Does fame and Fortune Buy Innocence?

Recently, allegations have come up against X-Men: Days of Future Past director Bryan Singer stating that he forcibly raped a teenage boy in 1999. Allegedly, Brian and his friend Marc Collins-Rector, a registered sex offender, would fly teenage boys into Hawaii, luring them with drugs and alcohol and then sexual assault them. According to this article published by variety.com, Singer and Collins-Rector were known to have created a sex ring and host elaborate parties in which their guests could partake in the assault. Whether or not the allegations are true, we rarely see famous celebrities spend their due time behind bars, if any at all.

Unfortunately, Singer’s case of sexual exploitation of women and children is not unique in the industry. Actor Woody Allen has been publicly accused by his step-daughter Dylan Farrow of molesting her throughout her childhood. Allen has denied all accusations but if it is indeed true, he will likely not be handed a sentence. Comedian Bill Cosby was accused of a string of rapes in the 1970’s and never received one either.

It is no secret that power and connections can get you out of a lot of trouble. Examples of this include Lindsay Lohan and Martha Stewart, in which both parties did very little time for felony crimes. However, it should go without saying that a drug or insider trading crime does not fall under the same caliber as sexual molestation or rape of a child. Many believe that the sentences for rapists and pedophiles are too lenient, but even worse is when a rapist or pedophile gets away with their crimes and are never brought to justice. It is an atrocious crime to the system and the victim. It should not matter how famous you are, what songs or films you’ve made, or who you know. If someone commits such a heinous crime, they should be judged and found guilty like anyone else.

Singer’s case is sure to be monitored closely by the public as his newest X-Men film is set to release very soon. Here’s to hoping that a fair trial is conducted, with no outside influences like money or connections interfering. If he is truly guilty of his crimes, I hope his victim’s get rightly vindicated for their suffering by Singer doing time. 

Commercial Misogyny: The Sexist Snicker's Ad

The other day, I was catching up on my weekly shows. Usually, I just speed right over the commercials but for some reason, I left them on. Little did I know I would be discovering one of the most insulting ads I've seen in quite a while. 

For those who have not seen it yet, here is the offending video in question:

In the video, two construction workers call out to an unsuspecting woman walking on the street below. Expecting a crass cat call, the woman is surprised when they began yelling out supportive and progressive compliments such as “I appreciate your appearance is just one aspect of who you are” and “You know what I’d like to see? A society in which the objectification of women makes way for gender neutral interaction free from assumptions and expectations”. When I heard this, I was pleased. It’s very refreshing to watch a commercial that doesn’t objectify women’s bodies as sexual objects and this commercial even recognized gendered implications in society. But soon my enjoyment turned into anger. At the end of the commercial, a sign with the words “you are not you when you’re hungry” pops up on the screen.

I find this particularly offensive because it manages to be sexist to both men and women. It mocks men who do actually believe in gender equality and do not sexualize random women, and it mocks women as if they can only be objectified by men. It shows that women should expect to be sexually harassed by regular men. This ad is essentially a big fuck you to the feminist cause and belittles legitimate issues with sexual objectification and misogyny. This article for Time Magazine also argues that the ad makes it seem like blue-collar workers such as construction workers are only capable of being blubbering sexist jerks.

This ad is wrong on so many levels. I imagine that Snickers did in fact meet their intent by creating attention around this controversial commercial, but one thing is for sure: I will not support a company that openly mocks men who support feminist issues and upholds the sexual objectification of women.

The Industry of Technology and the Absence of Women

As has been previously discussed on this blog, the gender gap is of immense importance to the economy and to all women. In the area of science and research, the presence of women is severely lacking. Unfortunately, this is an issue in many different career fields, including that of computer technology and large companies. To find proof of this, you need to look no further than the capital of technology: Silicon Valley, California.

According to this article on women and power positions, only 11.5 percent of top executives at the largest publicly traded Silicon Valley companies are women. Some companies, such as Tesla motors, do not have a single woman on their team of board members. While there are a few companies that do have female members in high-ranking positions such as Yahoo and Facebook, the majority have very few or none at all.

There are several reasons why there are so few women in positions of power in tech companies, one being that there are a lot more qualified males applying. Only 18 percent of computer-science undergraduates are women, according to the Anita Borg Institute, a group that pushes for more women in technology. Another reason is that companies will look for referrals for existing executives and since most executives in the industry are men, it stands that they typically refer other men. It can be difficult for women to really get there name out there. Many men acquire their positions with help from connections. Although it may not be explicitly stated, there still can exist a gender bias for employee consideration that must be mentioned as well.

So what can be done to remedy this gender imbalance? Well for starters, we need to get young girls involved and interested in technology at an early age. We need to let our girls know that technology is for everyone and they are just as capable of creating great things as boys are. Women make up over half the population, if we can get some equal representation in companies that are on the cusp of innovation, imagine the growth and new technologies that could be discovered. 

The Struggle of Balancing Work and Family

It is no secret that women are often considered less valuable or less lucrative an employee than their male counterparts. Many times, women are paid less than men who work in the same position. Women also deal with the concept of the glass ceiling, where they struggle to move up in a company while their male colleagues are chosen over them. Even though feminist efforts have resulted in improved policies for women, women as a whole still only make 77 cents to the dollar when compared to males. 

