Halton’s Catholic trustees and staff will be reviewing a fantasy novel that is `apparently written by an atheist’ Because of a recent complaint, they’ve pulled The Golden Compass (and as a precaution, Phillip Pullman’s other fantasy books) off school library shelves:

“(The complaint) came out of interviews that Philip Pullman had done, where he stated that he is an atheist and that he supports that,” said Scott Millard, the board’s manager of library services.

“Since we are an educational institution, we want to be able to evaluate the material; we want to make sure we have the best material for students.”

You may have heard of The Golden Compass; some critics anticipate it’s the next Harry Potter, and now it’s also a movie, set for release on December 7. Unlikely this ban on the book will last too long…

Last February, the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board removed the award-winning Snow Falling on Cedars from library shelves and teaching materials after a parent complaint about sexual content, but later reinstated the book after a review.

As a proud Canadian, I loves me some snow. Loves it, loves it, loves it. When I wake up in the morning, look out the window and see white rooftops, I squeal with delight. Seriously, squeal. Which can be hard on a sleeping partner (who fortunately finds it “charming”).

And Toronto didn’t mess around this year, our first snowfall is big and fluffy and pretty and yay!

I say boo to the forecasters who get all “it’s another beautiful day” when it is unseasonably warm in Nov/Dec/Jan. Usually accompanied by a not-so-innovative quip about shoveling. It is not a good thing when it’s hot in November.

We’re given many opportunities to ignore the seasons. We can get strawberries and goat’s cheese in the dead of winter. Everything is available all the time, for a price.

So how about a little bit of living in the moment. Instead of moaning about how it’s too wet, too cold, too slushy, we pull up our woolly northern socks and get on with enjoying our four uniquely fantastic seasons.

To facilitate that enjoyment, I’m sharing with y’all my family tradition: Snow Cake. “Snow Cake” is a white cake with white icing that can only be made once a year, because it can only be made on the first day of real snowfall. If you see a few rogue flurries that’s great, but it only means that Snow Cake day is on its way — it’s not time to break out the spatulas just yet. The rule is this: a true Snow Cake can only be made when there is a solid (if skimpy) layer of snow which stays on the ground for at least half a day.

But it’s worth the wait. What makes a Snow Cake what it is the anticipation and the event-ness around making it. How it is linked to the weather and the season. And, of course, the jaunty snowperson you put on top — meticulously applied with chocolate chips in the company of friends, family, pets… and then shared with the same (with the possible exception of pets).

There’s no one special recipe, any basic white cake and icing recipes will do, but if you don’t have any, you can use mine.

(more inside…)

Damn scientists and their blasted research!

It seems men are more stupid than once believed. Well, maybe not stupid so much as insecure. Yes, that’s the sweeping generalization I think can be made after reading this New York Times report.

A two-year Columbia University study of speed daters found that “men avoided women whom they perceived to be smarter than themselves. The same held true for measures of career ambition — a woman could be ambitious, just not more ambitious than the man considering her for a date.”

Researcher Ray Fisman (an economist) didn’t hide his disappointment in the results. “I guess I had hoped that they had evolved beyond this…So, yes, the stereotypes appear to be true: We males are a gender of fragile egos in search of a pretty face and are threatened by brains or success that exceeds our own.”(more inside…)

On November 10th Normal Mailer died. Respected publications such as the New York Times have devoted numerous pages of adoring recollection, depicting him as a brave, heroic and tireless genius, a literary leader, a pre-eminent chronicler of the 20th century. While the pieces that reflect on his life occasionally mention his flaws, it seems these glowing tributes wilfully ignore that, put simply, Mailer was “a sexist, homophobic reactionary.”

