Glorious and Free?

I'd just like to take a moment, a serious moment to discuss the recent happenings in Toronto at the G20 Summit. For those of you who live in Canada but are unaware of the current situation I direct you to the news and/or Youtube. This is a matter concerning a threat to our democratic rights and freedoms as well as your responsibility as a free agent.To be honest, before yesterday I was not even aware of the G20 Summit. After being shocked and baffled by what I briefly saw on the news yesterday morning, I knew that it was a big deal or else people wouldn't be protesting and the protests wouldn't turn into violence. As I learned more about this global meeting and what it stood for and why people in Toronto were so furious with it, I started to get a real sense of just what is at stake. I'm not going to comment on the social reasons behind the oppositions to the G20 Summit because that would take up a whole other post. Instead, I want to talk about the government's response to the protests and the injustices and atrocities that turned the peaceful demonstrators into militant activists.
According to Naava Smolash's account on the recent G20 protest in Toronto and Olympic protest in Vancouver, just prior to the G20 Summit, the government of Toronto past a new which granted the police the right to randomly conduct body searches on and demand I.D. from whomever they fancy. This law was passed unbeknown to Toronto citizens and it is because of this "new rule", random by-standers who my not even be necessarily involved with the protest were stopped and questioned by the police around the G20 Summit convention perimeter. Aside from the unjustifiable authority to violate citizens' privacy, as many videos and journalists documented, the Toronto police also made illegal arrests and attacked peaceful protesters and journalists throughout the day. But perhaps the most perverse thing of it all is that many mainstream media sources have twisted the story and framed the report and referred to the protesters who chose to deliver their message by smashing symbolic and inanimate objects (the most poignant example is of the burning police car with the phrase "to serve and protect" clearly seen in photograph) as "thugs and hooligans". Many people criticize these people as "violent", but my question remains, how is smashing non-living, materialistic property violent while pepper-spraying and striking people with batons "lawful", "just" and "non-violent"?Ten years ago, I immigrated from China to Canada and never in a million years did I expect a violation of human rights would happen here in a country which takes pride in its progressiveness and civil rights. How ironic is this: by exercising democratic principles (namely the right to peaceful assembly and the right from unreasonable search and seizure), the citizens of Toronto were subjected to harassment and arrests? Yesterday's events were almost reminiscent of a history of bloodshed in my home country where thousands died, fighting for democracy and freedom. And twenty-one years later, in a democratic country I see the same type of police-state control, oppression and unjust violation perpetrated against its people. Except in this case the hypocrisy makes it even more disturbing and unforgivable.

I am going to be away until next Monday, so no posts for a bit.

Make Sex, Not Gender

I'd like to take the opportunity and devote some time to discuss the relationship of "Sex and the City" and feminism. But first, I would like to apologize for coming off as being cynical all the time seeing that how almost all of my posts had been criticisms of one thing or another. But I think my opinions are more than just pointless rants because I always try my hardest to establish an introspective conclusion within my writing. Therefore, if you would like to challenge any of my arguments, please do so. I welcome friendly debates.
Back to "Sex and the City". As a female, I have always enjoyed the show. I love the fashion, the "girl chats" and even the character relationship dynamics. However, as a feminist I've always felt somewhat conflicted for liking a show that pretty much perpetuates and glamorizes every single gender stereotype. I mean, this show made a lot of contemporary feminists lose their shit over arguing who's right. Because the themes and indications of gender stereotype in it was a little more complicated than just say, a blatantly sexist rap music video. Within the feminist realm, lots of women are against the show for its obvious sexist portrayal of contemporary single women. But some very progressive feminists think the show is empowering because it was not only relevant but also portrayed women as independent characters in control of their lives. I stand somewhere between those two extremes because what I've recently realized is that the show itself, as much as it is controversial, really isn't intentionally trying to endorse gender stereotypes. And for the longest time I thought it was precisely this unconscious mental set that has caused the biggest problem in this male-centered society. Because how can you get rid of acts of sexism when we're not even aware of committing it? I mean even the most feminist-minded, and self-aware woman sometimes can't clearly distinguish between what is empowering and what is oppressive. Most gender issues these days seem to always start out with people unknowingly making gender based assumptions and ending up offending someone. And I think I have come to realize that gender, is really a social construct and as long as we are cognitive beings who tend to rely on social constructs to understand the world, we are going to inadvertently harbor certain beliefs that are not necessarily true . So, it really boils down to simple "guilty, not guilty" question: can people really be held accountable for committing acts of sexism without an intent?

