Inspiration Series: The Beauty of the Butterfly

“We delight in the beauty of the butterfly, 

but rarely admit the changes it has gone through to achieve that beauty.”

-- Maya Angelou

The butterfly is a symbol of transformation, even of spiritual rebirth.  We can start as a lowly, unassuming caterpillar but emerge from the chrysalis as a beautiful, winged creature.  But what happens in between?  It turns out that we don't entirely know.  And maybe we don't really want to know.  Because what happens in the chrysalis is that  the caterpillar turns into goo.  Yes.  Soupy goo.  And while that is really intriguing, from a scientific standpoint (Wow!  How does that goo become a butterfly?), it is kind of, well, unappealing.

That's the problem.  We love to see the transformation, to celebrate the amazing potential for change, but we don't want to know the process, particularly if it shatters our illusions.  Millions of people watch the The Biggest Loser for its displays of dramatic weight loss, but I'm betting that fans would probably rather not be confronted with the show's brutal treatment of contestants.  We'd rather just applaud the transformation from fat to thin than be confronted with the realities of what that entails.  Shape magazine, for example, features "success stories" of weight loss, but refused to include a photo of one woman in a bikini, presumably because her belly skin showed the aftereffects of extreme weight loss.  They'd rather hide that part of her story, to present an idealized version of her weight loss.  We'd rather imagine that the transformation from obese to skinny is flawless and simple -- a modest effort of diet and exercise, and the perfect trim body is revealed!  But it's not true.  Radical transformation is often grueling, and it leaves its mark.

When we focus solely on the before-and-after, ignoring the process of transformation, we create a fantasy that change is easy to achieve.  This creates false hope . . . and crushing disappointment for those who expect to transform seamlessly and effortlessly.

We'd rather believe that someone is a "natural beauty" than acknowledge the time and money and pain that is often involved in achieving cultural beauty standards.  Historically, women have been encouraged to endure dangerous, costly, and time-consuming procedures to become beautiful, but then also to pretend that they look this way naturally.  Don't admit to coloring your hair or getting cosmetic surgery.  Don't complain about the pain of high-heeled shoes or bikini waxing.  Don't acknowledge the hours of effort that went into your hair and makeup and clothing.  Oh, I just rolled out of bed looking like this.  We demand not only that women transform to be beautiful but also that they then lie about it.

When I discuss social change movements with my students, they are often unaware of the long-term, difficult struggles that were necessary to enact change.  My students will say that the United States government "gave women the right to vote," rather than acknowledging the decades of struggle by committed suffragists who marched, were harassed and arrested, facing harsh treatment in prison.  Women like Alice Paul, who went on a hunger strike in jail and was painfully and dangerously force fed, are simply erased in the narrative that the government somehow spontaneously recognized the error of excluding women from equality under the law.  Change is difficult.  The process of social change can be ugly and brutal.  But to ignore the realities of history is to deny the work and suffering of those who fought for social justice.

Transformation can be wondrous.  But let's honor the process of transformation, as well.  We can start with these CT scans of the development inside the Vanessa cardui chrysalis.  Yes, the inside may be unpleasantly gooey, but seen from another angle, the developing butterfly is lovely.

Life is not a series of static before-and-after photos.  Life is a process of change and development.  Let science and history and psychology reveal to us the real truth of change, in all its complexity, both beautiful and ugly.  I want to know the changes the butterfly went through.  I think we all need to know.

****************************************

Notes on making these pieces:

I started with the quote and a photograph of an Owl butterfly I took when we visited the Butterfly Conservatory at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City.  The quote was an obvious fit with the photo, so that part was easy.  I did a bit of clean-up of the photo in Photoshop (cropping, fixing contrast, and using the filmgrain filter, which brightened the greens and made the colors pop more).  The photo and the quotation were printed on my Epson C88+ printer, using pre-treated fabric sheets.

I got three of the pieces started, but not finished, before my studio renovation, so they sat in limbo for about two years.  I have been eager to get back to these and finish them, but then had a bit of trouble getting started sewing after such a long hiatus.  So they have had a long mellowing process.  *grin*

(Note that you can click on the photos to enlarge them.)

Beauty of the Butterfly #1 (approx  5.9  x  8")

I started with this piece, which includes improvisational crazy piecing and raw-edge applique (using fusible web) onto a base of Timtex stabilizer (which was the base used for all the pieces).  I did some hand-embroidery to frame the appliqued fabrics, including back stitch (which I haven't done in a while) and french knots.  As with all the pieces, the quotation was fused and then edge-stitched using decorative machine stitching, backing fabric was added, and the entire piece was machine edged with a zig-zag stitch.

