Dressing a BOUS

For the most part, fashion dolls are roughly the same size and shape.  Most of the clothes are interchangeable, even for the nine inch ones.  The only real issue I've had with is Monster High fashions - they are generally too small for anyone, but the minidress makes for an adorable (if snug) maxidress on Barbie's little sister Kelly! But what about the BOUSes - Barbies of Unusual Size?

Years ago, I had in my care two My Size Barbies.  They wore 4T in people size, with an occasional alteration to the waistband.  Both were the standard white blondes.  I saw in the stores other races, but only in ads did I see the redhead.  I coveted that redheaded My Size - even wrote one into my novel.  Yesterday, the boy talked me into going to the Flea Market and one of the booths had two My Sizes, one the standard blonde with a repainted face and the other a redhead. REDHEAD.  In the Mattel bridal gown.  She'd been played with, clearly, but both she and the gown were in good shape.  I did hesitate - this close to Christmas, we have rules about buying stuff for yourself, but eventually she was safely ensconced in my Mamma Cart and on her way home with me.  

Mattel made an eighteen inch Barbie as well, called Supersize Barbie.  I managed to get my hands on one of those a few years ago - Disney's Pocahontas, no less! Since the usual doll that size is a well fed little girl shape, she can't wear the eighteen inch doll clothes found in stores.  I still browse them, hoping to find something my meager sewing could make fit, but no dice.  I could go on-line and spend more for her clothes than for my own, but there are limits to my obsession.

One of my pleasures in my dolls is dressing them for various holidays - I've even dressed them for Halloween parties attended by humans.  My redhead can wear people clothes, once I buy her some, but poor ole Pokey is stuck in the halter and miniskirt Disney designed for her.  

Star Wars, Racism, and Sexism.

The Empire Triumphant: Race, Religion, and Rebellion in the Star Wars Films  by Kevin J. Wetmore Junior. 

Let me begin by saying this: I am not a huge fan of George Lucas.  Largely because of the almost incestuous Luke and Leia story line and because he wanted Marion Ravenwood to be too young to drive when Indiana Jones seduced her, I suspect he may be a pervert.  Even so, I feel the need to defend him from baseless accusations.  

The author starts out by saying he isn't calling George Lucas a racist, and then proceeds to list all the reasons the Star Wars Universe (created by George Lucas, remember) is as racist as a Klan rally.  His logic is not consistent, he relies on revisionist history, and worst of all - he criticizes another author for doing the same thing he is.  The other author "ignores evidence that contradicts his interpretation".  

The author claims filming in Tunisia for the backwards world of Tatooine means  Lucas believes Tunisia to be backwards.  Yet it doesn't occur to him that the primitives of Endor were filmed in California, which would mean Lucas thinks of Californians (including himself) as primitive. 

Aspects inspired by Asian culture are "appropriation" if used on a good guy and "stereotyping" if used on a bad guy.  Lucas has never made a secret that he was heavily influenced by Japanese movies.  The Jedi are analogous to Samurais.  What this guy is calling Appropriation is actually Imitation - the highest form of flattery.    

He claims that there is no sex in the Star Wars Universe and then tells us Vader sexually threatened Leia on the Death Star (Interrogation Scene), that Lando was a horny stereotype, and even compares Luke to Oedipus.  

At one point, he says the characters never go to "a performance", yet we see Palpatine at what seems to be an opera.  There are "no aliens" in the capital city - except for those interacting with the White Males the author keeps ranting about.  He even goes so far to take literally Luke's petulant comment to C-3PO about being farthest from the bright spot in the center of the universe!

Now that I've poked all kinds of holes in his logic, shall we move on to his claim of racism?  First is the lack of color - everyone is white.  Mace Windu and Lando?  Tokens.  Even Padme's right-hand-man, a black man named Panaka, is dismissed as tokenism.  My favorite one, though, is the claim that Vader is black.  Never mind he has white skin under the armor, and white offspring, Darth Vader is clearly an Evil Black Man.  One who sexually threatens the virginal white Princess.  

Jar Jar Binks is a "Gungun" according to this book.  "Gunguns" are black stereotypes who were not allowed a voice in the Senate.  In truth, Gungans (note the spelling) were isolationists.  They  didn't want to be in the Senate.  They were also Quasi-Jamaican, and not all Jamaicans are black.  

The Neimoidians were inscrutable and had almond-shaped eyes, so they must be Asian, thus making Asians evil.  Watto was greedy and had a big nose, so he must be Jewish.  The Jawa, by merit of the words sounding similar, were Jews - even though their behavior more fits the stereotype of a Gypsy. And the Tusken Raiders are Arabs, Bedouins to be precise, because they are nomadic and dress for protection from the desert in which they live.  

Ewoks and Wookies are American Indians, which makes Chewbacca Tonto.   Or maybe Friday, since he was a South American "savage" tamed by the White Man.  Any tribal society, in harmony with nature, MUST be American Indians.  

