Shira Tarrant, editor of the fabulous Men Speak Out, is at it again with a call for essays for a new academic anthology, this time on feminism and fashion, tentatively titled Feminism, Fashion and Flair: Confronting Hegemony with Style. Here’s the description:

Fashion is a powerful way we express our politics, personalities, and preferences for who and how we love. Yet fashion can also repress freedom and sexual expression. Fashion encourages profound creativity, rebellion, and defiant self-definition while simultaneously controlling and disciplining the body. Fashion signals resistance to sexual morés and it can also promote a problematic consumer culture. Fashion creates collective identity, but also constrains individual voice. In other words, fashion contains the paradoxical potential for pleasure and subjugation, expression and conformity.

This book explores the productive tensions generated by fashion and style. We are interested in essays that take up questions of gender with special attention to race, class, sexuality, age, and ethnicity. This collection blends theory and pop culture analysis in exciting ways, focusing on contemporary trends and controversies.

Suggested topics include, but are not limited to:
Theories of agency, style, and the presentation of self
Performing identity: race, class, gender and sexuality through style
Consumerist pleasure and anxiety
Fashion production in the context of global capital and trade
Bois, grrls, trannies and styles of queerness
Hardcore, metro, punk, and khakis: constructing masculinities through fashion
Body art and ethnic appropriations
Debates in plastic surgery and re-fashioning the body
Class identity and decorating domestic space
Feminist fashion: debates over style and politics
The ethics of green production and marketing
Everyday pornography and fashion fetish
Virtual style and online identities
Material culture and craft in a postmodern world
Slumming and radical chic: tensions of authenticity and irony
Vintage and thrift fashion: nostalgia and class signifiers
DIY Style: fashion off the corporate grid

Deadline for abstracts is August 15, 2008.

Format for abstracts: Word document, double-spaced, between 300 and 500 words. Include contact information and short bio.

Send to: FashionBook1@yahoo.com

Shira Tarrant
Assistant Professor
Women’s Studies Department
California State University, Long Beach

and

Marjorie Jolles
Assistant Professor
Women’s & Gender Studies Program
Roosevelt University

It’s my delight, as always, to bring you this guest post from GWP regular Virginia Rutter, prof of sociology at Framingham State College, to whom I send out a big batch of xxoo! -Deborah

My organizational alma mater, the National Council for Research on Women, has two open positions and I’ve been wanting to help them spread the word. If you or someone you know seems right for these, please let them know.

POSITION 1 – Director of Research and Programs

The Director of Research and Programs will report to the President and will take primary responsibility for overseeing and implementing the organization’s programmatic and research agendas and its policy-oriented programs, including working groups, convenings, research reports and relevant advisory committees. A primary responsibility will include bringing the work of the Council and its network of Member Centers to inform public debate and policies, and manage and oversee the Council’s rapid response function. The Director of Research and Programs will also oversee the work with the Council’s 116 Member Centers. This will include developing stronger relationships among the centers, organizing conferences and convenings, assisting centers with identifying funding sources for their research, and providing technical assistance where needed. The Director will also work with and manage relations with relevant Board Committees.

The Director of Research and Programs will also help provide vision and strategic direction to the Council’s programs, and help to ensure the organization’s fiscal health through program-related fundraising, proposal writing, internal and external communications, and the use of technology to meet the needs of its various members, and other partners. The Director will also ensure that diversity and inclusion are core values and a strong component of all our strategic goals. The position also entails managing, training, and supervising staff and interns.

This is a unique opportunity to play a central role in shaping the work of a prestigious organization that is making substantial and significant contributions to the women’s research movement. The new Director will be expected to strengthen the programmatic focus and direction of this growing organization and improve the ability of the Council to implement quality programs. The ideal candidate will be detail-oriented, self-motivated, informed, committed to success, deadline-driven and a team player capable of and committed to contributing to the senior management team’s strategic thinking about the Council’s future direction. She/he will also have excellent writing and research skills and the ability to translate research across various arenas. A social science or public policy background is preferred.