Beauty of the Butterfly #2 (approx 5.75 x 8")

For this piece and the next one, I explored sliced strata:  sewing strips of fabric together to create a striped unit, which is then cut at various angles and sewn back together with additional fabric strips as inserts.  I was inspired by Rayna Gillman's work (although only in general approach -- the final pieces don't look like her work at all).  I added machine stitching (with metallic thread) and some hand embroidery (using ArtFabrik's hand-dyed thread).

Beauty of the Butterfly #3 (approx 8.38 x 6.25")

This piece used the sliced strata, but with a a portrait orientation to emphasize the verticality of the insert strips (well, diagonality, I guess, since they aren't truly vertical).  I also mounted the butterfly photo on a separate piece of Timtex, added fabric binding, and then sewed it down to the main piece.  I wanted to try framing the photo separately as its own piece, rather than embedding it within the larger piece.

This separateness was enhanced by bead embellishment -- I created a picot edge using gold beads around the "framed" photo, and added seed beads, bugle beads, and glass leaf beads on the surface of the "frame."  Doing the edging proved more difficult than I expected because I did the beading after the photo was sewn down to the main piece.  Hand sewing through two layers of Timtex and four layers of fabric was challenging (I broke one needle and bent another), and I had to bring up the needle at an angle to get to the edge.  Next time, I might do some of the beading before mounting the piece (although it can be hard to machine stitch without hitting the beads).  I also found carrying the edging around the corners challenging (this was my first attempt at a picot edge) -- I might explore other options for the corner treatment in future pieces.  

The beading around the photo needed to be carried into the larger piece, as well, so I included some seed beads on the strata. I like the dimensionality that was created through the separate photo framing and bead embellishment.

Beauty of the Butterfly #4 (approx 6.15 x 8.25")

Here I went back to improvisational crazy piecing, but using the leftover strata pieces and trying to create greater value contrast with the bright green insert strips.  The fabric pieces crossed over the photograph to connect with the diagonal lines of the grass in the photo.  Unfortunately, that also cut off part of the butterfly wing.  So I printed out the butterfly photo on organza and fused the organza butterfly over the photo.  It creates an interesting effect -- the photo is a bit blurry, but also has more depth.  (The artist Wen Redmond uses organza to enhance photos on fabric, which gave me the idea.)  I added machine stitching and hand embroidery (seed stitch and french knots, using ArtFabrik's hand-dyed thread).

Beauty of the Butterfly #5 (approx. 6.5 x 8.25")

For the last piece, I wanted to go in a different direction, so I created a landscape -- or really, a grass-scape, I guess.  I was inspired by Laura Wasilowski's Craftsy class on fused collage landscapes (although I didn't strictly follow her process, nor does the piece look like her work).  I used hand-dyed fabric from Cherrywood -- my first time using their fabric, but certainly not the last.  I love the rich color and depth of their fabrics.  After prepping the fabric with fusible web, I cut out grassy shapes freehand and layered the pieces to create a field of different green grasses. I used a gray for the sky to blend in with the photo background, and fused a cloud shape from the gray fabric and one from the organza photos I had printed to create a cloud-shadow.  Then I did lots of machine stitching -- I edged the cloud shapes and did lots of "grass-stitching" in the green shapes to create texture.  I really like how it came out!

If you would like to be eligible for this week's Inspirations giveaway (for the card pictured at the top -- Beauty of the Butterfly #2), just leave a comment on this post by Sept. 6, 2015. Be sure that I have your email address so that I can notify you if you are the winner. I'll do a random draw and announce the winner during the following week.

Memories of My Mother

After a long hiatus, I have a new post on my other blog, Memories of My Mother.  I hope you enjoy it.  If you haven't visited my other blog before, you might want to read some of the earlier posts, including the first one, to get a sense of the project.

My mother, Nancy Driessel Stearns (date and place unknown)

The Sexual Double Standard: Elusive and Ever-Present

Illustration by Hayley Lim via

"She just keeps going over there because she wants his attention because she likes him.  That's disgusting.  That to me, if you want to talk about slutty, that to me is whoring yourself out.  And, I mean, I hate to say that because she is one of my best friends, but good God, it's like how stupid can you be?" (female college student at a Midwestern American university from Armstrong et al., 2014, p. 108)

The sexual double standard reflects a pattern of women being judged more negatively than men for similar sexual behaviors (Jonason & Marks, 2009).  If a man engaging in causal sex is hailed as a "stud" or "player", but a women with the same sexual history is tarred as a "slut" or "whore", it reflects the sexual double standard.  In many societies, women are held to stricter sexual standards than men are, where it is more acceptable for men to engage in premarital or extramarital sex, for example, than it is for women to do the same (Baumeister & Twenge, 2002).

