I've always found it absurd when money is spent to do a study that finds obvious things such as "Racism Still Exists." There's only one word I can respond with, a perfect word, that I haven't really used since I was 12: Duh! I know it's not mature or intelligent, but to me it's perfectly fitting.

I came across another "duh" moment this week when I saw this headline: "Women's rights key to Africa AIDS crisis: study." My fellow Democrats, liberals, feminists, and users of common sense and logic have known this for years. If a woman has the right to say no, to use her own protection or insist that her unfaithful husband use protection, to have control over the body that she lives in, she will be in better health. The study focused on the failings of African governments in regards to women, but I can't help but think of our own country's failings for women around the world.

Jennifer Leblanc

Two young gay men hide their sexuality in order to keep their government jobs and their reputations. Thomas Mallon set such a premise in 1950s D.C., but virtually nothing has changed since then.
Take this news bit worthy of celebration, for example: "…the Department of Defense no longer classifies homosexuality as a mental disorder." You'd think this action would've been taken back in the '70s when mental health professionals came to this conclusion. Sadly, this was reported less than a year ago.

In Mallon's novel, the earnest young government employees (gay and straight) believe in fighting the evils of communism. But there's still time to weed out the lavender along with the red. Just as now, while the entire world recognizes the growing danger of Al-Qaeda, our top officials will even torture innocent civilians all over the world to stop the enemy. But a gay co-worker? Our government just can't tolerate that. In fact (and this also happened just last year), the Pentagon fired seven Arabic translators for being gay. MSN reports, "Between 1998 and 2004, the military discharged 20 Arabic and six Farsi speakers." Brilliant move in the fight on terror.

Mallon's novel focuses only on government employees leading double lives. Our government isn't happy with just targeting their own. From 2005: "Pentagon anti-terror investigators labeled gay law school groups a 'credible threat' of terrorism." Even outside of D.C. and the military, Uncle Sam equates gays with actual terrorists who fly planes into sky scrapers.

Historical novels typically move me to think, "imagine living through this or that back then." Sadly, pathetically, unnecessarily, gay people are still living this. And for what?

Jennifer Leblanc

Before the start of the shoot, Terrence Malick and Emmanuel Lubezki devised a series of photography rules or dogma that are to be used in film. They are:

• 1) No artificial lights. All is shot in natural light.
• 2) No crane or dolly shots, just handheld or Steadicam shots.
• 3) Everything is shot in the subjective view.
• 4) All shots must be "deep-focus shots," that is, everything (foreground and background) is visible and focused.
• 5) You (the camera crew) are encouraged to go and shoot unexpected things that might happen in accident or if your instinct tells you so.
• 6) Selective shots: any shot that does not have visual strength is not used. (From IMDB).

If only every film could be shot according to these rules. Some may marvel at the digital everything in blockbusters like 300. Give me scenery so pure and naturally colorful that I can almost touch it any day.

Give me simple touches — her hand to his, his hand running down her back — rather than the violent, gratuitous grinding that now passes for love scenes.

Give me simple statements — the words for eyes, lips in a new language — instead of cliches, over-blown speeches, and last-minute happy endings.

Show me a young actress — still a child at 14 — who can carry history and raw emotions, who can stand at the crossroads of love and death on screen. 

Show me a pure world that was once new but is not lost.

Show me a film so beautiful it haunts me.

Jennifer Leblanc

Yahoo headline: "U.S. divorce rate lowest since 1970." So could you please spare me all the talk about how the American family is in trouble, how gay marriage undermines the blessed union, etc.? Can we concentrate on some real problems? Aren't there people dying somewhere in the world?

Now, once you've tied the knot and had a child, take some advice from a Watery Tart: "A University of Washington study reports that 40% of 3-month-olds now watch television…They just don't need television, and we have only begun to understand how harmful it is for them: obesity, ADD and ADHD, decreased interest in math, science and reading have all been connected to over-consumption of passive forms of entertainment. And the people who produce and market these "baby-friendly" and "educational" programs will have you believe that you're doing your baby a benefit by beginning them on a steady diet of video entertainment as early as possible. Don't believe them. Listen to the doctors, the scientists, the ones who stand to gain nothing monetarily."