Ideal Experience and Qualifications
We seek a sophisticated professional with five years of experience in program development and management, preferably in organizations that share the Council’s commitment to women’s empowerment and to using research to promote social change. The ideal candidate will be expected to have general familiarity with the broader areas of women’s research and policy related issues. S/he will also have the managerial and strategic planning acumen to accomplish policy program goals and objectives. In addition, the candidate will have the following qualifications:

· Self-starter with a demonstrated ability to identify priorities, work independently, and prioritize multiple activities and tasks;
· Extensive knowledge of public policies at the state and federal level
· Intellectual flexibility to engage a dynamic array of issues;
· Successful experience translating vision and ideas into working programs, creating networks and collaborations, and building partnerships with people of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, personalities, and talents;
· Proven track record in creating and implementing programs dealing with issues related to the Council’s mission and a demonstrated commitment to social change;
· Track record and experience with international issues and issues related to race, class, ethnicity, and other markers of difference is highly desirable;
· Successful experience managing or coordinating a research agenda/program; overseeing and coordinating the activities of advisors, consultants, and other participants;
· Expertise in developing publications, positions papers, and reports; organizing meetings, conferences, and other events; overseeing logistics and programs;
· Excellent verbal and written communication skills and the ability to represent the Council to a broad public;
· Credibility and experience to connect the Council to resources and opportunities outside the organization;
· An MA or Ph.D. in a related field (public policy, law, human rights, political and/or social sciences). Some experience in the nonprofit sector is desired.

POSITION 2 – temporary, part-time Researcher

The temporary, part-time researcher will be responsible for gathering critical data and research at the national level and in battleground states on the BIG FIVE issues*, especially data produced by our network of Member Centers and partners. The researcher should have the ability to identify multiple and reliable sources and develop fact sheets that will lay the groundwork for position papers that will be developed by the lead researcher, under whose supervision the temporary researcher will work. The content gathered will be a centerpiece of the campaign and will be used by advocates, thought leaders, and stakeholders to amplify the voices of women and girls in the upcoming election cycle. This is a Temporary, Part-Time position that could expand into additional opportunities, depending on the candidate’s abilities, and the Council’s needs.

*The BIG FIVE Campaign will bring together the Council’s 117 Member Centers, and strategic partners, to interject a gender lens and voice in the presidential campaign and the next Aministration. Specifically, the campaign aims to influence national debates and shape public policies that directly impact the lives of women and girls by highlighting the critical issues that face them. These issues encompass economic security, health, immigration, violence, and education.

Responsibilities
· Undertake in-depth research for the BIG FIVE campaign focusing on economic security, immigration, health, violence and education.
· Synthesize data and develop fact sheets for each of the BIG FIVE issue areas.
· Work under the direction of the lead researcher.

Qualifications:
· A Bachelors degree, with preference given to Ph.D. candidates or those with a Masters in a relevant field (e.g. public policy, government, economics, health, immigration, women’s studies, education)
· 2-4 years research experience
· Excellent research skills, preferably in a non-profit environment
· Attention to detail and excellent organizational, written, and oral communication skills
· Strong electronic and word processing skills including, website maintenance (CMS, Dreamweaver), Constant Contact, email campaigns, blogs and on-line social networking. Working knowledge of Donor Perfect, HTML, PowerPoint, and Excel ia plus
· Ability and willingness to work in a diverse environment
· Exceptional interpersonal communication skills and ability to network comfortably and effectively in both public and private sectors
· Flexibility, patience, a willingness to take on multiple tasks, efficiency, a friendly disposition, sense of humor, and problem-solving skills
· Interest and commitment to women’s rights and feminist issues

Applications will be reviewed as received. Applications, which will not be reviewed without a cover letter describing your interest and qualifications, your resume (in Word or PDF format), a writing sample, and salary history, should be sent to: jobs@ncrw.org. In order to expedite the internal sorting and reviewing process, please write your name (Last, First, job title) as the only contents in the subject line of your e-mail.

For a fuller (!) description of the positions and who they’re looking for, please email the Council at ncrw@ncrw.org.

Just wanted to thank everyone for all those good wishes yesterday, and on the day I posted Girl w/Groom (my one post during the honeymoon)! You made my day.

Here’s one of my fave New Mexico pics (left), if only because it recalls a delicious state of mind. While Marco was climbing down into the Rio Grande River Gorge braving death-defying heights in order to get pictures of rocks, I was happily meditating up top. Breathing in, breathing out, ahhh….

It’s my first day back and I’m still feeling as high as I felt when I was carried into the air on this chair!

Before anything, I wish to extend heartfelt thanks to everyone who kept GWP going while I was gone, and particularly Kristen, blog steward extraordinaire. The wedding was bliss, the honeymoon was delicious, and coming back to a blog in full swing was a gift like none other.

Going away gives one a sense of perspective and, upon return, I feel we’ve really created something here, this lil GWP community. I love the plethora of voices these past few weeks and would so hate to give that up. I LOVED the content our guest bloggers posted (and will be contacting you one by one to follow up and express more personal gratitude)!

