|As More Women Start Companies, Husbands Work for Their Wives - NYTimes.com
This conversation cuts to the heart of the matter: are you willing to give up control for a loving relationship?
How are you handling sharing power and money with the people you love?
|No Babies? - Declining Population in Europe - NYTimes.com
European population slated to decrease to less than 2 per cent of the world total?
Governments paying people to have babies?
Feminism is the new natalism?
We can't have a country where everyone lives in nursing homes?
This is a must read. Very interesting to see European nations finding themselves even more dependent on the immigrant populations they fear so deeply because, for one, they vote.
The Elements of Style
Hey beautiful people--I'm finally back from France and feel like focusing more on art and less on politics. The quote below was pulled from a post on Carrie and Danielle's site. They're the authors of Style Statement, my new favorite book. Coming from Marseille and Nice where everyone is obsessed with style, it's nice to take a closer look at what lies beneath.
"It's clear to me from the many people I talk to that there is a great misunderstanding about style. Style is not a price. It is not an age. It is not a size. And it can be learned.
Style is one part self-knowledge and one part self-confidence. In other words, it's an attitude. It is a life-affirming expression of your character and spirit, a conviction that you are worth knowing, worth looking at and can present yourself well. It is knowing your strengths and weaknesses so that you can accentuate your strengths, not hide real or imagined shortcomings. Feeling good about yourself is a sine qua non of looking good.
There is one more element of style, and that is clothes, but style should never be confused with fashion. Fashion is synonymous with clothes, but style is merely expressed through clothes. Fashion is IN the clothes. Style is IN the wearer.
Style is nothing if not a celebration of individuality, of individual variability. It glorifies the fact that we are all different. It exposes as preposterous the notion that there is an ideal body, an ideal woman—that there is only one perfect way to look, that any one way is perfect for all
Style rejects ideals. It goes its own way. In fact, style is nothing if not a triumph of the fresh and unusual.
Style is democratic. It assumes that every woman has the potential to create an identity that's unique, and to express it through how she carries herself, how she grooms herself, what she puts on.
Yet style is aristocratic. It sets apart those who have it from those whose dress is merely functional, utilitarian. It announces to the world that the wearer has a sense of herself and has assumed command of herself.
Style is intelligent, because it requires self-knowledge. Style hugs the self closely, even though it never represents the whole self at one time. The self is too complex to be represented by any one way of dressing.
Style is optimistic. It is optimism made visible. Style presumes that you are a person of interest, that the world is a place of interest, that life is worth making the effort for.
There is no style without taking risk, without exploring new sides of the self, without saving what works and discarding the errors. Style, then, is a springboard for personal growth.
There are those who criticize style for its trendiness and materialistic consumption. But they are confusing style with fashion. Fashion is preoccupied with change merely for change's sake, to stoke consumer purchases.
Style is in fact a way of avoiding the clutter of stuff. It is a way of sorting through the crowded marketplaces, a way of selecting, making choices influenced not so much by pressures such as advertising but by internal considerations. This kind of style no more requires change from season to season that does your character. But neither is it completely static. Ideally it should evolve over time, as character does.
Style is really self-knowledge applied selectively--selectivity is its essence--to the material world."
|Salon.com - Breaking news, opinion, politics, entertainment, sports and culture.
Hey everyone--here is a piece from Salon.
And my response:
To Phyllis Chesler and the Editors of Salon:
I know it is very disappointing to a faction within the feminist leadership that their candidate did not win the nomination. I feel for them, it is a devastating blow. But all is not lost. I believe Hillary and Obama will work out what is best for the country.
The major issue is how Hillary's supporters are going to recover from the statements made that an entire generation of young women are naive. Evidently, the people have spoken. The young women and their Second Wave allies who supported Obama have decided not go with those who offended them by calling them uninformed.
I note that Chesler does not bring up the significant contribution of my first book, To Be Real: Telling the Truth and Changing the Face of Feminism in her reflections, or my fifteen years of outreach at over five hundred universities on the subject of Third Wave feminism and its potential to work in real-time with feminists of Hillary's (and Chesler's) generation.
Instead, Chesler wants to draw in the personal differences I have with my mother. This appears to be opportunistic and ill-conceived. The fact is the piece to which she refers is an inaccurate tabloidization of an interview. No matter how much she would like to see the piece as factual and however sensational the article may appear, my father is not a descendant of Holocaust survivors, I never used the word fanatical to describe my mother's views, and so on.
Chelser's zeal to make comment is undermined by the fact that she did not take time to fact-check the so-called "essay" to which she refers. She has unwittingly used tabloid sensationalism to make an all too personal assessment of a situation with little bearing on the major national issues we should all be deeply concerned about.
My hope is that women of both parties will deepen their participation at the national level in a way that best represents what they feel will be good for women. I will continue to examine the relevance of Third Wave feminism and its relationship to women and men of Chesler's generation.
I hope the disappointment of those who supported Hillary's campaign will heal quickly, and in a way that avoids the kind of misguided commentary Chesler offers.
|Commentary: Best woman for the job could be a man - CNN.com
Here's my take.
|Obama and the 'Women Question' | Views | TheRoot.com
I've got my own op-ed coming on cnn.com which I will post shortly, but until then I think this is a piece worth reading.
|Seeds : The Hot Mama
Hey you guys--another fun post from theroot.com blog. Let me know what you think!