Ads and the isms

Isms in ads is/are an issue that has/have irked me for many years. I understand that ads are supposed to catch your eye, because that’s what makes a product stick in your mind. I totally get that. But I am curious as to why a company would want a product to stick in someone’s mind as “WOW that company is super sexist/heterosexist/elitist and I never want to buy their products!” Let me throw out some examples (be aware that I put the links to the ads on here with extreme reluctance because I don’t want people to watch them, but want you to see what I’m talking about and what exactly irks me).

Because we don’t need to sell hair products like this. Seriously, when did the world decide that sex sells products that don’t have anything to do with sex. Shampooing hair should not lead to an orgasm, unless the individual has trichophilia. And while we’re talking about fetishes selling products, let’s also throw out this one about shoe fetishism. Or there’s this ad that objectifies men, or Tom Ford ads that objectify everyone (I am not providing a link because they are way beyond pushing the envelope and I already feel vile enough posting the rest of these).

Because we don’t need to sell cars like this. And may I also say that this commercial frightens me an exceptionally LOT because it glorifies 1) Lust, 2) Wrath, 3) Envy, 4) and Pride. It thumbs up treating women like objects, violence perpetrated by anger, the Want of Better Shit, and “yep I’m better than you.” Whaaaat.

Because we don’t need to sell cars like this, either. This is classism, white male privilege, and “the American Dream” that isn’t actually achievable for the majority of the American population. But no, you go ahead and sell your car like that, guys. Freedom. ‘Murica.

(There isn’t really an ad depicting this, but it should also be noted that companies like General Mills actually get backlash for making commercials like this [know why people were mad? Hint: skin color. I wish I was joking] or when Nabisco gets in trouble for making commercials like this [locate the problem this time? Hint: same-sex relationships. Again with the wishing I was joking]. People throw fits about Cheerios and Honey Maid graham crackers but don’t blink twice about SEXSEXSEX commercials? Seriously, that’s where we are right now?)

Those of you who know me enough to have suffered through my speech about how Unilever unnerves me with their two-facedness can skip this next part, ’cause that’s what this is. Unilever owns Dove, the company that’s been doing all of the ‘remarkable’ ’empowering’ “Real Beauty” ads recently. They’re great. Really. They’re all like, “Hey, the media is presenting terrible images of women and we’re all buying into it” and “Hey women, you’re beautiful despite what you see in yourself,” and that’s great, really. Those are really good messages. UNFORTUNATELY Unilever also owns Axe, one of the most remarkably sexist objectionist products that I know of. Axe both objectifies women as sex products, as bodies to be viewed, used, and discarded, and objectifies men as only ever wanting sex. A lot of Axe commercials get banned worldwide, which is great, but guys, they’re trying to sell their products this way. This is what they want to be known for as a company. Here’s one ad that was banned, as well as all of these (not for those who think that women shouldn’t be objects/sex shouldn’t sell products/men shouldn’t be seen as only desiring sex). Unilever is telling women that they are worth more than just their physical bodies, and that those bodies should be treated with care and they should see the beauty in themselves, but they are telling men that women are Things that can be manipulated, as Objects that can be lusted after, as Prizes to be won. They are telling men that they are allowed to give in to their animalistic instincts (I am NOT saying that men have animalistic instincts and that men are just looking for a thumbs-up to use/abuse women) and wantwantwantneedneedneedhavehavehavetaketaketake.

Last week a male went on a shooting rampage; while we can speculate whether or not he was mentally ill, whether or not he felt entitled, whether or not he was a narcissist, what we KNOW (because he told us through videos) is that he blamed women for rejecting his sexual advances. That’s why he was killing people. And people pitied him. That’s misogyny. That’s a view of women that starts with the belief that they are for the taking. That belief didn’t come from nowhere, that is something that is being taught–or at the very least is not being admonished–by society. He was completely responsible for his own actions, but society is responsible for helping create the thoughts behind those actions. Belief: Women have a responsibility to men to fulfill their sexual desires. That’s. So. Wrong. (I’m not going to talk right now about how misguided society is about what feminism is or how there’s an actual thing called “Men’s Rights Activists” and how terrifying it is to be a woman a lot of days, that’ll be another blog another day, but suffice it to say oh WOW life is scary.)