Speaking of which, I feel us naturally evolving into more of a group forum — possibly even a group blog. Do you agree? Please let me know what you think of the idea of turning GWP into a group blog in comments here — and also if you would be interested in being considered as a regular contributing blogger (you can also email me at girlwpen@gmail.com)! And soon, I’ll post a survey to get more of a sense of your feelings.

Meanwhile, a hearty welcome to new readers (traffic and subscription were both UP UP UP while I was away!!), and to you loyal standbys, thank you for being here!

I’m off to catch up on a thousand emails and will be back posting GWPish content tomorrow, but wanted to leave you with my gratitude — which, as I learned while putting together a wedding toast to our guests, has been called by someone or other “happiness mixed with wonder.” That’s absolutely what I’m feeling right now, post-wedding/honeymoon high, and returning to a virtual community that has become so very meaningful to me and so very, very real.

Well, I am off on a much-needed vacation, as you can see by the picture of me in my traveling hat, and Deborah will be back next week, but I wanted to leave you with one last post for the weekend. Existing in the feminist blogosphere, one inevitably comes across the unpleasant, the misinformed, the spouters of inanities, the ignorant, bigoted, misogynistic and the more than slightly unhinged. In a world of internet anonymity, it is well known, seemingly mild-mannered humans will give free reign to all that is most crass in them. And it is up to the blogger or website master to decide how much they will stomach.

There are various options. Some allow everything and anything to be said—in the name of free speech or notoriety. Some screen all comments before they post, or any comments from new commenters. For example the policy at Bitch PhD is “Comments are great; obnoxious comments get deleted. Deal.” Others, like Feministing, “don’t feed the troll”: i.e. they ask their commenters not to respond to comments that are intellectually prehistoric. The feminist blogosphere, constantly dealing with the misogynistic, are lucky to have a site such as Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog where they can send such misogynists for an elementary education. Needless to say, those sent to reform school are rarely pleased with the offering.

Ryan Singel at Wired Magazine recently wrote about a lawsuit against a number of commenters/posters and the administrator of the web forum, AutoAdmit.com. One commenter, charmingly named “AK-47” targeted two women Jane Doe I and Jane Doe II, who had been admitted to one of the country’s top law school, Yale Law. Here’s what happened:

The AutoAdmit controversy began even before one of the women, identified in court documents as “Jane Doe I,” started classes in the fall of 2005, the lawsuit alleges. Doe I was alerted in the summer to an AutoAdmit comment thread entitled “Stupid Bitch to Attend Law School.” The thread included messages such as, “I think I will sodomize her. Repeatedly” and a reply claiming “she has herpes.” The second woman, Jane Doe II, was similarly attacked beginning in January 2007.

Both women tried in vain to persuade the administrators of the AutoAdmit.com site to remove the threads, according to the lawsuit. But then the story of the cyber-harassment hit the front page of The Washington Post, and the law school trolls became fodder for cable news shows. Soon after, the female law students, with help from Stanford and Yale law professors, filed the federal lawsuit in June 2007 seeking hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages.

The Jane Doe plaintiffs contend that the postings about them became etched into the first page of search engine results on their names, costing them prestigious jobs, infecting their relationships with friends and family, and even forcing one to stop going to the gym for fear of stalkers.

While the women asked the administrator, Anthony Ciolli, to take the comment thread down, Ciolli refused. He has since been removed from the lawsuit. I have various reactions to this, as I imagine you all do as well. In reality, internet “free speech” is a very different beast from real world “free speech.” Until now, the internet been an essentially anonymous forum with little chance that one will be held responsible or incriminated by one’s words, as long as one remains behind the mask of the moniker. This has spawned good things, such as Bitch PhD. But it also allows for maximum impact with minimal responsibility. Here’s what I mean by maximum impact: the postings about Jane Doe I and II became so attached to their names that they showed up on the front page of search engines, which would inevitably be seen by future employers trying to dig up all the information they could on their potential law associates. AK-47, however, remained nothing more than AK-47.

I have been raised in a generation that understands that everything one writes or says may become fodder for the front page of a Google search devoted strictly to their life. Lucky are the Emily Smiths and Mark Cohens among us. Some would argue that our norms have changed as a result—we hardly bat an eye on learning that Obama tried coke, whereas just a decade ago it was a scandale whether Clinton had inhaled or not. The Chronicle of Higher Education and Inside Higher Ed has documented how the Academy views professors blogging for public consumption. And I am aware that the above silly picture might just be viewed someday by someone who wants to take my work very seriously. Alas.