Is there a sexual double standard in the United States today?  Most people would probably say yes (Marks & Fraley, 2005; Milhausen & Herold, 1999, 2001).  Certainly young women worry about being stigmatized as a slut (Armstrong et al., 2014).  

Interestingly, though, research on the sexual double standard has been mixed.  This topic has been researched fairly extensively, but the results are inconsistent:  Some studies find evidence of the sexual double standard, while other studies do not find such evidence (Crawford & Popp, 2003; Fugère et al, 2008).

View image | gettyimages.com

For example, let's look at perceptions of contraceptive use:  Is a woman judged more negatively than a man when providing a condom in a sexual encounter?  Having a condom indicates sexual readiness and possibly experience, so the sexual double standard would suggest that a woman with a condom would be seen as "slutty" while a man with a condom would be seen as "responsible."   Suppose we give people scenarios in which a woman and a man are having a casual sexual encounter, but some of the people read a scenario in which the woman provides a condom, while others read one in which the man provides a condom or a third version where no condom is used.  What would we find?

• In Hynie and Lydon (1995), female undergraduates judged the woman's behavior more negatively and as more inappropriate when she provided a condom than when her male partner did so (or when no condom was used): evidence of the sexual double standard.  They also assumed her male partner would feel more negatively about her when she provided a condom than when he provided the condom. 
• On the other hand, Kelly and Bazzini (2002) conducted the same study with both male and female undergraduates and found no evidence of the sexual double standard.  In fact, female participants (and to some extent, male participants) judged the woman more positively when she provided a condom than when no condom was used.  Although again, female students (but not male students) thought her male partner would feel more negatively about her when she provided the condom.  (This belief is important and I'll come back to it later on.)
• In Young, Penhollow, and Bailey (2010), men, but not women, exhibited the sexual double standard, rating the woman more negatively when she provided a condom (compared to the same scenario when no condom was mentioned), while the man was rated more positively when he provided a condom.  Male participants rated the female character most positively when she didn't have casual sex and least positively when she had casual sex and provided the condom, but the male character was rated least positively in the "no sex" condition and most positively when he had casual sex and provided the condom -- a classic example of the sexual double standard.   

Such conflicting results may tempt us to throw up our hands in exasperation and mutter about the deficiencies of psychological science.  But wait!  There are really only three basic explanations of this kind of mixed research evidence:

1. The effect does not exist
2. The effect exists but is very small
3. The effect exists but only under certain circumstances

Garden Remembrances

The gloomy sky offers another day of cold rain and I have been struck down by a dreadful winter illness.  In between my bouts of coughing and fevered exhaustion, I can't manage enough energy to do much of anything.  You know what I need?  Summer garden photos.  If we can have Christmas in July, why can't I have summer garden in January?

The garden wasn't really at its best in 2014, as a number of shrubs were damaged or killed by the Polar Vortex.  We lost a big rosemary plant in the front garden and had to severely cut back the hydrangea and crepe myrtle shrub in the back garden.  I still have some work to do to fill in gaps in the back garden that will continue this spring and summer.  The vegetable plot wasn't very productive, perhaps due to the increasing shade from the nearby tree.  But we had lots of new garden art, and there were lovely annual flowers.  We had some very nice (i.e., not too hot) days and I tried to keep up better with tending and weeding.  There were bunnies and butterflies and birds, including a number of hummingbird sightings, which I always find thrilling.

So let's explore the garden, shall we?

Front garden, west side (Aug 2014)

The Sex Machines Museum (Prague, Czech Republic)

We often enjoy quirky, off-beat museums, so we made time to visit two museums listed as part of "Eccentric Prague" in one of our guide books: The Museum of Torture Instruments and the Sex Machine Museum. I didn't take pictures at the torture museum -- not only was the content disturbing, but I wasn't sure about the historical accuracy of the signage or the provenance of the actual implements being shown.

But I did take photos at the Sex Machines Museum -- after all, being a sex educator, this is work related for me. (Does this make my whole trip a tax write-off?) This is the third sex-related museum we've been to -- we've seen the Museum of Sex in NYC and the Erotic Museum of Barcelona. The Sex Machine Museum in Prague was good, although I would have liked more detailed signage to provide context for the items shown. The museum exhibits included a variety of sex aids, including some elaborate mechanical sexual furniture, as well as anti-masturbation machines and clothing, chastity belts, and BDSM equipment and accessories.