Then there's the mean way Lucas portrays women.  All they can do is have babies (Shmi and Padme) or get saved!  Did you know Leia was rescued from Jabba The Hut?  Never mind it looked like she was participating in a plan to rescue a White Male...  All those bad guys either of the leading ladies shot?  They don't count.  The female Jedis we saw? Tokenism.  

I will grant that the Star Wars universe could use more color and that females are under-represented. What this book does goes beyond that.  Star Wars is a tale meant for children.  As such, things are simplified and a resemblance to established stereotypes is going to happen.  And of course George Lucas tells a story from a Eurocentric viewpoint - he is descended from Europeans and raised in Western society.  

Public Unisex Restrooms

I remember being a small child and asking why my brothers had to go into a different public restroom.  All the toilets were in little stalls, after all, and no one could see each other.  The reason given was that the urinals are not in stalls, and that some people will "peek" at the opposite sex.    

Forty years or so later, I still don't get it.  Urinals can be done away with, or put into stalls, or hidden in secluded corners.  I've been peeked at - by adult females and by children of both sexes.  So it's clearly not simply an "opposite sex" thing.

I also speak from the parental (more or less) point of view.  A female parent (or parental facsimile) can't go into the men's room, but may not feel safe letting the boy child go by himself.  Even if said boy child is "old enough".  Even parents who might take a boy into the women's room are reluctant to take a girl into the men's.  Those open urinals, I suppose.   Never mind that only Ron Jeremy might be able to use a urinal from a distance that would allow a sighting.

Which leads me to nudity.  There is nothing evil about any body part in and of itself.  No one's eyeballs have ever boiled from glancing at an unexcited reproductive organ, unless I missed that X-men comic.   Most people tend to shield those parts from view, anyway, even at the urinals.

The people who would hurt your child are not always of the opposite sex, nor are they always sexually motivated.  Sex-segregated restrooms do little or nothing to protect them.  In fact, if these predators target a woman's male child in a unisex restroom, she will be there to protect him.

I can't tell you how many times I've used a men's room because I was about to burst and the wait for the women's was forever.  Having a unisex restroom, smaller than the two combined would have been but larger than either alone, would make the wait shorter.  Builders could save at least the cost of that dividing wall.  A unisex restroom wouldn't need to be closed for cleaning - there's no issue of what sex the janitor is.

Unisex bathrooms simply make more sense, especially in a world where those lines are becoming more blurred every day.  Save money, time, and space.  Build unisex bathrooms.

Perception and Racism

My nephew-in-law is a black man.  He's been dealing with racism for his entire life, and now he sees it where it may not exist. I can understand this, as I do the same thing with Welfare.  If he and I were standing in line at the grocery and the cashier was rude to the food-stamp-using black person before us, we would jump to different conclusions.

Another example, from fiction.  Professor Slughorn is surprised by a student who was born to Muggles - non-magical people - excelling in his class.  Harry Potter, angry, responds with "One of my best friends is Muggle-born and she's the best in our year."  The first few times I read this, I thought Slughorn was in the wrong.  But what if his surprise came, not from the bloodline, but from the notion that a Muggle-born has no exposure to magic until the age of eleven?  Imagine a child raised with no exposure to music suddenly becoming a virtuoso!

I'm sure there are many others, but I'll get to the point.  We do not know the motivations of strangers. The cashier in my first example could have been rude for any reason - maybe even just be a rude person.  When I was a cashier in a grocery, there was a woman who came in regularly.  She always tried to buy twice as much food as she had money for.  Every time.  Had I been rude to her, it would have had nothing to do with her race or method of payment.

I had a chat the other day, with a ten year old, about "The N Word".  He said that sometimes people use it to mean "friend".  One woman I knew used it the way I use "Black".  Some folks use it as they do the term "White Trash"- but for black folks.  But the problem is, the perception of it as a slur is simply too strong, so I told the kid to never use it.

The same is coming to apply to the word "Redskin".  I've read lots of historical documents where that word was used simply as a synonym to "American Indian".  Clearly, having it used as the name of a sports team is intended as a compliment.  Those who the term applies to need to pull a Hermione Granger (back to Harry Potter) - she embraced the wizarding slur "Mudblood" as a badge of honor.  Basically... "Damn straight I'm a Mudblood.  Mudbloods are awesome."  It's too late, I fear, to save the N word, but the R word still has a chance.  

I'm not going to tell you racism doesn't exist.  We do, though, need to keep a calm head about our own perceptions.  That guy cut you off in traffic, not because you are a different color, but because he would have cut off his identical twin. That lady who tells you that your half-black children are beautiful means well, even if she is kind of ignorant.

Come to think of it, this advice applies to life in general.  Don't assume to know why people do things.  I bet everyone reading this has a different take on why the stick people family on my truck is huge.  Some of you, those who know me best even, might be wrong.

