I’m quoted in a Reuters article posted today by Helen Chernikoff, “Burlesque revival: more nerdy than sexy?” I think Chernikoff did an excellent job portraying the nuance of new burlesque. And while I’m on it, the Spring/Summer 2007 issue of Women’s Studies Quarterly puts the new burlesque in context. A quick summary of the issue, which is titled “The Sexual Body”:

The mid-1970s feminist critique of the female body, sex, and pornography ignited a debate that has continued to this day. Through critical essays, fiction, poetry, and images, this provocative issue of WSQ probes this territory in the light of emerging areas of study. Engaging the fields of critical race studies, film studies, history, literary criticism, performance studies, and political theory, The Sexual Body energizes the debates on the status of sex, pleasure, power, and desire. Ranging from soul food to dance hall music to new discussions of female-and transgender-directed pornography, this issue mobilizes cutting-edge feminist, race, and queer scholarship to push critical theories of the body to their limits and anticipates where race and sex will inform the next generation.

Bonnie Erbe recently hosted a roundtable on feminism and Gen Y on PBS’s To the Contrary. Over at feministing.com, Gen Y feminist Ann Friedman responds to the charge that Gen Y is not a movement generation, noting that the online feminist community is where it’s at:

I think if the online feminist community has proved anything, it’s that we are a movement generation. I participated in feminist actions on my college campus, but that felt more like a club than a movement. I worked for a women’s rights nonprofit, but that felt more like a day job than a movement. I went to rallies and marches, but they felt more like one-off events than a movement. It took blogging here, and being part of a community of feminist bloggers, for me to really feel like part of a feminist movement. To feel I was part of a group of people, committed to a set of ideals, who are working day in and day out to advance those ideals.

So my question then is: When does a virtual movement become “real” in the eyes of those who have, in the past, done activism differently? Because it’s not just about getting young women involved in feminism. It’s about getting feminist organizations involved in online.

Scroll down here to see the video or just listen to the audio.

(I hear that a To the Contrary episode with clips from me and Jessica Valenti aired recently, but I can’t seem to find the link! If anyone has seen it, please let me know? And shoot me the link? Many thanks.)

If you’re in NYC and write (or want to) about parenting, I strongly recommend this panel on October 3, sponsored by the Newswomen’s Club. My friend Helaine Olen is moderating. Both she and Rachel are terrific — and I’m sure the others are too. And if those newswomen don’t have the damndest logo! Here are deets:

Join the Newswomen’s Club of New York at 6:30 pm on October 3rd, when we discuss the world of writing for parenting magazines. Our five guests — all editors at nationally known parenting magazines — will offer an overview of how to pitch, research and structure articles ranging from service pieces to personal essays. They’ll also discuss what kinds of ideas do and don’t work for their publications as well as answer questions from those in the audience.

Panelists:
Ada Calhoun, Editor-in-Chief, Babble.com and AOL News Blogger
Judy Goldberg, Senior Editor, Parents
Rachel Lehmann-Haupt, Executive Editor, Plum
Jenny Rosenstrach, Senior Editor, Cookie
Joy Press, Culture Editor, Salon

Cost: $20 members/$25 non-members to be paid at door

Location: Playwright Act II restaurant at 732 8th Avenue bet 45th and 46th in the party room. 212-354-8404. Attendees can get food and drinks before and after the event. RSVP: olenroshkow@yahoo.com

And while I’m on the subject, don’t forget to check out The Motherhood and Work It, Mom! — the latest in online mommy networking.

In response to Sunday’s New York Times article featuring women in their 20s who outearn their dates and feel awkward about it, the Wall Street Journal’s “Juggle” now asks:

Have other professionals out there faced awkwardness when one person earns far more than other? Or can love trump those kind of differences?

The comments are sooo very interesting.

Meanwhile, according to a new Accenture study, an overwhelming majority of working mothers say that if there were no obstacles, they would continue working. Here’s the deal:

In an online survey of more than 700 working mothers in mid- to senior-level management positions, nearly 90 percent of the respondents reported that, if there were no obstacles, they would work either full-time, part-time or under a flex-time arrangement (reported by 31 percent, 26 percent and 33 percent of respondents, respectively). Just 11 percent said they would not work at all.

Take that ye opt-out-disaster headlines! Read more more here.

(Thanks to the Amazing Laura Sabatinni for the links. Photo cred.)