But there is still an imbalance between the complete anonymity of some commenters who can drag a person’s name through the mud at will, the lack of consequences, and the inability of that person to erase the link from the Google frontpage. Should webmasters be required to reveal commenter’s identities in egregious circumstances? Should there be more lawsuits such as this one? In the future, will we become more permissive toward embarrassing photographs, blog posts, and stories from the past?

–Kristen

Here’s a news round-up from the beginning of this week, courtesy of Rebekah Spicuglia and Women’s Media Center Daily News Brief. Any other stories you think we should be reading? Post them in the comments below, please! –Kristen

In Study, Evidence Of Liberal-Bias Bias
7/27/08
LA Times: Cable talking heads accuse broadcast networks of liberal bias — but a think tank finds that ABC, NBC and CBS were tougher on Barack Obama than on John McCain in recent weeks.

Military Women Fight Sexual Assault
7/27/08
AP via Chicago Tribune: Sexual assault and harassment involving female military personnel is not a new consequence of war. But the sheer number of women serving today – more than 190,000 so far in Iraq and Afghanistan – is forcing the military and the Department of Veterans Affairs to more aggressively address the issue.

McCain Backs Ban On Quotas
7/28/08
Boston Globe: John McCain said yesterday that he supports a proposed ballot initiative in his home state that would prohibit affirmative action policies in state and local governments.

Literacy Debate: Online, R U Really Reading?
7/27/08
NY Times: Internet-addicted children like Nadia lie at the heart of a passionate debate about just what it means to read in the digital age. The discussion is playing out among educational policy makers and reading experts around the world, and within groups like the National Council of Teachers of English and the International Reading Association.

Couric to Lead CBS News’ Convention Coverage
7/29/08
Broadcasting & Cable: As expected, Katie Couric will lead CBS News’ coverage of the political conventions later this summer.

Sexuality Bias Seen At Justice Department
7/29/08
LA Times: On Monday, the Justice Department’s internal watchdog hinted at perhaps the most sensational justification yet — perceived homosexuality. In a series of reports on the tenure of former Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales, the department’s inspector general found that two former Justice aides used sexual orientation as a litmus test in deciding whom they would hire or fire.

Nancy Pelosi Airs Some Clean Laundry in ‘Power’
7/28/08
Washington Post: In her new book “Know Your Power,” Nancy Pelosi explores the route to becoming the first female speaker of the House, including growing up in Baltimore (where her father and brother both served as mayor), her years organizing in Democratic politics in California and her decision to run for Congress at 47.

Filmmakers’ Point: Putting Women In Charge
7/29/08
SF Chronicle: Filmmakers Amy Sewell (“Mad Hot Ballroom”) and Susan Toffler decided to make Wilson and six other smart, ambitious young women the focus of their new film, “What’s Your Point, Honey?” A feminist film, it looks at the political gender gap through the lives of these ethnically diverse women.

Slate writer, Jack Shafer, wrote a provocative article last week on a “double standard” at play in the media’s treatment of scandalous love affairs. Now, I think it is easy to pinpoint that double standard at work for women versus men: just look at the flack over CBS chief foreign affairs correspondent, Lara Logan’s relationships in Iraq, which spread to the front page of the New York Post. And she’s not even a nationally-recognized figure.

But Shafer claims, in light of the new “scandal,” or lack thereof, over John Edwards’ alleged affair, we need to pinpoint another double standard in media treatment: that of Larry Craig, of the infamous wide stance, versus John Edwards. Questioning why the media hasn’t jumped all over the potential affair and love child of a man who campaigned for president on the strength of his family values, Shafer asks:

So why hasn’t the press commented on the story yet? Is it because it broke too late yesterday afternoon, and news organizations want to investigate it for themselves before writing about it? Or are they observing a double standard that says homo-hypocrisy is indefensible but that hetero-hypocrisy deserves an automatic bye?

Shafer does point out some of the differences between the two cases (notably, a police blotter in one), and I have never really looked to the National Enquirer, which broke the Edwards story, as a news authority– but it is impossible to deny that a story, either to verify or debunk, is there, simmering, with everyone too afraid? skeptical? uninterested? to look into it.

But no matter what Edwards actually did or did not do, it seems to me that Shafer has something on the double standards. News media love salacious stories, and in America, here is what is salacious: 1) a beautiful woman with lovers (promiscuous!), 2) a gay senator (gay!). Here is what is run-of-the-mill: a male politician with a mistress on the side.

