On Perspective 2 (or Fighting Real Problems Instead of Making Up New Ones)

This post might very well lose me friends.  But I just calls 'em like I sees 'em, and this isn't something I take lightly.

I have never backed down from the idea that I am a feminist -- I'm kind of one of those people of the belief that if you or someone you care about identifies as a woman, than you have no right or sense to not support things that would help make the lives of women everywhere better.

But maybe I haven't been clear on my views towards those people who calls themselves activists who are, in reality, looking for something to complain about.  I came across this tumblog that literally blasted everything from meat eaters to a child abuse awareness campaign.  The campaign in question won the Gold Lion award at Cannes and depicts the cycle of child abuse, showing each child being abused and eventually growing into their abuser.  Actually, you can see them here: http://www.buzzfeed.com/copyranter/powerful-child-abuse-ads.  And why was she targeting this campaign?  Because the verbal abuse image depicts a woman yelling at her children.

She said the campaign disgusted her -- not the acts portrayed as a part of it -- but the fact that it only depicted a woman yelling, which she thought fueled the "nagging" stereotypes about women.  Statistically, it might have made sense to make the abusers in all three images men (each image represented a form of domestic abuse -- sexual, physical, and verbal) because an overwhelming percentage of abuse is male-dominated, but doing so would have been unfair to both men and women because, due to the structure of the campaign, it would eliminate the possibility of women as perpetrators or victims, and they do, in fact, fill both roles, more often than we'd like to believe.  And, unfortunately, women are far more likely to perpetrate verbal abuse than any other kind of domestic abuse -- and would it really have been better for the global image of women to have the only woman in the campaign be a sexual predator or a violent monster?  Or simply to put a woman as a passive victim?

This is just one case, among many, I'm afraid, where people get so caught up in the politics of activism that they forget what's actually important.  This campaign should disgust you, but not for it's content.  What it depicts, and the fact that child abuse is still a prevalent issue in America, one that's still not talked about because it's taboo, which creates a self-perpetuating cycle of violence as children who feel mistreated grow up to mistreat others.  Your need to be confrontational, to take an issue with everyone just so you have something to say -- has made you blind to the real issue, which makes you unable to do anything to stop it.

So until you start complaining about the real issues and stop letting the small details distract you from the problem at hand, I am still going to take issue with the way you handle things like this.  Your loss of perspective is terrifying.

(infinitesimally) yours,
Rachel Leigh

'Sup Darling-Type-People?

I think one of the coolest things about the internet is this seemingly-endless desire to give back to the people who have made it a community.  I really first noticed it with crossover and guest comics on Questionable Content -- how the creators of these really different webcomics in different artistic and narrative/comedic styles could come together to create a really interconnected community that credited the people who have helped and inspired each individual creator.

And then there's YouTube, which I think has the single strongest Creator-Community of any site I've seen.  Users promote other users' material and form not only working relationships but real friendships with their co-creators.  I think the coolest example I've seen is the Liker Chain, where prominent YouTubers go on to list the channels that either made them want to start producing videos or make them continue to want to be a part of the community.

In this same spirit, I've tried to, in the past, credit the people on the internet who have made me want to become a content creator and have, mostly unbeknownst to them, helped me hone my style and realize the kind of blogger I want to be.

So, to the YouTubers who help me understand myself -- Jenna Marbles/Mourey and Tyler Oakley, for helping me realize that being snarky and weird for no reason can actually be cool. Philip DeFranco and SourceFed for helping me see that being serious is not only okay but can actually be important and something of a responsibility.  The VlogBrothers for turning the internet into a community.

To the bloggers, columnists, and writers who helped me realize the writer I want to be -- Dan Savage for being no-holds-barred awesome about the things he writes about in "Savage Love," Allie from "Hyperbole and a Half" for the single funniest blog I've ever read, The Ticking Time Bombshell/BerkeleyBabe for being a hot mess and totally honest about it.

And, of course, to the friends and family who help make me feel like I don't just write this blog for my own selfish entertainment, even though I totally do.

Love you all, darling readers!
Rachel Leigh

On "Because I'm a Psycho"

I swear, if you looked up "Crazy Cat Lady in the Making" in the dictionary, there would be a definition something along the lines of "Perpetually single, slightly demented girl in her early-to-mid-20s with an unnatural obsession with cat videos on the internet and next to no social skills."  Next to this brilliantly-worded entry, you would find a picture of my face and a nice little "See Also" tag.

But, even this crazy cat lady has a wedding board on Pinterest and like six seasons of "Say Yes to the Dress" in her Netflix queue.  And that got me thinking... Why?  I can understand why women who are deeply, soundly in love with someone might start dreaming about their future wedding day.  But what prompts the rest of us, the girls for whom the prospect of a future wedding may actually be what most people consider laughable, to fantasize about these things?

Is it some sort of way of filling in the gaps in our lives?  Is it the manifestation of years of brainwashing by Disney princesses who want nothing more than to be married and live happily ever after?  Is it because we're actually planning these elaborate weddings so we can one day marry those 20 cats that we're probably already on the road to having?

I honestly wish I had an answer.  But, in all honesty, I don't even understand it in myself.  Said Pinterest board is sub-titled "Because I'm a Psycho," so clearly I think it's as nuts as everybody else does.