Mailer was a violent man, and that violence coupled with his hatred of women was certainly problematic. Mailer stabbed his second wife in the neck, and his fourth wife made accusations of physical abuse. The New York Times refers to Mailer’s behaviour largely as “womanizing,” and seems to explain and excuse the stabbing by stating everyone was drunk at the time. In fact, while the paper does mention all of these abuses, the way in which they seem to “write away” Mailer’s conduct is astounding:

Mr. Mailer belonged to the old literary school that regarded novel writing as a heroic enterprise undertaken by heroic characters with egos to match…

I find it interesting that we so thoroughly celebrate a man who, to everyone’s knowledge, lived a life openly endorsing his own misogyny and homophobia?

Mailer thought there were more gay men around and he blamed it on a loss of faith in the “notion of one’s self as a man”. He complained bitterly about the “womanisation of America”, revealing his pathological fear of a femininity he regarded as passive and threatening at the same time.

Our culture has a long tradition of celebrating the lives and works of those machismo artists who were known for their hatred and abuse of women, their violence often excused by the complexity of their genius. The celebration of this archaic notion of masculinity is problematic because it continues to endorse and excuse violence against women through artistic practice.

I am not here to argue against Mailer’s talent (in fact a few dissenting critics have done that for me,) nor am I here to disrepect a man who has died, I’m just here to ask the question: is it appropriate to so widely celebrate the life of someone known for and characterized by their hatred and abuse of women?

I’m a little late on this celebrity gossip:

Actress Sarah Michelle Gellar has changed her famous three-part moniker as a fifth wedding anniversary present to actor Freddie Prinze Jr. The couple was wed September 1, 2002.

A source close to the 30-year-old star tells Us Weekly,”She officially changed her name to Sarah Michelle Prinze” in honor of the occasion.

“On their anniversary, she showed [Freddie] her new driver’s license,” the source tells Us. “It was so sweet.”

I thought it was interesting that Gellar/Prinze made the decision to change her name so late after the fact. I wonder if it has something to do with the state of feminism in this here post-9/11 context - you know, the return to domesticity and traditional gender roles, yadda yadda…

I have noticed (and this could just be me) that more and more women I know are taking their (male) spouses’ names. My co-workers at the feminist organisation I work for, who are life-partnered and a few years older than me, tell me that ten years ago, no one was changing their name.

The whole question of name-changing is pretty much old hat - in the end, I support a women’s right to do whatever the heck she wants with her name. I should admit though, that I was a little demoralised to see the poll published just below the Gellar-to-Prinze news flash:

Do you think women should change their names for their husbands?
Yes 72% (4285 votes)
No 28% (1677 votes)

When I opened my front door this morning the following headline greeted me from the cover of The Toronto Star: “The ‘Ethical’ Cell is Born.” My knee-jerk reaction was one of rage, the focus of my anger the perceived irresponsibility of the paper in printing a headline that passed such an obvious moral judgment on the ethics of stem cell research - admittedly, I missed the quotes around the word ethical.

The front page news is this: scientists have discovered a way to make ordinary human skin cells behave like powerful embryonic stem cells. The “ethics” referred to in the headline are those around the controversial use of existing human embryos and cloning techniques that have clouded the development of the revolutionary and lifesaving research to date.

For President Bush and other opponents of human embryonic stem cell research, this good news has become a matter of “we told you so:”

“By avoiding techniques that destroy life, while vigorously supporting alternative approaches, President Bush is encouraging scientific advancement within ethical boundaries,” the White House statement said.

“We should all give credit to President Bush for challenging our nation to find a solution,” said William Hurlbut, a physician and consulting professor at Stanford University Medical Center who serves on Bush’s bioethics panel.

While those kinds of self-congratualatory statements enrage me, this breakthrough is certainly worthy of its front page placement.

It’s much too early to see if this development will have the same kind of powerful results as its embryonic predecessor, but overall today’s news means that the political, moral and ethical discussions around this life-saving research could eventually be no more. Most importantly, more important than any debate on ‘ethics,’ it means the Anti-choice rhetoric that set up research road blocks can end and the benefits of this research can reach everyone necessary without argument:

…abortion opponents were quick to embrace the technique, described in research released Tuesday by the journals Cell and Science, and hailed the results as evidence that embryo-destroying research is no longer necessary.