If you are lucky enough to have a daughter (aren't we precious?), she will grow up eventually, no matter how much you pray to God otherwise, so what's a parent to do? Nowadays, what with virginity pledge this and parental consent that, parents and government officials favor the idea of complete female control — your body and life belong to them, not you, silly girl. But I'm a firm believer in this: if you raise your daughter with self-esteem and common sense, you won't need to enact laws that restrict her freedoms and decision making. You may want her to stay daddy's little girl forever, but she won't. Relying on church and state officials to keep her in line once you're gone won't work either.

What is so baffling about raising a female to be an autonomous individual, to believe she is capable of properly living her own life? Why do we feel the need to make a suggestion like this: "It is time to raise the age of consent from 18-21 –'consent,' in this case, referring not to sexual relations but to providing erotic content on film." This from Wall Street Journal Opinion Columnist Garance Franke-Ruta, who, while musing on Joe Francis and Girls Gone Wild, writes, "Is there anything to be done?" According to Ruta, the only thing to be done is control the girl. After all, how can a girl make a sound decision for herself, right? When we discuss laws restricting pornography in general and so-called filmmakers like Joe Francis, the First Amendment is always invoked, silencing all. We wouldn't want to be able to charge Francis and his ilk with something other than contempt of court or tax evasion. And why teach your sons to respect the other half of humanity when you can simply wag your finger at the female?

In general, I am not anti-porn. I also don't believe that raising the age of consent will have any effect on the GGW phenom. Think of how the age limit for drinking was raised and what good that did. Also, if you are legally of age to sacrifice your life for your country or vote for the leader of the free world, you're old enough to flash a camera man, whether you regret it or not.

Jennifer Leblanc

It's time for you, the little guy, to take a minute to try to make the world a better place. Then tell two friends. And have them tell two…

First, on June 26, the ACLU hopes to deliver a 10,000-signature petition to Congress urging them to:

1. Restore habeas corpus and due process.
2. Pass the Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007.
3. End the torture and abuse in secret prisons.
4. Stop extraordinary rendition: secretly kidnapping people and sending them to countries that torture.
5. Close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay and give those held there access to justice.
6. Investigate wrongdoing and ensure those who broke the law are held accountable.
7. Restore American values and the rule of law.

I know it's a tall order, but a girl can dream. So please, go sign it (via Boing Boing, of course).

After you do that, take another minute to help out the fellow little guys. From the Free Press website: "Postal regulators have accepted a proposal from media giant Time Warner that would stifle small and independent publishers in America. The plan unfairly burdens smaller publishers with higher postage rates while locking in special privileges for bigger media companies." Now, is that fair? Don't we just hate that? Then go sign it.

Jennifer Leblanc

May is Skin Cancer Detection and Prevention Month. That means my anti-sun habits are not just acceptable this month but trendy, too. 

I could make many excuses for how pale I am. I'm a bookworm — all those hours indoors reading. I'm part Irish — we're not a sun-friendly people. My skin doesn't tan, it blisters — well, that's not an excuse, just a painful truth. Besides all that, tans just don't do it for me. On myself or anyone else. I understand the image — J. Lo, Paris, jet-setters in general with exotic tans and a big purse that costs enough to feed a small nation. I also understand the economics behind the advertising — so much profit to be made off the bronzing powders, sprays, lotions, and tanning business, trying to look like an heiress. Intellectually, I get it (if you don't, read the NY Times article spelling it out for you). Personally, I don't like it. I have better things to do with my time than damage my skin. And if I were forced to be on the towel next to you, you'd get an earful from me.

To begin with, it's your health, stupid. A tan is skin damage. Even if the possibility of skin cancer (higher than ever before) means nothing to you, I'll appeal to your vanity. You may like to carry around Gucci bags, but do you want to look like one? Are you going for a crocodile look or something?

Now, this rich-girl image. A century ago the heiress look — only the poor worked outside and tanned — was pale. So pale in fact that they used arsonic-based cream to whiten their skin, which would naturally kill some of them or at least make them extremely ill. Do you think skin cancer from sun damage is any different?