According to an article published by technologyreview.com, women in the STEM (science, technology, economics, and mathematics) face this more than in any other industry. Women in the science field face less pay, smaller lab space, and less resources available to them when compared to male scientists. What’s worse is that these women often feel forced out of their careers because of a lack of accommodation with familial responsibilities. Typically, women are the ones who are responsible for taking care of children and the household, as well as having to take off time to deliver and birth a child. Because of the one-sided responsibilities placed on the shoulders of women, professional women often feel like they must give up their career in order to take care of their families.

Part of the blame goes to the systemic gender roles of women as caregivers and caretakers. Men are allowed to study and work and move up in their respective fields without having to take off time for family. Because of the fact that women are reserved as caretakers, many industries consider male employees as a better investment.  The article provided above argues that the systemic barring of women moving up within a field is costing the United States millions of dollars a year in wasted dollars.

I agree with the above statement. Women make up a large amount of the workforce and are just as capable of producing important research and related work. Instead of forcing women out of the industry, companies should provide childcare services at the workplace so women can comfortably work without having to worry about their kids. If possible, companies should allow mothers with very young children the option of working remotely from their home. Now there are certain family issues that a company cannot sort out, but making an effort to accommodate mothers in their company is definitely a step forward. 

When Does Voicing Your Opinions Go Too Far?

Workplace sexual harassment is not a new concept. Women have been at the butt of sexual jokes and unwanted advancements in virtually every field. While protection and prevention laws and policies have been enacted to help avoid sexual harassment, it unfortunately is still a rampant issue.

Recently, I've noticed a new disturbing trend arising with victims coming forward about their experiences. The internet has bred a new form of harassment where people can anonymously blast or berate the victim for accusing the offender or taking action against their offender.

Take for example the story of Adria Richards. Richards publicly posted a photo of two men who made crude sexual jokes about her at a conference. One of the men she accused was fired from his job. As soon as the entire story went viral, Richards began receiving hateful messages, as well death and rape threats from people who were upset with her. The company she worked for ended up firing her instead of having her back. Regardless of whether or not you may agree with her actions of posting their information on the internet, Richards has been unfairly ostracized by the internet for the actions of unprofessional and rude men. The internet has created a forum in which people can berate individuals and threaten their lives without having to reveal their identities. Unfortunately, Richard’s experience is not an isolated one.

In January of 2014, Vancouver based makeup artist Samantha Ravndahl publicly came out with her intentions to sue female rapper Lil’ Kim for using her images without her explicit consent or any compensation. While many in the community supported Samantha for standing up for her work, many of Lil’ Kim’s fans went on the attack. She received hurtful comments and rape threats.

When did it become acceptable to go on a hateful campaign against anyone, but particularly women who are just standing up for themselves? The internet has become a double-edged sword, great for providing information quickly and efficiently but unfortunately allowing trolls to disrespect and insult victims of abuse, crime, or unwanted advancements. There will always be people who disagree with the victim but when did it become ok to attack people so severely? Regardless of your personal views on the situation, proper discourse is more than enough to relate your point of view. There is no need to lower to unacceptable threats against a person’s life. As adults have told us since childhood, if you have nothing nice to say, better to say nothing at all. Internet trolls should take note instead of looking like petty and ignorant children. 

The Process of Loving Your Monsters

The time of human beings roaming the earth may seem minuscule in the grand scheme of the universe. However, in the time that we have spent here, human beings have managed to create, invent, and innovate a world in which technology and humans work hand in hand. Humankind has come to rely on the technological innovations which power the world. Computers, cars, planes, weapons, agricultural technologies, medical advancements, you name it, human beings have worked tirelessly to create technologies that make the world just a bit easier of a place to live in. 

There will always be those who devote their lives to innovation, just as the many who have come before them. But what happens to the created that falls by the wayside? Does the drive for constant innovation trump the achievements of what has been created? Is the chase for a newer, faster, better technology automatically discount the validity and importance of the creations that came before it? 

Bruno Latour explores this idea of creation vs. the created in his piece on Loving Your Monsters. Latour uses the example of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. Most people who think of Frankenstein believe that the fault lies with the abomination created by Dr. Frankenstein, a monster born out technology and human. But what we fail to understand is that Frankenstein the monster is not the one at fault here. The fault lies with his creator who abandoned him from the moment he came to life. Had the Frankenstein been nurtured and cared for properly as it deserved, the outcome of his demeanor would have been entirely different.

Those who are involved in the idea of Political Ecology must remember that the creations garnered from hard work and innovation must be cared for properly instead of being overshadowed by the next great technological innovation. Latour makes the comparison creations and children, stating that they must be properly maintained and well-cared for.

As society continues to progress into modernization and the lines that divide technology and nature/politics/religion/moral beliefs begin to blur, a sect of society proposes a retreat into the old archaic ways. We cannot leave our creations unattended nor take a step back into medieval times. The only way for us as a race to progress is to keep moving forward, keep imagining, keep innovating, keep creating. I do not dispute this fact. I only share in Latour’s word of caution and heed his advice on caring for the created.