–Kristen

Image Credit

Last week, the New York Times published an article on how the slowing economy is affecting women equally to men, which claimed that:

After moving into virtually every occupation, women are being afflicted on a large scale by the same troubles as men: downturns, layoffs, outsourcing, stagnant wages or the discouraging prospect of an outright pay cut. And they are responding as men have, by dropping out or disappearing for a while.

The discussion continued on Girl with Pen, where Virginia Rutter’s detailed the research behind the, gasp, realization that women workers may not be choosing to “opt out,” as the anecdotes go, but instead leave work for the same reasons men do: because of downturns in the economy.

I wanted to post a few remarks from our commenters, who had their own angles on the “opt out” question.

Marjorie noted: I’d also be interested in seeing if the researchers accounted for women who “opted out” of the labor force in order to start their own businesses. I left traditional paid employment for good earlier this year to pursue a career as a freelance writer, for example.

I wonder if there are any statistics on the percentage of women versus men in the nontraditional, freelance workplace– does anyone have any idea?

And anniegirl1138 had the following insight: I am curious though about what impact the rising costs or child and elder care might play and the fact that in a down employment cycle men might be taking jobs in service sectors that typically went to women.

Which was a very keen observation. In a letter to the editor yesterday, Sara K. Gould, President and Chief Executive of the Ms. Foundation for Women, made a similar point: women are not the “equals” of men in the poor economy, but instead:

Today, despite decades of struggle for job access and pay equity, women are paid 77 cents for each dollar a man makes; the disparity is worse for African-American women, who earn 62 cents, and Latinas, who earn 53 cents.

Nearly 10.5 million women are single parents (as compared with 2.5 million single fathers). For them, opting out for any reason — like motherhood or education — is not viable.

Already disadvantaged by years of workplace and legislative failures, women and their families face an increasingly insecure future if policies are not adjusted to meet their ever more pressing needs.

Am I naive to be surprised that a long article giving a vast overview of women’s place in the American economy, failed to make the very basic, and in light of the article’s argument, primary point that women and men cannot be “equally” affected by the economy if women begin 23 to 47 cents behind?

–Kristen

Image Credit

Yes, it has been a week since I returned from San Francisco. I will be the first to admit it has taken me longer to recover from the two-conferences-in-a-row experience than I anticipated. Hence the crickets chirping over here. Seeing Kara Jesella’s piece on the BlogHer conference in the New York Times today reminded me that there is still a lot more I want to say about my experience.

One session in particular has been on my mind since I returned: “Beautiful Blogging and Positive Posting.” The title initially set off my snark alarm, but I forged ahead because I knew Alyssa Royse from Just Cause It and Off the Rocks (a new blog she’s writing with her husband, following his arrest for a DUI–“because we’re not pathetic and destitute, we’re just dealing with the worst f*ing situation of our lives”) would be speaking, and I think she’s doing some amazing work. Also on the bill were Lucrecer Braxton from Art Slam, Krystyn Heide from HopeRevo, Jen of oneplustwo, and Kyran Pittman of Notes to Self.

Alyssa mentioned that her young daughter recently came to her and asked, “Mommy, is there any good news in the world?” Ouch. The short answer to that question is yes, there is. And that’s ultimately what positive posting is all about. As many of the panelists pointed out, the topics we post about don’t have to fluffy and cute (although I personally enjoy some fluffy cuteness here and there). We don’t have to ignore that injustice, suffering, and media b.s. exist–and we don’t have to hold back our anger about it either. The point is that we need to start talking about the difference between a snark-filled rant and a post that inspires something positive in our readers. Here are a few key tenets of “positive posting” that came up:

Positive: A blog or post that serves as a catalyst for social change in the real world
Positive: A blog or post that aims to break through a taboo topic and overcome social stigma
Positive: A blog or post that builds connections through honesty

Magali and I try our best to make 5 Resolutions a combination of all three of these. We started talking publicly about our eating disorders and body image issues because we wanted to break through the silence and misconceptions surrounding these issues. We launched a blog and a network to build connections and bring about change. At the end of the day, positive posting isn’t so much a particular approach to blogging as it is what naturally happens when you have a hopeful approach to life. That said, I think it’s important to remind ourselves of what makes a positive post as we’re writing (and reading other blogs for that matter). We might not hit the mark every time, but we think it’s important to try.

Cross posted at 5 Resolutions.