Hattie McDaniel "I'd rather play a maid than be one."

My mind went to the mammies and maids in "Gone With the Wind" after seeing "Sex & the City." I realized that Carrie's assistant played by the fierce and gorgeous Jennifer Hudson, is the first and only African-American/African-descent/woman of color in the film. In the series, the only woman of color was Sonia Braga. In keeping with the old European sexist/racist/Orientalist trope: one woman in the pair is fair - Samantha, and the sexually agressive one is racialized "dark" and "exotic." Which is not to say that I didn't find it satisfying to see my fantasy of having sex w/ the incredibly hot Braga played out on screen, but I'm just saying. And is it just me, or did none of them ever date or sleep with a man of color, not African American, nor Latino, or Asian! In two instances was this possibility raised: on the Fleet Week episode, and in the Samantha feeling like she's too old to be player episode where she dates the tragically short man with the massive tool. In the latter, Samantha feels she has hit rock bottom after an Asian bus boy (South Asian?) comes on to her. In the former, Carrie for the only time in the entire series, refuses to go home with, indeed even make out with a gorgeous black man in uniform. Why did she choose this particular instance as the one in which to draw the line? Was inter-racial dating or even an inter-racial one-night-stand considered too risque for Sex & the City? Why were there never any people of color - not even us Latinos (or "Hispanic.....Americans...." as Obama haltingly referred to them, but I digress), appeared in the series. And why are the only two Asians of the female gender my idol Margaret Cho in a genius cameo as the fashion show coordinator the time Carrie falls on the runway, and little Lily (hmm, why not call her Jade or Bamboo?), the Chinese baby adopted by Charlotte? 

CORRECTION: Apparently I missed an episode of Sex & the City - call CNN - and in it, Samantha was dating an African American man but the man's sister vetoed it. How fabulous is it that my shrink is the one who told me? So when I say I had Closure after watching Sex & the City: the Movie, I wasn't joking. And again, it was Samantha who had an interaction with a person of color - another friend reminded me that Lucy Liu, playing herself, was the client that Samantha lost when she used her name to score a Birkin bag. Finally (if any of my lovely handful of readers remembers any more, please comment!) Miranda not only had sex with her very sexy neighbor, an African-American doctor, but she also got helpful advice on how to make her baby stop crying from an African-American neighbor who called her out on never saying hello. (the latter reminds me of the difference between living in lower Manhattan and living in certain parts of Brooklyn: in the latter areas, people are integrated, and people greet each other politely)

True love waits

Today I read about a line of K-MART sweats for women only (naturally, women are the harlots that provoke men to acts of lust they cannot control, right?). These tacky pants are decorated with a pro-abstinence slogan. For about 17 bucks you too can wear these alarmingly low-rise lounge pants anywhere (note the gendered discourse at work in the advertisement copy) you want to share your repression with the world! I love how the slogan is in the front and the back. Nice, in case your man tries the front and the back door, or in case he has the attention span of a fruit fly, he'll know the score! 

Here is the priceless copy from K-MART's website:

Whether she is lounging around the house, going to practice, or doing her chores. These soft athletic style crop pants will keep her comfy. Perfect for wearing with her favorite sweatshirt or tee. These athletic pants boldly proclaim just where she stands by pointing out that "True Love Waits" in a large screen print on the front and back of these pants.

Drawstring waist
Bold abstinence screen print
Elastic cuffs. Cotton/Polyester blend
Machine washable
Imported

CHE Chotchkes / CHE chucherias

I really love this one, and if you saw my earlier post about the Hugo Chavez doll, imagine how much fun it would be to play Barbies with the two of them!!! But doesn't he look more like one of the dudes from "Planet of the Apes" more than Che?

Every girl needs a little Che in her chocha.

for more chechucherias see: 
http://gawker.com/tag/dress-for-the-revolution/?i=395292&t=che-for-sale

Juan Gonzalez on the PR primary

Juan Gonzalez's excellent analysis of the situation down on the Island.

