "choice feminism" constitutes, but not every woman who invokes choice is necessarily choosing freely. I'm referring specifically to participation in raunch culture as depicted by Ariel Levy in Female Chauvinist Pigs. Obviously, there's nothing wrong with being a lesbian or a stay-at-home mother, but when women emulate and glorify porn stars, it's not hard to trace how their "choices" are influenced by what the male gaze deems desirable.

My main point is this: it might seem silly to criticize seemingly abstract forces like "the patriarchy" or "capitalism", but I'm not exactly preaching conspiracy theory here. Most people make decisions based on how they've been socialized in terms of gender, and they work for others who profit (sometimes obscenely so) from their labor.

Re: How Feminism Misses The Point When It Comes To Marriage

lena — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:25:42 -0000

To clarify, my previous post concerned weddings more than it did marriage itself. Though the government does not exactly force people to get married, it does penalize those who don't and offer privileges to those who do. (The fight for same-sex marriage is not merely a symbolic one.) It's no coincidence that marriage is beneficial for both capitalism and patriarchal power. My argument is that marriage itself isn't necessary for individuals to make "long-term commitment[s]" nor is it a necessity in the instance of children since separate custody laws could easily be set up to negotiate that.

As for "choice feminism", though I previously wrote a sex blog that some characterized as epitomizing the college hook-up culture, I am often wary of claims that girl-on-girl kissing, camera flashing, etc. are empowered decisions rather than simply manifestations of male-created sexual ideals. That doesn't mean women can't or shouldn't express their sexuality as they like, but rather that we ought to be self-reflective about why we default to a certain pre-approved menu of expressions.

Re: the ch!cktionary - Jessica Valenti, Weddings, & Social Expectations

lena — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:24:00 -0000

Nicole, I think you bring up an interesting point here, which was precisely what I was trying to get at when I explained why I didn't see Valenti as a hypocrite:

"Does this mean I was influenced by society? Yes, of course - if I didn't live in a culture where it was common (and yes, expected) for me to change my name, would it have occurred to me to do so? No. But does that mean the patriarchy is getting me down, or that I feel coerced into this decision? Hell no."

We can recognize that our decisions are informed by the society in which we live while still choosing to make "traditional" decisions. (I should add, however, that I'm wary of "choice" feminism since the things some women view as their own empowered choices -- think: Girls Gone Wild -- are very much motivated by their existence within a male-dominated society.) But while I agree that it's nonsensical for anyone to expect you/Valenti to not get married (it's not going to make marriage less patriarchal if you opt out anyway), I think more people should think about why it's even important to be able to call ourselves "married" or to call each other "husband and wife". If not for the existence of the State, there'd be no recognition of those titles, but it wouldn't make our relationships any less important.

Ultimately, my problem with marriage isn't that it's a gendered institution. That's secondary to the fact that it's an institution whose function is not to magically enhance our relationships but rather to act as an instrument for promoting state interests, namely to generate wealth. To name a few examples, procreation, division of labor, and inheritance (i.e. reproduction of wealth) are all influenced or directly controlled by marriage, whose boundaries are oh-so-conveniently defined by the State. Governments don't just issue marriage licenses out of benevolence. Marriage is used as an instrument with which to organize society and promote productivity (often at the cost of economic equality). Today, marriage in 21st century America may be a more equal institution in that women aren't stripped of any and all rights, but a more equal instrument of societal control is still an instrument of societal control. And while it might be worthwhile to work toward a less gendered notion of marriage, you can't really change how people perceive the institution itself unless you change the (capitalist) conditions in which we live.

In other words, Valenti didn't lose the good fight because she got married. She was just fighting the wrong battle to begin with.

Re: the ch!cktionary - Jessica Valenti, Weddings, & Social Expectations

lena — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:16:10 -0000

Whether or not my boyfriend intends to marry me has no relevance to this discussion.

Re: the ch!cktionary - Jessica Valenti, Weddings, & Social Expectations

lena — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 20:21:36 -0000

The way I see it: marriage is first and foremost an institution and secondly, a patriarchal institution. I think Valenti wants to change the latter but not the former, and if that's her intent, then her getting married is fine. I, on the other hand, think it's a problem that marriage is an institution in the first place. That's why I don't want to get married, even if it becomes a less gendered affair.

Re: the ch!cktionary - The Official Lena Chen Homepage

lena — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:18:32 -0000

I use a Weebly template and customize it with my very basic CSS/HTML knowledge.

Re: the ch!cktionary - Huevos Rancheros with Roasted Potatoes and Salad ...

lena — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:50:23 -0000

Hah, I'm still not the marrying kind! But I think the domestic goddess was always in me ;) All I needed was a fully functional kitchen outfitted in stainless steel. Mmmm.