People pretend that media does not have an effect on anyone. If that was the case, companies would not spend their money making commercials or billboard/magazine/internet ads. WE ARE EFFECTED. WE ARE AFFECTED. We buy products because of advertising, because of what the company promises us about the product. Companies that sell products based on the isms that are rewarded by having their products sell will keep on selling products that way.

Think before you buy. Find out about companies, and think about the message that they are sending through their advertising (whether or not you think they’re aware of it). [This is also not a blog about buying natural, local products or avoiding certain chemicals or anything like that, but those are good things, too, and I do encourage you to do so!] I am an idealist. I believe we can change things through conversation. So let’s talk.

Controversy du Jour: World Vision

In case you haven’t heard what’s been going on…

World Vision is a Christian organization run out of the state of Washington (that’ll be important in a second), and they do amazing things. They’re arguably the most famous for child sponsorship (that’ll be important, too). This past Monday, March 24–four short days ago–Richard Stearns, President of World Vision, announced that the US branch of World Vision would now hire Christians in same-sex marriages. He was quick to note that “It’s easy to read a lot more into this decision than is really there…this is not an endorsement of same-sex marriage. We have decided we are not going to get into that debate. Nor is this a rejection of traditional marriage, which we affirm and support.” 

When I read about this on Monday, I was torn between feeling happy about the change in policy and being really confused, because World Vision has a history of discrimination towards LGBT people. And now here they were saying that people in same-sex marriages would be allowed to be hired by World Vision, without the company endorsing their marriages or indicating that their marriages were on the same level as heterosexual marriage. Essentially, “you’re not the same as us, but we believe in unity and we’re not going to let a disagreement on a minor issue to get in the way of our organization operating better and being more effective.” That’s not the most positive message, but I was hopeful that it would cause the course of the conversation to change, and would stand as a leader for other Christian organizations to follow.

I was wrong.

On Wednesday, after severe backlash from supporters (Stearns says that a bit less than 5,000 people removed their child sponsorship because of Monday’s decision), Stearns made a new announcement that not only said “lolz jk” but took further steps backwards by apologizing to the people spewing hate, removing their sponsorships, and generally saying horrible things about gay people. He also backslid from stating that including workers in same-sex marriages would help build unity to stating that “Rather than creating more unity [among Christians], we created more division, and that was not the intent. […] Our board acknowledged that the policy change we made was a mistake … and we believe that [World Vision supporters] helped us to see that with more clarity … and we’re asking you to forgive us for that mistake…We cannot defer on things that are that central to the faith.”

So.

Let’s talk about business. 

I’m not a business person, so I’m not going to spend much time talking about this, other than to say that I wouldn’t have cared one smidgeon if World Vision had never changed their policy in the first place. They have standards for their employees, I get that. I have spent a number of years working for various Christian organizations, and each one had its own standards for what was acceptable and not acceptable conduct from an employee. I don’t think that World Vision’s hiring standards are absurd, and I respect their ability as a company to choose whom they want to hire. HOWEVER. They also get over 200 million dollars in governmental grants every year, and the government is encouraging businesses to have non-discriminatory hiring practices. As someone who has seen firsthand how grants can really tie an organization’s proverbial hands in certain matters, I get that sometimes grant-writers make you do things you don’t want to do. But World Vision’s reason to fight the government on this was because gay people can’t actually be Christians (I mean come on, ammirite?). 

Business-wise, I don’t think anyone would have raised a big stink if the policy never changed. But it DID change. And then it changed back after people stopped sponsoring children. And yes, I understand that it goes into a giant pot and the children affected wouldn’t suddenly be kicked out of life-saving programs, but losing 2.1 million dollars a year would have been a pretty hard loss for a not-for-profit organization. So while it wasn’t about the money…it was about the money.

Let’s talk about responses.

Y’all have probably heard all of the negative, angry responses (if not, check out World Vision’s Facebook wall Monday-Wednesday and feel the hate burning your eyes out of their sockets–and now they’re getting the same negative backlash from the other side, because apparently unity is a myth), so I’m going to share some heartbroken responses, both to Monday’s decision and then Wednesday’s “repeal.” Rachel Held Evans blogged about the scenario on Monday, and then on Wednesday she wrote what I thought was a perfect piece. “Honestly, it feels like a betrayal from every side.” And it does. I am hurt by Christians who are so opposed to my being sanctified by Christ that they would rather give up supporting an organization that would dare to hire me. I am hurt by an organization that for one small moment told me that my relationship was considered valid and valued, and then told me that I was rejecting a fundamental piece of the Christianity I claim.