[Note:  If you are offended by frank discussions or depictions of sexuality, you may not wish to read further.]

Hats! at the Ethnographic Museum in Kraków

As I perused the folk costumes at the Ethnographic Museum in Kraków, I was enchanted by the elaborately decorated hats.  I've written before about how I used to wear and collect hats.  Although I don't collect hats any more and rarely wear them, I guess I still have some inner hat lust that emerged at the sight of these beauties.

More than most accessories, hats seem full of symbolic and cultural significance.  As we were traveling, we visited synagogues, where Q was required to cover his head, and cathedrals, where he was asked to remove his hat to uncover his head.  Wearing hats can denote respect or disrespect.  Historically, women's hats have often been derided as silly fashion accoutrements, and yet a woman wasn't considered fully dressed without an appropriate hat.  Each type of hat has its own meaning -- the cap, the fedora, the bowler, all call to mind different situations and different types of people. (In one episode of the British sitcom, Are You Being Served?, they discuss specific rules about who is allowed to wear which type of hat, based on their rank in the company, for example.)  Consider this quote from Bella Abzug:

I began wearing hats as a young lawyer because it helped me to establish my professional identity. Before that, whenever I was at a meeting, someone would ask me to get coffee. -- Bella Abzug

The hats at the Ethnographic Museum seemed more like the kind one would wear on festive occasions, rather than an everyday accessory.  But as the museum signage notes, folk costumes carry a great deal of meaning about one's social place, so without a more detailed understanding of traditional Polish culture, I can't speak to the cultural significance of the hats.  But I can enjoy the artistry and adornment they represent. 

Making a Difference (whether you know it or not)

Butchart Gardens, Vancouver Island (8/2012)

With the advent of the new year, it's a good time to review the experiences, events, and achievements of the previous year.  Last year, I blogged about my cosmic footprint and tried to sum up all I had done in 2011.  But recently I've been recognizing that we often don't really know what effect we have on the world.  Sure, I can list my activities, but it's harder to capture the impact I may or may not have had on the world around me.  The carefully crafted lecture that I spent weeks refining may have breezed by my students, while an off-hand remark I made might have been a turning point for a student's academic career.

I'm reminded of an email I got over the summer from a former student.  I hadn't heard from this student in years, but I was deeply moved by the story he told.  I share it with you now (with the student's permission), not to toot my own horn, but to let you know that we can all make a difference, even if we don't know it at the time. 

I'm a UMD psych major right now who's pulled nothing but As and academic honors since becoming a full time student again, I'm going to be eligible to graduate in the fall and right now I'm going through the process of finalizing some grad school applications and taking my GRE.  I'm finishing up PSYC300 with a student I found out yesterday also came from MC and we got to talking about how hugely formative having you and Dr. Palmer as teachers was in really shaping our interests.  [. . .]

I bombed out of my freshman year at a 4 year institution, never because I couldn't do well in my classes but because frankly I just didn't care about them.  I hated my job, I hated being in school, my family situation was atrocious, I didn't like myself very much and I was really depressed about that for a very long time.  Even my time at MC was approached very half-heartedly, just stumbling through random classes hoping to find something that would really interest me.  Plenty I would just not show up to after a few weeks because even the idea of coming to class just made me feel deathly bored.

I took PSYC100 over the summer with you what feels like a life time ago and I know it sounds really cheesy to say, but that was without a doubt the best experience I'd ever had with either a professor, or an academic subject ever.  I found I really loved the material which helped, but more than that I was really struck by how much you obviously loved what you do and that really resonated with me for a very long time.  That was exactly the kind of engagement I was looking for in my life.  I felt challenged and engaged in your class and even though it was hugely inconvenient for me to make the trek to Rockville then, I always looked forward to coming to school for that.  I don't think I can really explain how enormously important that was to me.

I ended up taking Human Sexuality simply because you were teaching it, and Abnormal Psyc with Dr. Palmer, even though neither class fulfilled any kind of a requirement for me at the time.  I started reading psych books for fun.  For a few years, I didn't do more than that, because I really didn't think that I could go to school for that, let alone get a career in it.  Going to school for several more years seemed daunting but much more than that, I didn't think I'd be good enough so I didn't try to do more.  My life was a mess, I struggled enormously with depression.  Things really started to run around for me eventually. I found myself a really great therapist with many of the same qualities I saw in the teachers I had at MC.  I got a lot of the encouragement I need from her to really pursue that interest and I was lucky to have really great teachers for my other psych classes.  Long story short now I'm looking at entering a grad program for the 2013 school year.  How that's going to play out exactly is still very uncertain, and even if I feel like I don't always feel like I know what I'm doing making that leap, I can't imagine working towards anything else.