Behind the image: last I heard Paris Hilton had been sentenced to 45 days in prison. Wow — that's hot. Like, burning skin hot. I'm sure some time in "the yard" will allow her to keep her coloring.

I also understand that not all young women out there know how to be their own person. They need an icon from a magazine cover to aesthetically mimic. I can provide some pale versions, some anti-crocodiles. First, Nicole Kidman. Come on — what's not to like? Oscar winner, the richest of all rich girls, and a UNIFEM Goodwill Ambassador. Next, a French version: Julie Delpy. Is anything more chic than a French woman? Last (but not least, I just can't think of more pale actresses at the moment), a youngin', Michelle Trachtenberg. From the NYT article: "In the May issue of Allure magazine, [she] said the pressure to bronze is her pet peeve with beauty advisors at makeup counters. 'They're like, 'Maybe you'd like to warm up your skin tone'…And I'm like, 'No, I'm going to embrace the pale.'" 

That's right, people — embrace the pale!

Jennifer Leblanc

So I'm reading through Mother Jones online and, dear Lord, is that Bill Donohue's name? In Mother Jones? Who contacted the dark side first? Donohue just led the crusade to have "anti-Catholics" Melissa McEwan of Shakespeare's Sister and Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon removed from the Edwards campaign. Mother Jones is one of my favorite liberal rags. An unholy alliance indeed.

But as I am open-minded, I read it. I'm so glad I did. I heard about the Domino's Pizza founder and nut job Tom Monaghan last year. Monaghan, a strict Catholic, is funding the construction of a right-wing Christian town in Florida. No porn, no contraception, all church. But the laws, you say? No problem — just make friends with former governor Jeb Bush who "made Ave Maria Town a special tax district like Disney World, giving the self-appointed Board of Supervisors (run by Monaghan's development partner) widening powers and exempting the town from state and local laws." And Big Brother is literally taking care of that pesky constitution. Sa-weet.

In this Eden-on-a-swamp, the average home will cost $1.95 million dollars. So much for helping the poor. But I'm sure God will understand when he hears this point of view: "One future resident, construction manager Darryl Klein, who has six children, had told me earlier that he'd moved his family from South Carolina because Ave Maria represented 'the ideal American community. It'll be a place where you know your neighbors. We'll be around like-minded people. The kids that play with my kids — they'll go to the same church as us. And we'll be accepted.' "

Yeah — being white wealthy Christians makes it hard to fit in anywhere else. On Earth. You poor outcasts, you.

While Donohue was trying to talk casually to a bunch of the Ave Maria University students, an official Hitler Youth broke it up: "Whoa, whoa whoa… Is this, like, an interview? With the media? You can't say anything to him — that's official policy." A school director compared students like this to military personnel, keeping order in and outsiders out. I've seen lots of pictures of Christ with his arms closed and his goons at the gates.

Once Donohue got a few anarchist students to talk, off-campus of course, the real fun began. " 'The first time I ever kissed a guy,' a gentle, soft-spoken Ave Maria freshman named Mersadis said over her mozzarella sticks, 'I thought it was disgusting. And now I don't want another guy to kiss me before marriage.' She took a sip of her iced tea, then continued. 'In high school, I found myself looking at every girl and asking, "Has she given up her virginity? Is she still pure?" Here, I've stopped asking. I know everyone is.' " I'm sorry — I can't type when I'm laughing this hard.

As for the boys: " 'We don't believe in the separation of church and state,' one student named Aaron said, 'and this country should orient itself toward Christ. The foundation of Western civilization rests on Christendom, which means that America owes its existence to the Catholic Church.' " Funny — our forefathers, who created America, did believe in separation of church and state. But no worries — contradictions follow, as usual: " 'The offertory in the new Mass,'  griped Aaron's friend, an energetic and sandy-haired youth named Mike, 'is essentially a Jewish table grace.' " Well, Jesus was Jewish, and there was no such thing as Catholicism before he lived and died. So much like America "owes it's existence" to Catholicism, Catholicism owes it's existence to Judaism, so maybe they should lighten up on the disdain for the originators of this free land and learn more about the peace-loving, charitable religion that they claim to live by.