Benjamin Moberg wrote on Monday out of his pain, “I am tired, friends, so tired of being hit. I am tired of being the most galvanizing symbol for evangelical Christians.” To which I say a heartfelt ‘yes.’ And his follow-up words on Wednesday ring just as true: “I am not ready to forgive those that held starving children as ransom because of who I am and I am not ready to forgive Richard Stearns for this profoundly deep betrayal. I am not ready to forgive either of them for the devastating message they have sent to gay children everywhere.” David Henson also had some really great things to say.

I get that this is a hot button for everyone right now: it’s political, it’s religious, it’s personal, yada-yada-yada. But it’s also 100% about people. It’s about me, and it’s about my legitimacy in the eyes of God, in the eyes of my Christian brothers and sisters, in the eyes of organizations, and in the eyes of the world. Me and God, we’re all right. We don’t need anyone else’s approval. I know where I stand with Him, and that’s really great. I just get so tired, my friends, of having to defend myself, my spirituality, my relationship and my reconciliation of teachings in Scripture. But hey, let’s go ahead and talk about them, in a minute. First, I think it’s time for a little sex talk.

Let’s talk about sex.

It seems to me that people sit around thinking that all gay people ever do is have sex: sex, sex, sex. That is the only thing that makes up someone who is LGBT, because, after all, it is their SEXual orientation. Geez, is that all you heteroSEXuals think about? That gay people don’t fit together like a puzzle piece (I’m looking at you, old college ethics professor!)? Did you know that LGBT people actually have entire RELATIONSHIPS that are not solely (and sometimes not at all) involving sexual intimacy? I know, crazy thought! A romantic evening with my partner typically involves playing Rummy or Nerts and watching Netflix. For how obsessively straight people talk about gay people sex, you’d think there was nothing else about which they could fill their minds.

But let’s bring the sex talk back to the World Vision conversation: World Vision was (albeit however temporarily) allowing Christians in marriages to work for them, holding them to the same standards they held all of their other employees. Washington (I told you it would be important) allows same-sex couples to be legally married. World Vision was saying, “that’s fine, Washington. That’s fine, same-sex people. Abide by our rules and you’re welcome here.” So whatever sex these Christians were having was within the confines of a legal marriage (and I could talk ALL DAY about how if you want to argue that marriage is purely a religious thing, you shouldn’t be allowed to vote on who can do it, and if you think it’s purely a political thing, you STILL shouldn’t vote on who can do it–but that’s another talk for another day), thereby fulfilling their employee policy.

Let’s talk about love.

I want to talk about Christ’s love for ALL PEOPLE. “How can Jesus love gay people when they are constantly sinning?” one might ask. “There are so many verses in the Bible that clearly condemn homosexuality!” Well, I disagree. The context behind those verses do not indicate to me that they’re really about gay people at all. They’re about inhospitality and gang rape, they’re about the purity code and trying to build a nation, they’re about pagan prostitutes, they’re about acting against how you were created, but they’re not about modern-day homosexuality as we know it. (I know that many of you will disagree, and we can dispute this until the sun goes down, but I believe what I believe [and I respect that you believe what you believe, as well!]. Our beliefs do not have to get in the way of loving each other and treating one another with respect, kindness, and genuine interest in each others’ lives.) Regardless of the translation of these verses, there are about 75 verses about love to every 1 verse that might-or-might-not be about gay stuff. My favorite of these verses, and one of the ways that my heart feels at peace in my spirituality and my orientation, is something Jesus said. Answering the Pharisee’s about what the greatest commandment in the law, Jesus says, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’  This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ The Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments” (Matthew 22:36-40).

Jesus loves me. Jesus loves you, and Jesus loves me. Jesus loves those people. He seriously actually really does love everyone. His love isn’t hidden under condemnation; he doesn’t tell people that they need to change in order to be loved. He says “go and sin no more” and knows that literally no one can. No matter what your views are on sin (what it is, what it means to stop, what counts and what doesn’t), you can pretty much be sure that you’re sinning. I’m sinning, too. And Jesus loves me, anyway. And Jesus loves my partner. And I believe with all of my heart that Jesus loves us together, and loves the family that we’re going to be, and loves that our church extends His love to everyone. I believe Jesus loves World Vision and the wonderful work they do and the staff that tirelessly work at being God’s hands and feet on this earth. I believe Jesus loves the people who were so mad that World Vision changed their policy to include gay people, and those who are so mad that World Vision changed their minds. Love, love, love. I know I am far from perfect in showing that love. We all are. So let’s all try a little harder, yes? Let’s listen, and respect, and LOVE.