So from the bottom of my heart, thank you.  Even though I probably didn't show it very much when I was in your class (I was a really average student at best), you've had a huge impact in shaping who I am today.  Please don't underestimate the impact you can have on students, even those that you aren't really sure if you're reaching or not.

I am truly fortunate to be able to work with such amazing students, and to have the opportunity to help them find their way in life.  But we all have the potential to make the world a better place.  To paraphrase my student's sentiment, please don't underestimate the impact you can have on others, even if you aren't really sure you are reaching them.  Your passion, your enthusiasm, your caring, your encouragement, your commitment touch those around you, even though you may not see it at the time.  Don't give up.  You, too, can make a difference . . . whether you know it or not.

Some of my Social Psychology students
at the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History (3/2012)

Continuity

Results of the baking frenzy of 2011

I don't know how it all started.  Maybe it was the holiday visit to my high school boyfriend's family.  I baked cookies to bring as a gift.  But they'd like a variety of cookies, surely, so I'd need to make different kinds.  Somehow I ended up surrounded by tins of cookies -- far too many, really.  Was it then that I thought to give the extras to my friends?

It really snowballed in college and graduate school.  I became well-known for my cookie baking:  More and more of my friends asked to be on my holiday cookie list.  I spent days baking to make enough for everyone.  I hunted for new recipes, bored by the old standbys.  After final exams were over, I'd immure myself in the kitchen, surrounded by flour and butter and sugar, in marathon baking sessions that left my feet aching from the hours of standing, my hands wearied from mixing and rolling. An enjoyable pastime had become an exhausting mandate. 

Decorated by Q (2012)

Linguistic Lacunae: What Our Sexual Language is (not) Saying

“Language and culture cannot be separated. Language is vital to understanding our unique cultural perspectives. Language is a tool that is used to explore and experience our cultures and the perspectives that are embedded in our cultures.”  -- Buffy Sainte-Marie

Language reflects and recreates culture.  Cultural attitudes become crystallized in language, which then serves to reinforce those cultural attitudes.  It behooves us to carefully examine our language, to interrogate the meanings lurking within our everyday speech. 

Take our sexual language, for example.¹ The way we talk about sex speaks volumes about our cultural attitudes towards sex.  I don't just mean the pervasive sexism of our sexual slang that reveals itself through the construction of women's bodies as dirty and the continued presence of the sexual double standard (Braun & Kitzinger, 2001; Schultz, 1975).  I don't even mean the negative view of sex that becomes obvious whenever sexual terms are used as crude insults.  Of course these themes are revealing and deeply troubling.  But our cultural attitudes are also evinced through what is missing from our sexual lexicon.

Take a moment to think about the sexual words and phrases you know -- terms for parts of the body, sexual acts, all of it.  (Go ahead; I'll wait.)  Then think about what is *not* present in this sexual language.  There are several important aspects of sexuality that get short shrift in our sexual lexicon.

[Note:  Sexual terminology will be mentioned after the jump, so if you are offended by crude or explicit language, you may not wish to read further.]

Appreciating the Commonplace

I've been thinking about birds recently.  In particular, I've been pondering the thrill that runs through me every time I see this woodpecker visit our yard.  Sightings cause me to rush to the window, crying out "Look -- the woodpecker is at the feeder!"  Q has been very tolerant of these outbursts (even when they interrupt our conversations), but I suspect he doesn't understand my fascination with this red-headed avian.  Why does this bird make me so happy?  Obviously, it's a beautiful creature, with an elegantly long beak and rich coloration.  The brightly colored birds do tend to catch my eye (as I've noted before, I'm a sucker for color).   

The Great Material Continuum

Among the Ferengi people of the Star Trek universe, there is a belief in the Great Material Continuum.  This represents the trade that they see as the force binding all life in the universe, the river that flows from those who have to those who need.  The Ferengi see the Continuum as an opportunity for profit, but I attempt to traverse the river on a nonprofit basis. 

She *really* likes it: Eroticizing women's labor

I definitely do not look this happy when I am scrubbing the tub.
Image from Deviantly Domesticated (with funny commentary on lots of vintage ads)

Image from wonderfriend

Have you ever noticed how happy the women are in ads for cleaning products?  These advertisements  often glamorize domestic labor and imply that women are positively euphoric while cleaning (at least with the right product in hand).  You too can love cleaning and be floor-happy . . . with our product!  But some of the ads go further, implying that cleaning is an erotic experience for women.  In the Hoover ad below, for example, the woman is in a prone position, touching the vacuum lightly -- there is something intimate, almost romantic about the way they are situated (as well as putting her in a submissive position).   