JUAN GONZALEZ
New York Daily News
Poor turnout in Puerto Rico primaries reflects island's ambivalence
Monday, June 2nd 2008, 4:00 AM

CAYEY, Puerto Rico - At the Miguel Melendez Muñoz High School in this mountain town near Puerto Rico's southern coast, a mere 150 of some 3,000 registered voters had shown up by 11 a.m.
Most were elderly, and more than a few had spent years living afuera (outside), the term Puerto Ricans use to refer to life in the U.S.

"I was in the South Bronx for 18 years," said Rosario Rodriguez Vazquez. "Even ran for Democratic committeeman there, so I never miss an election, and I'm with Hillary all the way."

Clinton registered an even bigger landslide win over Barack Obama here than preelection polls had predicted.
But there's another strong message that Puerto Rico's electorate sent to Washington. Despite all the attention and furor the Democratic presidential campaign has stirred in the 50 states, less than 15% of Puerto Rico's registered voters turned out.
Such numbers reveal the deep ambivalence many Puerto Ricans feel about their political relationship with the U.S. How else can you explain that close to 10,000 independence supporters marched noisily through Old San Juan yesterday calling for a boycott of the entire primary?

The small yet influential movement kept labeling the primary a colonial charade, then surprised everyone with the biggest political rally of the entire campaign.

You need look no further than New York's own Jose Rivera, Bronx assemblyman and chairman of the Bronx Democratic Party, to see how politically schizophrenic some Puerto Ricans have become.

All day Saturday, Rivera campaigned for Clinton. He rode with her in the same flatbed truck for eight grueling hours, urging Puerto Ricans to turn out to the polls. Then yesterday morning, he joined the massive protest against the primary.
"I don't see a contradiction," Rivera told me. "This whole contest between Hillary and Obama has forced everyone in the U.S. to pay attention to the issue of Puerto Rico's status. Maybe now it will finally get resolved."

Rivera means the more-than-century-old debate that dominates island politics but U.S. politicians continue to ignore: whether Puerto Rico will become the 51st state, an independent nation or remain in some other form of association with the U.S.
Rivera noted that Clinton received her only standing ovation Saturday night from some 6,000 attending a church service in Hato Rey when she pledged to resolve the island's status during her first White House term.

Obama has made similar promises. But he spent only a day here, missing an opportunity to shore up his poor support among Hispanics, which could hurt him in November. John McCain will make an even bigger push to win Latino votes than President Bush did four years ago.

Clinton won her landslide because at least she paid Puerto Ricans some attention.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/columnists/gonzalez/index.html

HRC still won't concede.......

I'm trying really hard to identify with HRC. I think of myself as an empathetic person. But maybe it's because I shut down when I regard someone else as narcissistic and therefore incapable of empathy for others? If she had won -which easily could have happened - how would I have felt? Now, I can empathize with her supporters, many of whom are dear friends or relatives. If I were in their position, I would feel frustrated, sad or angry. One family member and friend threaten to vote for McCain. I guess I can understand that, but had she won, I would have boycotted by not voting, rather than crossing to the other party. 

In any event, sadly, I don't see how both sides of the Democratic party can come together, I blame this on the Clintons' scorched earth campaign yet my HRC supporting friends claim it was Obama's fault. They say that even though he didn't make inflammatory comments against her, his surrogates did. Perhaps they lose the nuance that it might not be the same thing to have associates make improper remarks as to have the actual candidate make them herself? (even HRC's supporters don't seem to deny that she took it to a new level on that score) But I can see how this could be regarded as having it both ways - Obama took the high road while his associates played dirty to keep up with the Clintons. The worrisome thing is that both sides can't seem to even recognize the other's positions. Even me. 

I grew to loathe Clinton personally, which scares me, since I consider myself a feminist. Some think that in this race it was a litmus test - race trumps gender or the other way around. So did race trump gender for me? I think it was his platform - though I don't agree with all of it. I think (fear) that he is too conservative and I strongly disagree with his policy regarding immigration. However I admire his frankness in discussing race, agree with most of his domestic and foreign policy and find his demeanor admirable. And I do identify with him as a person of mixed race. I don't identify with HRC as a woman just like I don't identify with Margaret Thatcher, Condi Rice or other conservative women as women. To me they're working for the other side, regardless of anatomy, even when I can respect the fact that they are strong enough to succeed regardless of the sexism that persists in the US and everywhere else. That's where I can empathize with Sen. Clinton, even though I strongly disagree with many of her views, and especially with the ways in which she conducts the campaign and now, her defeat.