LGBTQ and the Law

Recently, I’ve had a number of friends who have shown genuine surprise when they hear that gay people cannot get married in Ohio yet. So, in order to better educate those who ask and to get a better understanding myself, this is a run-down of some of the laws for and against LGBTQ people in the US.

1. There are 17 states–plus D.C.) that allow same-sex marriage. These are Washington, California, Hawaii, New Mexico, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maine, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, New Hampshire, Maryland and Vermont.

2. Two states, Nevada and Colorado, allow full civil unions and domestic partnerships.

3. Oregon both allows full civil unions and domestic partnerships and recognizes out-of-state marriages.

4. Wisconsin recognizes partial relationship status, which gives same-sex couples some of the same rights as heterosexual couples.

Now, recently there’s been this big drive of federal judges ruling that bans against same-sex marriage are unconstitutional; in fact, this happened in Kentucky just over a week ago. It happened in Utah in December, as well, but then the same-sex marriage ban ban was banned…which got awkward fast.

Ohio, not surprisingly, doesn’t make it into any of these categories. Ohio does not allow same-sex marriage, does not recognize marriages or partnerships from other states, and has no other type of legal recognition for same-sex relationships. This means that a couple who has been together for their entire adult lives are still granted 0 rights as a couple. While a few years ago, Obama ruled that hospitals cannot limit gay couples’ visitation rights, there are no legal rights recognizing the other partner if there is a death. “If a couple is not married and one partner dies, the other partner is not entitled to bereavement leave from work, to file wrongful death claims, to draw the Social Security of the deceased partner, or to automatically inherit a shared home, assets, or personal items in the absence of a will” (freedomtomarry.org).

“Surely not being legally recognized in a relationship isn’t the most horrible thing that could happen! It’s not like there are other rights being denied LGBT people.” Ah, but is it the only thing? Let’s take a look.

State law mandates that employees of the state and local governments be protected on the bases of both sexual orientation and gender identity/expression–YAY. State law does NOT protect employees in the private sector from either of these things. What does this mean? If I work for a private company and they somehow discover that I am gay, I could be fired without any other cause needed. Essentially, an employer could fire me because they are homophobic and the homophobia would be protected under the law.

But that’s not too bad, right? Just stay in the closet at work; after all, straight people aren’t always announcing that they’re straight! One day I will probably tell you the story of when my best friend forced me to come out at work, but that’s not today. I’m just bringing it up to say sometimes things happen and employers find out.

“So you can’t get married and you might get fired; that still doesn’t sound too bad!” Alright, let’s keep looking.

We can’t adopt! Unless we have really, really good lawyers. I have to stop here a minute, as adoption runs in my family’s blood. I think of the thousands of really crummy parents out there whose parental rights are (or need to be)–for the good of the children–stripped from them. Then I think of all of the children who are stuck in the foster system just waiting for someone capable of loving them and caring for them, many until they age out. I could adopt without my partner being legally named as the other parent, but if something happened to me (say, for instance, death), the state could very easily take away OUR child just because they would not view my partner as the child’s legal parent. That’s stupid, guys.

Finally, there’s the issue of bullying. Did you know that bullying is outlawed in the state? Bullying in public schools and online is prohibited. Do you know what isn’t? Issues of bullying specifically surrounding sexual orientation or gender identity. Do you know where the state doesn’t prohibit bullying? Private schools and religious schools. There are new bullying cases coming to light all the time, children who don’t feel safe going to school (private or public) because they hate being called names, being pushed around, being beaten up. Some decide that they would rather die than face their peers. That should never have to go through a child’s head; it should never happen. And it is all the time.

If we tell children who either identify as LGBTQ that they are not worth protecting, and that they are deserving of the words and actions against them, they will grow up believing that to be true. And just as sad are their peers, who will see that LGBTQ are supposed to be treated differently, poorly, and will grow up continuing to treat them that way. They will vote against them. They will teach their children to hate them.