I bet she'd be happier if
you promised to do the cleaning.
Image from SA_Steve on Flickr

This Pine-Sol ad, on the other hand, presents the woman in an orgiastic glow, presumably due to the stimulating qualities of the cleaning solution.  Who needs foreplay when you have Pine-Sol?

Pine-Sol -- with new aphrodisiac action!
Image from ThoughtCatalogue, who provides an
interesting retrospective of the Pine-Sol lady.

Janitors and Maids

Prompted by a Facebook discussion of my last post:

All this talk about professional cleaners got me to thinking about the distinction between janitors and maids.  Janitors tend to be men, while maids tend to be women.  According to the United States' Bureau of Labor Statistics, women make up 30.3% of janitors and building cleaners, while they make up 88.6% of maids and housekeeping cleaners.  Why? What is the key difference that makes one more male-dominated and one more female-dominated?

Let's start with the job descriptions.  The job description for janitors in the Bureau of Labor Statistics indicates that "[j]anitors and building cleaners keep many types of buildings clean, orderly, and in good condition," while the job description for maids indicates that "[m]aids and housekeeping cleaners do general cleaning tasks, including making beds and vacuuming halls, in private homes and commercial establishments."  These sound like very similar jobs to me.  Both involve cleaning buildings, although maids also work in private homes and janitors are involved in keeping buildings in good condition, as well as clean.  I'm still not quite getting the critical distinction that accounts for the gender disparity.  

Maid: Unpacking Ambivalence

Sometimes, while I am engaged in some unpleasant cleaning task, I think about how nice it would be to hire someone to do some of these cleaning jobs.  I'm not talking about a weekly whole-house cleaning (I can't envision that, somehow), just having someone in occasionally to clean the kitchen and bathrooms.  When I'm on my hands and knees scrubbing the kitchen floor, the vision of a professional service sweeping in and leaving behind clean, gleaming surfaces beckons to me.  And yet, apart from the time we hired a cleaning service when we moved out of our rental house (it seemed a good investment to make sure we got our deposit back), I haven't succumbed to the temptation of professional house cleaners.  In part, this is due to entropy (the irony of doing hours of scrubbing because I'm too lazy to call and arrange the service does not escape me) and being worried about the quality of their work (will things get broken or damaged?  I know I can do this safely and carefully -- will they?), but I also have a strong discomfort with the prospect of handing off my cleaning to professionals.  It seems the epitome of bourgeois privilege to not have to do one's own cleaning.  Let's face it, even with all my careful talk about cleaning professionals, the term that comes to mind is . . . maid.  And I'm not ready to have a maid.

Versatility

Most of the blogs I read are fairly focused.  There are blogs about politics, or art, or science, or the joys of a gluten-free diet.  Some bloggers discuss their daily lives, but that also provides focus.  By concentrating on a particular topic or theme, bloggers can tap into the readership interested in that theme.  Like most of modern life, blogging is about specializing; find your niche and become a voice for that topic. 

The reader perusing my blog might well wonder, "What is this blog about?" While certainly there are themes in my writing, I tend to be interested in a fairly broad range of topics and issues.  If I restrict my focus to just one topic, there isn't enough scope -- it feels too confining, too much like work.  Part of what is fun about being an academic is the potential to explore new ideas and consider all kinds of issues.  I have long resisted the push to specialize, researching across disparate topics and teaching in different areas of psychology and women's studies.  I have pursued a number of creative outlets, as well, including singing, acting, dancing, gardening, herbcraft, beading, and textile arts.  I love the vast scope of possibility I see before me and I want to sample it all. 

Of course, what specialization offers is the ability to go deep and become expert in a particular area.  The dangers of a broad scope of interest is being a dilettante -- knowing a little about many things but not much about any of them, being a jack-of-all-trades and master of none.  There are risks to the narrow focus, as well; the specialist may miss important connections between different topics or across fields.  Many innovations stem from the juxtaposition of seemingly unrelated areas of interest (as discussed in Jonah Lehrer's new book, Imagine).  The broadly educated person may be more well-rounded and find inspiration across disparate interests. 

“One purpose of a liberal arts education is to make your head a more interesting place to live inside of for the rest of your life.”  -- Mary Patterson McPherson, President of Bryn Mawr College

Q designed a logo for me --
What do you think?