But disdain, and downright hate, for other cultures, religions, and even other Christians is the norm at Ave Maria, as Donohue finds: "I leafed through Ave Maria's campus paper, the Angelus. University president Nicholas J. Healy Jr. writes a column for each issue. In one he calls Islam 'a hostile and aggressive religion,' and goes on to lament a 'widespread loss of the Christian moral vision,' most evident in Europe, where 'birth rates far below replacement levels have already allowed millions of Muslims from North Africa and the Middle East to…heavily influence the political agenda.' "  Actually, the majority of North Africans came to Europe after World War II when A) colonialism was over and the white man was suddenly AWOL, and B) when European countries (especially France) actively welcomed and recruited low-wage workers from these countries to help them rebuild their cities after bombing each other to dust and burying a great many of their citizens. This, by the way, was also about 20 years before the pill showed up on the radar, so birth rates — a.k.a., sluts aborting their babies and taking the pill — doesn't have a damn thing to do with it. But I'm sure no one at Ave Maria wants Blacks or Arabs to — gasp — have political influence.

Still, they like to fool themselves. Aaron, the student mentioned earlier, claims, " 'If you are devout…the calling of celibacy is not a problem.' " That's why priests are best known in the world for molesting children. I'm sure these all-American, privileged young men will have no problem controlling their natural, inevitable human urges.
Again, because I am open-minded, I expect there are a few dissenters who will one day escape and join the clutches of sinful reality: "Not everyone at Ave Maria shares Aaron's self-certainty and resistance to change. In fact, one student tracked [Donohue] down outside a dorm and in urgent, secretive tones said, 'Don't use my name, but I saw you talking to Aaron, and you should know that most people here think he has very extreme views on modernism.' " I was just disappointed that Donohue did not give anymore ink to the more moderate voices on that campus.

As this was written by Donohue, I expected slobbering praise. Instead, he paints a decent picture of a faith as misguided as any radical Islamic fundamentalism. He sees fascism, ignorance, and sheltered kids without a clue about the real world. Donohue correctly understood that these self-made martyrs can't handle living in a world that they can't control, so they're making their own little haven of denial and repression.

I'd like to thank Mr. Donohue for giving a liberal feminist such as myself (raised Catholic, to boot) a thumping good read.

Jennifer Leblanc

Virginia Tech happened because the Democrats failed with gun control laws.
Virginia Tech failed because the other students were not armed and able to defend themselves.
Virginia Tech happened because we raise our kids to be wimps and cowards.
Virginia Tech happened because of video games and Hollywood violence.
The best one yet has come from a conservative blogger named Gina Cobb who believes that teaching students young and old to believe in God could've prevented this. A few hours after I read this, NBC revealed the contents of their present from Cho Seung-Hui, in which Hui "rails against… Christianity." Well, there goes Cobb's already ridiculous theory.
I don't think it will be long until someone blames immigrants, as  Seung-Hui's parents came to America from Korea. 
Maybe having someone to blame makes everyone feel better. But finger pointing is useless and most of the time incorrect. Accusing everyone and everything just adds to the thick cloud of sadness and confusion for those involved.
Some of the issues will need to be addressed: the response of campus officials, guns on campus (personally, I wouldn't have been comfortable sitting in a room of armed classmates during my four years), etc. Talk of God and movies related to this case is nonsense. 
The only person to blame is Seung-Hui. It doesn't matter what he watched, listened to, who he dated or was rebuffed by, or whether or not he was quiet or anti-social. He was simply a psychopath.   

Jennifer Leblanc

I confess to ignorance about Imus before he was fired. I never listened to his show, or any other radio show, actually. It took some back reading and summary articles before I could have an opinion: that his sorry a** should've been fired a long time ago. But so should a lot of others.

In the aftermath, the media is looking closely at rap, free speech, whether or not flippant but hateful statements even matter, and what else, or who else, should follow Imus.

Nothing will change. Imus was never the problem — there's no shortage of ignorant old white men with opinions, and there never will be, unfortunately. But there's also no shortage of media professionals willing to employ these men and no shortage of a complacent audience to ignore their racist/sexist remarks.