This outfit was so comfortable. It's a very prepubescent look but I was nostalgic for that stage of life where boys and girls didn't try to exaggerate their genders and sex was still somewhat ambiguous due to lack of secondary sexual characteristics.

Freudian

For the nth time today, someone called me "small" and "cute" but this time it was different because usually those words would annoy me to no end. But today, instead of cringing immediately following the echoic impression of those adjectives, I simply responded to them with a mental "whatdiyagonnado" shrug. And that in itself seemed a tad strange to me. I couldn't help but wonder if this new found indifference was a result of me getting used to being labeled that all the time or simply a classic case of "learned helplessness" where I've pretty much lost all hope in trying to get people to see me as more than that. Either way, both options indicate defeat. I think I'm a classic case of someone who has deep-seated inferiority complex and being constantly referred to as "small", "cute", "petite" or sometimes just plain" awwwwww" are just the type reinforcements for sustaining this underlying anxiety.
Seeing how some women out there are obsessed with "sizing-down" they would probably want to shoot me for complaining about having a small stature. However, I would just like to justify my annoyance with the fact that being called "small" may seem like flattery in today's "fat-prejudice" society, the truth is I (along with my fellow "tiny" people) do not feel complimented. In fact, I feel somewhat insulted whenever people comment on my size. It makes me feel patronized, belittled and de-individualized. More importantly, when and why did people start considering "small" as a positive trait to characterize someone? Moreover, the worst part of it is that whenever I would speak up against those "sizeist" comments, I get weird looks like I'm crazy for not wanting to be perceived as "small". As if I'm oblivious or simply stupid for not recognizing that they have just given me a praise. In in that sense, I think "small" people are at a disadvantage because while "bigger" people can rant and express their offense, us small folks are not only "not allowed" to protest, we are also sometimes expected to simply accept or even thank those who "awarded" us with those labels. I think there should be a new category of prejudice called "sizeism" and it should apply not only to those who are over-weight but also those who are smaller than the average population.
(I put the words "small" and "big" in quotations because I don't endorse their connotations or their over-usage in describing people whom we really don't know anything about.)

This outfit was inspired by a someone on lookbook. To compensate for my lack of height, I wore high-waisted pants and a crop top, but regardless of my attempt at achieving a few "visual inches", I was still called "small".

Big Bad Wolf

I went to see Toy Story 3 today and was absolutely blown away by how good it is. Seriously, considering how good the first two movies are, I thought the third one would just be another Disney "filler" movie (like Shrek 4) created strictly for the purpose to bamboozle money from hopeful nostalgic fans and over-indulgent parents. But the movie was awesome and was ever bit as charming as the original one. I don't often recommend Disney movies (or anything Disney for that matter) but this one is definitely worth watching.
In other news, I just wanted to share some of my D.I.Y. recording with you all because as I was going through my old posts I realize just how little I mention my love for music. I hope you enjoy my cheesy cover songs.I'm glad I finally figured out how to make this AA scarf look good on me.

A hard on don't mean you're in love

I'm going to keep this one short because I got to go back to studying.
I meant to post a link to my Behind Sapphire article in The Peak last week but kept forgetting to, so here it is. Consider this as today's blog post if you will since I'm not writing much. I hope you all like it.Super girlie-girl outfit, no glasses and with hair tied up. I don't even know myself anymore

My favorite necklace. Oh so granny.