The only real theme of my blogging is that I like to think about things (in psychological terms, this is called a high need for cognition).  And truly, there isn't much audience for a blog that's just think-y, without any clear focus.  But then, my friend and fellow blogger db mcneill, author of the momsomniac blog, nominated me for the Versatile Blogger Award.  After being surprised and pleased by the nomination -- thank you, db mcneill! -- I got to thinking about what it means to be versatile.

The power of names

Lore and legend has long held that true names have power.  From the Egyptian gods of the netherworld to Rumpelstiltskin, deities and supernatural beings of all kind can be controlled, dismissed, or invoked through saying their true name.  To know something's true name is to know its shape and thus do we leash it and make it bow to our will.

But what is a true name?  Proper names seem particularly unlikely as true names.  Inherited or given at birth, these are merely arbitrary handles that seem to have no connection to our inner self.  But at times these names, random syllables as they are, become part of our selves.  The name has been attached to us and we grow attached to it.  As we become entwined with our name, we may come to see it as at least a fragment of our inner self.

Proper names are poetry in the raw.  Like all poetry they are untranslatable.  ~W.H. Auden

Exuberant enthusiasm and concomitant excess

So often we are advised to practice moderation.  "All things in moderation," they murmur, urging us to sample pleasures in small portions.  We are assured that excess is bad; after all it is, well . . . excessive.

I've never been good at moderation.  I'm full of bubbling enthusiasm that inspires me to fling myself wholeheartedly into one activity after another.  I go from a passionate pursuit of teaching perfection to months of extreme gardening only to then throw myself into a grandiose creative project.  There is no temperate jogging for me -- I'm always running full-tilt.

I've never forgotten some words of wisdom my undergraduate class received during our college orientation.  We were urged to pursue our passions intensely.  If we enjoyed a writer's work, we should read everything we could find by that author.  If mathematics intrigued us, we should immerse ourselves in the study of mathematics.  I found this advice deeply compelling.  The idea of plunging headfirst into something, letting it take me over completely, fit my approach to life.  Moderation be damned!  If we are going to do something, let's really go for it, fully and without reservation.  I wanted to meet life with exuberant enthusiasm, not cautious reserve.  Indeed, in my first year of college one of my friends gave me a sign that reads, I Am Subject To Bursts of Enthusiasm.  I have it on my shelf today as a badge of pride. 

The value of dissent

Contemplating the journey (Sagrada Familia by Antonio Gaudi, Barcelona)*

In my Psychology of Human Sexuality class on Wednesday, we had an intense discussion about sexual assault.  We talked about a number of commonly-held beliefs about sexual assault, including the issue of whether women are "asking" to be raped when they dress in sexy outfits or when they invite a man into their home.  One of the students (I'll call her Pat -- not her real name) was of the opinion that women should be held accountable for such choices.  She argued that women should be aware of how these behaviors will be viewed by others in our society, and stated baldly that she had less sympathy for a rape victim who had dressed revealingly.   I (along with other students) challenged her assumptions regarding the cultural meanings of any given behavior and made the case that nothing justifies assault.  She acknowledged some of our points but was unpersuaded and stuck to her opinion with considerable passion.

It would be easy for me to see this interchange as a teaching failure -- I failed to convince Pat to give up her belief.  I failed to persuade her that such beliefs reflect a cultural mythology that justifies rape through victim-blaming.  Certainly, I find such rape myths deeply problematic, part of a larger societal system that normalizes sexual assault and silences victims who believe they are somehow at fault for their victimization.  Yet while I am utterly opposed to Pat's beliefs about rape, and I strive to eradicate such myths at every opportunity, I still consider this discussion a success.

The Crowd that Makes the Renowned

The 2010 U.S. Professors of the Year who are also ΦBK at the Capitol Hill reception. Pictured left to right: ΦBK Associate Secretary Scott Lurding, Lendol Calder, Deborah C. Stearns, Andrew W. Kindon, Betsy A. Bowen, Mike Veseth, Frances Tiller Pilch and ΦBK Secretary John Churchill.

It's been a big year for me, a year full of accolades and recognition.  I was named the 2010 Maryland Professor of the Year by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education (CASE).  This is one of the most prestigious awards honoring professors, and the only national award for undergraduate teaching.  As a result, I was also featured in an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education and in a spot on MCTV, Montgomery College's television station.