People are willing to let it go — so what, he was joking, he didn't mean it, get over it, God, you're so sensitive. It's just some casual racism with my morning coffee. It's just a sexual put-down to women that we want our daughters to look up to: women who have the strength, intelligence, courage, and self-respect to never be "hos." 
Maybe if, for all these years, Imus had just been the old coot down the street or your drunken uncle, it wouldn't matter. But when you're paid to say such things, it matters. When millions of people, even those young and just learning right and wrong, are listening, it matters. When others follow in your footsteps and willingly spew hatred for cash and fame, it matters. If you ignore Imus, you have to ignore every other talking head who says something that is just plain unacceptable. The dominos keep falling — ignore what Ann Coulter says about The Jersey Girls or Rush Limbaugh's take on Michael J. Fox, and others fall in line.

In Virginia, a record number of innocent people were killed. Their family member and friends will never be the same. Most of all, the survivors no doubt have the hardest road ahead of them. Instead of support, sympathy, or aid, an Imusite, John Derbyshire, has only this hurtful bit: "College classrooms have scads of young men who are at their physical peak, and none of them seems to have done anything beyond ducking, running, and holding doors shut" (via Time). A blogger named Nathanael Blake agrees with him.

Haven't they ever heard of survivors' guilt? The constantly haunting questions of "Why did I get out and not them? What could I have done differently? If only I hadn't been here or doing this?" It drives people to suicide. Then there are the coming stories of students who did step up, who did fight back, who risked or gave their lives to help the person next to them. But people like Derbyshire and Blake have no problem rubbing unnecessary salt in a fresh, gaping wound.

Journalist Gwen Ifill (in 1993, Imus said of her professional appearance at the White House that they had let the "cleaning lady" in) appeared on "Meet the Press" and spoke about the Imus incident: "…people will say, I didn’t know, or people will say, I wasn’t listening. A lot of people did know and a lot of people were listening and they just decided it was okay. They decided this culture of meanness was fine — until they got caught. My concern about Mr. Imus and a lot of people and a lot of the debate in this society is not that people are sorry that they say these things; they are sorry that someone catches them."

Think of how many there are who are not afraid of getting caught, whose remarks will not be condemned, who will keep their jobs, and who will never have to or want to apologize. Imus apologized and got fired. Does that really change anything? Michelle Malkin, for one, is still getting air time and column space. Countless others like her are on radio, on TV, in print every day saying worse than Imus. And they will be tomorrow and the day after, as long as you let them. Everytime you hear something that you know in your heart is wrong but ignore it, you are no better than Imus. As long as you listen, let the advertisers pay, shrug, don't write that letter or blog post, don't protest, don't act, you're telling these fame-seeking mouthpieces and the world that it's OK.

This is the ugly side of free speech. Yes, I do believe the above mentioned have the right to say whatever they want. It doesn't mean it's right, entertaining, acceptable, unimportant, or worthy of a salary and a spot on any news show.

Jennifer Leblanc

How am I supposed to blog when a literary giant has fallen?
The Tart cried. Adam too. As always, Maud has the best links and the soulful brevity.

Jennifer Leblanc

Once a week I go to the movies. By myself. I'm probably going to do this every week for the rest of my life. I sit where I want, no one finishes my drink, and most important, I get to see whatever I want. For Grindhouse, I was definitely on my own. But for this one, I'm dragging everyone back with me.

I went Saturday night. I was expecting it to sell out, so I bought my tickets online. I also got there early to avoid sitting next to an old-school, genuine "grindhouse" viewer. Neither happened. There were maybe 20 people in the cinema with me. But those 20, like me, cheered and clapped at the end of the second film. The last half hour alone was worth the ticket price.

The first movie is quite campy — half homage, half spoof of B-movies. It's entertaining to see B-movie kings like Jeff Fahey and Michael Biehn alongside A-List Bruce Willis. Lost's Naveen Andrews was wonderfully slimy in a Miami-Vice-style suit and British accent. Otherwise, there are lots of zombies, cheap jokes, and a smokin' sex scene interrupted mid-way by a polite apology about a missing reel. Dang.

