* Today is “Boobquake,” the day where women are encouraged to show excessive amounts of cleavage in order to disprove the theory of Iranian cleric Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi, who posited that scantily-dressed women cause earthquakes. Local participants are encouraged to haul their breasts over to Dupont Circle from noon to 12:30 p.m. As for me, I’m showing about as much cleavage as I generally do—-not much—-but as Amanda Marcotte points out, I don’t have to dress particularly immodestly to be blamed for a natural disaster—-because “by Iranian cleric standards, every day in America is boobquake.”
* Thinking it’s a bit counter-intuitive to stick it to misogynists by flashing some cleave? A counter-protest, “Brainquake,” encourages women to fight Sedighi’s words by “show[ing] off their résumés, CVs, honors, prizes, and accomplishments.” Speaking as a creative writing major with minimal cleavage, I will instead be participating in “Blogquake,” in which I make some sort of point about the oppression of women by just blogging about boobs. Boobs, boobs, boobs.
* What the fuck is this headline? “Women Engage in Barebacking at Higher Rates Than Gay Men.” The piece opens: “For all the flack gay men get for their sexual antics, it turns out the ladies have them beat for an oft-chastised but ever-present-in-porn act—-barebacking.” Hey, way to get personal! It takes two to bareback, so why focus all the shaming on the receptive partner? And as one commenter on the piece points out, there’s no need to drag lesbians into this: “Editors: Parallelism in style, and fairness require the headline to read: HETEROSEXUAL Women Engage in Barebacking at Higher Rates Than Gay Men.”
* Cracked writer Christina H.’s piece, “Five Mistakes Women (Like Me!) Make on the Internet,” chastises women for ever thinking that anyone is ever being sexist to them:
women who expect to be treated better on the Web are often more likely to accuse anyone who disagrees with them of being afraid of a “strong opinionated woman.” Not only is this as bad as playing the race card, it insults all the other ladies in that online community who haven’t been bashed, since it implies that they’re not intelligent enough to be persecuted by your imaginary conspiracy.
The author—-who is, if I’m reading this right, too intelligent to not be persecuted by the imaginary conspiracy of sexism—-was apparently not dismissive of women enough to actually be accepted by the Cracked crowd. She netted several hundred comments like this one: “This article was only mildly amusing, kind of like when a friend gets diagnosed with testicular cancer. Mostly though it just came off as another female rant with a pinch of humor. That said: TITS OR GTFO.”
*Hysteria! points to this horrific feature in the New York Times‘ T Magazine which asks the eternal question: So, was Simone de Beauvoir hot, or what? Her photographs say “yes”; her ardent feminist beliefs say “no.”
Photo via Ian Muttoo, Creative Commons Attribution License 2.0