The Meaning of Moaning

It's that time again -- V-Day season -- and I'm working with students and faculty to put together the Montgomery College production of Eve Ensler's "The Vagina Monologues", which will be on Wednesday, March 30 at 7:00pm in the Theatre Arts Arena at Montgomery College (Rockville, MD).  I'll be performing with a new piece for me, one I have wanted to perform for a while.  This monologue features a sex worker, a dominatrix who works exclusively with women, and who is obsessed with women's moans.  I particularly like the narrative because it includes a fascinating analysis of the source and meaning of moaning, which appeals to my intellectual nature.  At the end, she demonstrates an array of different types of moans.  This typically elicits howls of laughter from the audience and can be a show-stopper when done really well.  (But no pressure, right?)  I'm enjoying the challenge of working on this piece, but it also got me thinking about our reaction to women's moans.  Why do they generate such a strong response?

Our response to women's moaning is, in part, reflective of our broader cultural ambivalence regarding sexuality, and women's sexual pleasure in particular.  Our culture has considerable discomfort about public displays (or even discussions) of sexuality, so this litany of moans is bound to be a little uncomfortable for some.  Moreover, we have particularly ambivalent attitudes regarding women's sexual pleasure.  In many (but not all) cultures today, women are expected to experience sexual pleasure; indeed, part of a heterosexual man's sexual prowess is measured by his ability to bring his female partner to the height of ecstasy during lovemaking.  Yet, if she is too demonstrative in her pleasure, she risks being seen as wild, oversexed, loose, a bad girl: a slut.  (The remnants of the sexual double standard at work here.)  In other words, she should enjoy sex, but not too much.  So women's moaning is fraught with meaning, as it is presumably evidence of her sexual pleasure.  She mustn't moan too much or too loud, but some discreet moaning will be met with approval, even approbation . . . if it is genuine.

As a demonstration of pleasure, moaning is also suspect, since it can so easily be faked.  Women's sexual pleasure is often viewed with suspicion.  Given the significance of women's sexual pleasure and our general belief that women don't want or enjoy sex as much as men do, it is easy to understand why we think women may "fake" pleasure.  (This fear is not unwarranted:  One study [Elliott & Brantley, 1997] found that 60% of heterosexual, and 71% of lesbian or bisexual, college women reported faking orgasm at some point.  On the other hand, we could be suspect of men's pleasure, too, as 17% of heterosexual, and 27% of gay or bisexual college men reported that they had faked orgasm at some point.)  The classic scene from the film When Harry Met Sally in which Sally gives an extended performance of sexual pleasure that is obviously fake illustrates the cultural anxiety surrounding signs of women's sexual enjoyment. 



In her book Hard Core:  Power, Pleasure, and the "Frenzy of the Visible", Linda Williams (1989) argues that the central dilemma of pornography is how to represent women's sexual pleasure.  While (presumably authentic) male pleasure can be visibly demonstrated by erection and ejaculation, "the visual terms of the cinema do not allow the female protagonists of hard-core films to authenticate their pleasure" (Williams, 1989, p. 32).  While the woman may moan and writhe in the film, how do we know it's for real?  Hard-core films then rely on other cinematic mechanisms to putatively reveal women's sexual pleasure, often using displays of male pleasure as though they are intrinsically representative of female pleasure (hence, the use of the money shot).

So it is not surprising that the litany of moans given on stage during "The Vagina Monologues" would generate a strong reaction.  The monologue highlights the sexual pleasure of women, about which we already have considerable ambivalence (too much = slut;  too little = frigid).  The sexual pleasure is being given by a woman to another woman, with no man involved.  If women don't need men for sexual pleasure, that threatens men's status as the ultimate source of women's sexual pleasure and undermines one of the core pillars of masculinity (as defined in our culture).  The moans in the monologue are obviously fake, highlighting the concerns about the authenticity of women's sexual response (if she can fake it this convincingly on stage, then maybe all my lovers have been faking it too).  In other words, the monologue foregrounds anxieties about the authenticity of women's sexual response, which further undermines the degree to which a man can be sure of his sexual prowess, and hence, his masculinity.

With all that going on, of course we guffaw -- what else can we do?  Eve Ensler has found a way to get to the heart of our cultural anxieties surrounding sex and gender, but in such a way that we can laugh at ourselves.  The humor is deftly woven through the show, giving us a way to release some of our discomfort as our assumptions regarding women's sexuality are challenged and we learn about the diversity of women's experiences.  The show is a powerful experience, for performers and audience alike, but it is also a lot of fun.  I am, as always, struck by the capacity of V-Day to educate, transform, and entertain.  

I hope to see you at the show! 

References:
Elliott, L., & Brantley, C.  (1997).  Sex on campus.  New York: Random House. 

Williams, L.  (1989).  Hard core:  Power, pleasure, and the "frenzy of the visible."  Berkeley:  University of California Press.