On a personal note, I can empathize with Clinton's refusal to concede defeat in one way: I am striving to refuse to concede defeat in my search for a healthy relationship. Yes, this is trivial in comparison to the search for the next leader of the so-called free world, but it takes up as much of my time as following this fascinating, frustrating and ultimately unsatisfying campaign. Like Clinton, I threw myself into my campaign in earnest a year and a half ago and like her, I had moments where I thought I was "winning." All signs pointed to a rise in my "polling data." I was introduced to promising men by mutual friends. And in just 4 months, on two different on-line dating sites, I have tracked the hundreds of men who have been interested enough to look at my profile.  As a campaigner, the last thing you want is to lose them at hello, you want them to at least read your platform! 

And the polling numbers themselves were encouraging - the alleged straight man shortage in NY appeared to be a mirage as I saw the numbers ticking upwards. They are out there, it's just that in my daily life I don't meet them, I told myself. Winks, emails, calls, a date or two, and I saw that they are just like the flesh and blood men that I also met during this time - they seem interested, they appear to seek you out, then they disappear. They say they will call, but they do not. They claim they want to get to know you, but they don't. To put it bluntly: they send mixed messages, or to put it plainly, they lie. On line as in real life, they are juggling more than one woman at once, hedging their bets. In that way, I did feel more empowered since I tried out contacting more than one person at a time, the better to up my chances of meeting one that I was compatible with. 

As in real life, I found that my admittedly exacting criteria for an ideal partner is hard to find on-line. Few men seemed to have higher education, very liberal political views, an interest in travel, a down-to-earth sense of humor, intellectual interests leavened by a love for pop culture and campy stuff, to list just a few. I was contacted by probably a hundred men or more - I had to disable the email link because my inbox was cluttered with these messages every other day - the vast majority of which I was not interested in for specific reasons. Yet I tried to be open-minded, meeting men whose politics were far to the right of mine, or whose interests were not as close of a match as I would have liked, for example. 

All of this time, I have viewed  Obama as an ideal version of the man I would like, though I fear that he is not as comfortable with un-PC, trashy, or campy pop culture as I would prefer. And it also concerns me that the fabulous Michelle Obama had to quit her high-powered job to support his. At the end of the day, like HRC, I refuse to concede, for now. And like HRC, and unlike Michelle Obama, I have my job which gives me great personal satisfaction. It will keep me busy until and if I should find a man to include as part of my fabulous life. 

AC (hearts) Donna Brazile

and don't miss the moment when the camera pulls away from Brazile to get the reaction shot of the panel but they are all checking blackberries or zoning out!

Obama Wins!!!!!

I am still euphoric over last night's victory. And I am outraged that HRC refuses to concede. This is unprecedented, at least in my memory. Obama was very gracious toward her last night. But I fear this means might choose her as VP. I'm hoping that his shout out to her as future crafter of universal healthcare suggests he may give her a cabinet position to oversee this initiative for reform. Given that he has formed a 3-person VP search committee, the best case scenario for me is that they are looking outside the usual suspects, such as Bloomberg. 

Now Obama has to do his homework in regards to Latinos and some of the issues that concern many of us. I thought it was outrageous that he referred to us as "Hispanic.....Americans" - Somebody has to school him in nomenclature. Also, his position on immigration is problematic. So I am not an uncritical fan of Obama who has drank the "yes we can" Kool-Aid, but I think he's the best we've got and I hope he picks a VP who is towards the "left" rather than towards the "right" such as a Bloomberg. Granted, he has to make political calculations and to figure out which group counts more - Jewish voters, Latinos (and if so, which ones?!), women, working class people, fiscally conservative independents, etc. Of course, the latter sentence is absurd because just as I abhor facile analyses that assume "Latinos" (or: "Hispanic.....Americans") are monolithic, I know that this is true of every so-called voting demographic. But unfortunately, it seems that politicians and the media view such groups in these reductive, simplistic and short-cut ways.