Confusedly yours,
Rachel Leigh

On Graffiti and the DB of the Day

Here's the thing: I love graffiti. I think a well-executed tag in the right place adds one of the coolest possible touches to an urban landscape. Aside from that, there are very few things in the world that I find as cool as spray paint.
But there's a difference between a really cool, artistically-executed signature tag on an abandoned building, and some of the crap I've seen in the last couple days. I live in a relatively small town, not particularly known for its crime, and I'll admit, the first time I saw what looked like a non-sensical tagline spray-painted on a billboard that I didn't even like anyway, I laughed.

But seeing the same tagline spray-painted on the side of a small business that had just been opened (and had the building re-done in the process)? That just makes me angry. A good tagger is an artist -- Banksy is a legend who uses spray-paint as a medium to convey intense messages about politics and society in creative and highly-public way. Someone who thinks its cool to paint a penis on the side of a mailbox or their pseudo-intellectual "tagger name" on the side of a building is nothing more than an asshole.
So today's DBotD Award goes to -- that guy. You know who you are. And you're just a dick.
Angrily yours,
Rachel Leigh

On Toys That Ruined My Childhood

A happy Sunday, my darling readers!

The other day, my mother posted a link on my Facebook Timeline (yes, my mother has a Facebook and, yes, I have Timeline...these are both old news, get over it), that Hasbro is re-introducing one of their most popular toys: Furby.

I was 6 years old when the original Furby released in 1998, and like everyone I knew at the time, I wanted one, because they looked so damn cute, and also I secretly wanted a Gremlin (seriously, have you SEEN Gizmo? He's like the cutest thing to ever exist).


How can you say no to that face?

 But what Hasbro appears not to realize is that while Furby may have made them more money than Lincoln Logs could ever possibly hope to be worth (which, by the way, is complete crap, because Lincoln Logs were the definition of awesome), no one actually liked their Furbies.  What appeared to be an adorable, fuzzy knock-off of the pet every child born after 1984 ever wanted was actually a demonic, bird-like doll from Hell that most of the world was intent on destroying.

   

The look on its face says "I will destroy everything you love."

The freaky little thing had a ridiculously sensitive light and motion sensor which often caused it to wake up in the middle of the night, scaring the crap out of anyone and everyone in the room.  And then it would croak out "Furby huuuuungry..." and you'd have to feed it with the tip of your freaking finger, like Audrey II from Little Shop of Horrors.  The damn thing was one step short of demanding human sacrifices.

Hasbro, if you're listening, I'm begging you not to release these little monsters back into the homes of children everywhere.  I, for one, gave mine a proper burial in the bottom of my closet for many years before finally getting rid of it.  And if you don't believe that I'm not the only one who has a reason to want them gone, I suggest searching YouTube for the phrase "death to furby."  There are guys there with firecrackers and drills who would gladly vouch for me.

Having nightmares about the Furby Apocalypse,
Rachel Leigh

You know what's awesomely safe for everyone on the road?

Let's say there's an intersection.  For argument's sake (or, because people are morons and this actually happened), let's say it's an intersection downtown with pretty heavy foot traffic.

Say you pull up to this traffic light, and you find yourself at a red light.  Where do you stop?  I, personally, would say "before the crosswalk."  But, apparently, if the drivers on the road today are anything close to resembling right, then I would be wrong.  The answer is, apparently, "In or even over the crosswalk."

Because nothing says "the picture of safety" quite like forcing pedestrians to walk in the middle of the intersection to get around you.

Dear FOUR PEOPLE I saw do this today: You have been rated my Douchebags of the Day.  I wish I had gotten a picture of your car so I could post it on the internet just to humiliate you for apparently not knowing how to operate your freaking motor vehicle.  You suck, thanks.

On 'Murica and Bosons

Happy Independence Day, darling readers!  The day we celebrate our independence from the British by drinking, eating hamburgers, and shooting off explosives.  America...f*** yeah!  (If you don't know what that's from, get the internet).

It is also MOTHERLOVING HIGGS BOSON DAY.  Do you know what that means?

No?  Let me explain.  You know how things around you have, like, mass?  That thing that makes them heavy and also tangible?  My chemistry teachers always described it as the amount of "stuff" in an object.

Well, in order for things to have mass, modern particle physics says that elementary particles (those little subatomic things that MAKE UP atoms, like quarks (up, down, strange, charm, top, bottom!)) need the Higgs mechanism, which is the process which gives those awesome little particles mass.  And in order to explain the Higgs mechanism, they needed the Higgs Boson, which has never been discovered.  (Hence the punchline, "If you don't allow Higgs Boson Particles, how do you have mass?!" (Yes, the interrobang was necessary.  I think the joke involves something about a pastor.  Ohwell, the punchline's the only relevant bit anyway.))

Until, you know, today, or well, yesterday in Switzerland at this point (you suck, time zones), when the awesome guys playing around with that terrifying supercollider known as the LHC at CERN found a new particle which they are more than 99% certain is the God Particle itself, the Higgs Boson.

Like...the answer to why things have mass and therefore, yknow, exist.  Was discovered.  We think.  And for that, you get a HAPPY MOTHERLOVIN' HIGGS BOSON DAY.

Particle physicists and nerds of the world, I suggest we celebrate this holiday by drinking and setting off explosives.  Hamburgers optional.

Wishing you and yours a happy day,
Rachel Leigh