Role Models

The news these days is full of celebrities being caught in bad behavior - and a resultant fall from grace annoys me.  Not so much because I think they don't deserve it, because some of them deserve worse than they are getting.  What annoys me about it is the shock "normal" folks experience when they discover a celebrity is not above reproach.

Years ago, I was told that going to the movies was, in effect, approving the Hollywood Lifestyle.  I thought that a strange way to look at it - after all, if I pay a waitress to serve my lunch, what she does at home is not my business.

The big one right now is Bill Cosby.  That endearing, funny man so many of us wished was our dad or uncle turns out to be an old pro at "slipping her a mickey".  But that doesn't make The Chicken Heart any less funny.  That doesn't mean we can't still giggle when God asks Noah how long he can tread water.

There are a couple of celebrities that recently got into trouble over calling someone a "nigger".  Both of them are from the south, old enough to remember the civil rights movement, and were talking about a specific person they did not like.  Anyone with half a brain, in the 21st century, should not be using that word, but the context is important.    

But I digress.  My real point here is that any role model is imperfect.  Even you.  Yes, you are a role model.  You can admire Angelina Jolie as an actress or as a humanitarian while disapproving of her past personal life.

The trick is teaching your kids to have sense about it.  I've said it before - talk to them.  Kids aren't stupid.  When someone they admire behaves badly, discuss it with them.  Teach them that people are not perfect, not even celebrities.  Teach them to emulate and reward the good in people without being blind to the faults.  Remember it for yourself.  None of us should be defined by a single action, good or bad.

Marriage and flags

ON GAY MARRIAGE 

Bestiality and pedophilia are not going to become legal because animals and children are not capable of informed consent.  There may be some basis to the thinking that polygamy might become legal, but as I have said before - if everyone involved knows what they're getting into, and no one is being hurt, why not?  

An aside to my Anarchist friends, who say the government has no business in marriage, anyway, I must disagree.  Marriage is a legal contract, as romanticized as it may be, and a legal contract is exactly the sort of thing government does have business in.  And as a genealogist, I feel for those who  would have to research those undocumented marriages.  

"The Bible says...."   The USA is not founded on religion, but upon freedom. What any Holy Book says has no bearing.    

ON FLAGS 

Speaking of things we worship, let's move on to flags.  A flag is nothing more or less than a symbol, and symbols can mean anything.  That's why dream interpretation is so difficult.  Yes, the flag in question was meant to rally the troops in support of, among other things, racism. The CSA's founding documents are full of references to the natural superiority of whites.  (I learned this only recently, myself.  Don't feel bad if you didn't know.)

 But even those rallied troops disagreed about what it stood for.  At least some of the Johnny Rebs were not fans of slavery. Compare it to the gay marriage thing.  I don't want to marry a woman (have slaves), I might even think it's wrong to marry a woman (have slaves), but my right to do should be validated.     

It's been over a hundred and fifty years.  The symbol has evolved even from that debate.  To most of the people I know, it's nothing more than a reminder to stand up for their beliefs or a way of identifying as a Southerner.  Yes, I know some racists who display it.  But they are vastly outnumbered.  

If we ban every flag that's flown over a wrong, there will be a lot of naked flagpoles around.  The American Flag - you know, the one only a traitor would even look at cross-eyed - flew over not only slavery, but the Indian Removal and Japanese Interment Camps.  The Jolly Roger, which I see often on children's clothes,  flew over all kinds of raping and pillaging.  Yet we understand that when we fly those flags, we aren't advocating that behavior.   

Draw a swastika on something and let people happen to see it.  When they freak out, tell them it was originally a symbol of protection and that they, therefore, are wrong to be offended by it.  Maybe even point out that the Nazis drew it in a very specific manner, different from yours.  Their reaction will tell you all you need to know about how a symbol evolves.  In the case of the swastika, it has been tainted by association with genocide.  It no longer means what it once did.  The Rebel flag evolved the opposite way, that's all.  

And even if it didn't, the First Amendment gives us the freedom to be horrible.  

Trans-WHAT

I've already weighed in on my opinion about transgenders.  Gender is a social construct and with few exceptions, caused by the roles society expects of us because of our genitalia.  I am no expert.  What I am is a reasonably intelligent person capable of research and deductive reasoning.

Steve Martin did a movie years ago in which a white boy is raised in a black family.  The boy is shocked to discover he's white.  It was a hilarious fictional concept.  Transracial was a joke.

I know a woman who dresses, behaves, and speaks like a black woman.  She is married to a black man and has given birth to five children society labels "African-American".  I've told her she's a black girl in a white skin.  I have joked with a Sioux friend that I'm a Indian in a white body.  Never did it occur to me that someone would seriously make such a claim.

Well, someone did.  The same people who are lauding the courage of a "woman" with a penis are having conniptions over a "black" who has no proven African genealogy.  My question is - really, at the root of it, what is the difference?  How is transracial so different from transgender?