The second movie has two parts — I don't provide spoilers, so feel free to keep reading. I could care less about the first part — it was just the foundation for the end but with great music. I admit — I was bored. And I was thinking, "I get how this will end, chicks die, yadda yadda." Oh no. Instead, I am going to build a shrine to Zoe Bell, Tracie Thoms, and Rosario Dawson.

First I started smiling uncontrollably. Then I was laughing. When it was over, had there been a man sitting beside me, I would've made him my bitch. And liked it.

So I see the headlines about the movie's five-million-dollar, opening-weekend failure and think, huh? But…? Why? Why is Harvey Weinstein apologizing? My God, man, stand by your product. I do agree with him about the length of the movie. Three hours and 12 minutes is quite a stretch. They're toying with the idea of splitting the movies into two showings. My money goes to the second one. Yours should too.

Jennifer Leblanc

This may be a familiar scenario to you (as it is to myself and all book lovers): you've started a classic novel/current bestseller/a friend's all-time favorite. You're mildly interested. Soon, you're just bored. You don't care who killed so and so, or how the multi-generational saga will unfold. But, this book has been hailed for decades as a masterpiece. Or, everyone is talking about this new book by Famous Author. Or, this book changed my boyfriend's life — I can't stop now. You tell yourself, I haven't read enough of it/I'm already half done/ I'm not as smart as others if I don't like it.

My (and Guy Dammann's) advice — step away from the book. First of all, no matter what anyone else thinks, you're entitled to your opinion. For instance, I hate Joyce Carol Oates's books. Yes, yes, I know — Columbia, Princeton, awards, prolific, etc. She's probably a lovely woman, others may be touched by her stories, but I'm not a fan. I don't apologize.

On the otherhand, my favorite book of all time is The Instance of the Fingerpost by Iain Pears. In my humble opinion, it's one of the greatest books ever written. But for my friends and co-workers, there was eye-rolling, groaning, "it was so boring." I play offended, but it's cool. (To those who don't like Christopher Moore, the genius of A Dirty Job and The Stupidest Angel, well, I can't be seen with you).

It has also been my experience that, if you hate a book, set it down and it may come back to you, somehow. I hated Poe as a teenager — not anymore. Ditto for Truman Capote, who is now a favorite (and may I add, Capote over Infamous). It took me a couple of years to get into Primary Colors, but in the end I loved it. The most memorable return to a book for me was The Ground Beneath Her Feet by Salman Rushdie. I started it when I was 18, when it was first released. I gave up before Vina even met Ormus. A few months ago, I devoured it. I'm still not over it. Since I've finished it, no other book can compare. Who knows why I felt nothing at 18 or why now it's a song that I want to hear again and again. It doesn't matter either way. There's always another book.

But I feel your pain, still. As zen as I may be about it now, it's instinct for a bibliophile to feel guilt over abandoning a book. Just yesterday I let go of Heyday by Kurt Anderson. I know I'll go back to it someday. But it's not the right time. I move on. 

Now, A Farewell to Arms. Did that suck or what? I actually finished it, too. Never again!

I could not put down Suite Française by Irène Némirovsky. The experience was a first for me: as I was finishing it, I felt sadness, and a little desperation. I knew the end was near, that this person had to leave me soon, and there was nothing I could do about it. I had never before felt as if I would miss a book, or it's author, as I would a friend going away for good. It must have been because of the book's background. I knew Némirovsky died at Auschwitz before she could finish it. I knew the last three intended parts of the novel died with her, unwritten. It's silly, really, wishing someone gone for six decades to somehow be saved because of her words. Suite Française will never be finished. The other precious 5,999,999 others were never saved either. Too much was lost. I feel it when I think of the last three missing parts of that novel.

The remaining words are all the world can ever have of a writer anyway. Suite Française was just our introduction to Némirovsky. Her previous novels are being translated and sold. And another, although much shorter, novel was found in her archives. Chaleur du Sang, or Fire in the Blood as we will know it, will be published in the fall, along with a biography of Némirovsky. What is left will have to be enough.

Jennifer Leblanc