Well, at least it’s not a “catfight” (hehe). Turns out the American Association of University Professors just shut down their listserv because folks couldn’t play nicely with each other. (Read about it here, in Inside Higher Ed)

Over at MediaCommons, Clancy Ratliff offers a montage of visual representations of “The Internet Regression” (which is the cleverish name of an essay describing internet users’ tendencies to exhibit extreme rudeness and/or kindness.) Says Clancy,

I believe many scholars hear “online publishing” and think of [images of obstinate blowhard conversation — like the one pictured above]. It may take a lot of counterexamples to dislodge those prejudices, especially since the behavior that prompts the prejudices still occurs all over the net every day.

Ok ok. Full disclosure: This post began as an excuse to post the picture, which looks remarkably like, but is not, my cat. (But for the record, I am NOT cat blogging. Um, yet.

Ever wondered what it’s like to edit an anthology? Come to the Woodhull Writers Well this Thursday and find out! My friend and coeditor Daphne Uviller and I will be discussing both the content of our book Only Child: Writers on the Singular Joys and Solitary Sorrows of Growing Up Solo as well as the process, from proposal to publication, of putting together a successful (IOHO) anthology. We’re hoping to give our audience a clear sense of the challenges and rewards of dealing with agents, contributors, purchasing editors, and publicists; the benefits of working with a co-editor; and the need to self-publicize. Participants will walk away with a timeline detailing the process by which one can reasonably expect to complete a salable anthology — and a sense of what it’s like.

When: Thursday, September 27, 2007
Time: 6:30PM to 7:30PM
Location: 32 Broadway, Suite 1801, New York, NY 10004

This is a FREE event open to women only. Reservation is required. Please call 646 435 0837 or email rsvp@woodhull.org to make your reservation.

I’m sitting here in the hospital waiting room and got excited to learn this hospital has wireless. So now I can happily distract myself by catching up on blog reading. Check out the ever-clever Rebecca Traister on images of men in tv’s fall lineup. And to go with your reading, here’s a pic of Marco and Dad taken yesterday. Ok, even this girly girl has to admit it’s a darn cool truck.

So Nation columnist Katha Pollitt just published her first collection of personal essays, Learning to Drive: And Other Life Stories Here are my favorite Katha quips from Deborah Solomon’s interview with her in yesterday’s New York Times:

Deborah Solomon: Do you think feminism has been disfigured by consumerism? To certain women out there, feminism seems to mean buying what you want instead of being what you want.

Katha Pollitt: Young women live these contradictions and everyone’s down on them because their skirts are too short. I don’t blame them if sometimes they want to go shopping. Women don’t buy more junk than men.

DS: Are you a Hillary supporter?

KP: In this country we have a real problem with women and power. If people don’t stop saying incredibly sexist things about Hillary Clinton, I may just have to vote for her.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it. (Katha: I’m starting to agree.)

The gals are catching up. Though I’m curious to learn more about *which* gals and *which* professions. In case you missed it, the New York Times reports today on a “historic” reversal:

For the first time, women in their 20s who work full time in several American cities — New York, Chicago, Boston and Minneapolis — are earning higher wages than men in the same age range, according to a recent analysis of 2005 census data by Andrew Beveridge, a sociology professor at Queens College in New York….The median income of women age 21 to 30 in New York who are employed full time was 17 percent higher than that of comparable men….Professor Beveridge said the gap is largely driven by a gulf in education: 53 percent of women employed full time in their 20s were college graduates, compared with 38 percent of men.

How long before we start with the “Girls-are-taking-over!” and “What-about-the-boys!” headlines? I’m guessing a New York minute.

Regardless, as Jessica rightly picks up on over at feministing today, the article’s slant on the whole thing is rather, how do you say, annoying. The basic message? Beware the young woman with the earning power. Men in their 20s are running scared!

Greetings from Chicago! My dad is going through a medical procedure tomorrow, so GWP will likely be slightly quieter than usual til Tuesday. Though I may have some pix to post. This here is a pic of me (looking rather dorky) with my dad, on an architectural boat tour today. Marco took the photo. Behind us is Navy Pier, where BlogHer took place. Ah, the memories!

So one thing I learned from the docent on the tour was that Chicago was apparently first called the “Windy City” by New Yorkers who were bitter that Chicago won the bid for the 1893 World’s Fair instead of New York. According to Wikipedia, however, that’s a popular myth. Wiki says that the earliest known references to the “Windy City” are from 1876, and involve Chicago’s rivalry with Cincinnati. Cincinnati as a rival to Chicago? WTF!