For those readers who grew up in the early days of Sesame Street, you’ll be happy to know that the golden era of Cookie Monster, Oscar the Grouch and The Count are now available on DVD. There’s one thing you should know, however: according to the New York Times, these DVDs have been branded strictly for adults only:

According to an earnest warning on Volumes 1 and 2, “Sesame Street: Old School” is adults-only: “These early ‘Sesame Street’ episodes are intended for grown-ups, and may not suit the needs of today’s preschool child.”

That’s right, children of the seventies and early eighties. According to modern standards, the pre-Elmo Sesame Street you grew up with is actually unsuitable to grow up with. The various reasons behind this warning may seem absurd, but they speak to an interesting trend, an overall cultural shift in terms of how we raise and subsequently shield our children from reality, and how modern children’s programming is deceptive (and often problematically gendered) “candy-colored animation hopped up on computer tricks.”

Contemporary television shows for children are a far cry from Oscar the Grouch’s depressive tendencies and Big Bird’s constant hallucinations of Snuffeluppagus (in fact, post 1985 everyone else on the street could suddenly see Snuffy too, simply because Big Bird’s imaginary friend got “creepy.”) This from Jezebel.com:

The producers cite an array of reasons (for the warning) including but not nearly limited to Cookie Monster, who was not only a pathological binge eater but also the Muppet who played the character Alistair Cookie, who, explains the New York Times Magazine “used to appear with a pipe, which he later gobbled. According to Parente, ‘That modeled the wrong behavior’ — smoking, eating pipes — ‘so we reshot those scenes without the pipe, and then we dropped the parody altogether.’”

In fact, the golden age of Sesame Street speaks to an era before our culture was paralyzed by a fear of our “neighbours:”

Back then — as on the very first episode, which aired on PBS Nov. 10, 1969 — a pretty, lonely girl like Sally might find herself befriended by an older male stranger who held her hand and took her home. Granted, Gordon just wanted Sally to meet his wife and have some milk and cookies, but … well, he could have wanted anything.

Please excuse me if I say “those were the good ol’ days,” but as our culture becomes increasingly sanitized and conservative, I worry that our children will miss out on gems like this, Sesame Street’s take on the Women’s Liberation movement:

(After the jump, I’ve included Stevie Wonder singing Superstition on Sesame Street, just for some nostalgic “when I was a kid” fun.)(more inside…)

The next time someone tries to tell me that the world is not a hostile place for women I’m going to point them to this story.

Via the New York Times: At halftime of the Jets’ home game against the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday, several hundred men lined one of Giants Stadium’s two pedestrian ramps at Gate D. Three deep in some areas, they whistled and jumped up and down. Then they began an obscenity-laced chant, demanding that the few women in the gathering expose their breasts.

According to the article, this “Gate D” (Get it? So mature.) practice has been going on for a while now, and there are numerous videos on You Tube of this hateful behaviour that border on hostile. There’s one that “shows a woman being groped by a man standing next to her.”

Now, I would think that hundreds of men yelling sexist obscenities at women at a sports arena would qualify as something objectionable? Punishable? You know, something you could do something about? No such luck:

…a guard later said they were not permitted to do anything about the chants at Gate D because of free speech laws.

Having said that, a woman who did expose her breasts as a result of the chanting was warned about “obscenity laws.”

Okay, so let me get this straight - 400 to 500 people chanting sexist, hateful obscenities that belittle and objectify female fans, making the arena a hostile and uncomfortable environment for them, that’s okay? But boobs? Boobs are bad.

Some days, I just shake my head.

Today is the 9th annual Transgender Day of Remembrance, a day where we “memorialize those who were killed due to anti-transgender hatred or prejudice.”

The Transgender Day of Remembrance serves several purposes. It raises public awareness of hate crimes against transgendered people, an action that current media doesn’t perform. Day of Remembrance publicly mourns and honors the lives of our brothers and sisters who might otherwise be forgotten. Through the vigil, we express love and respect for our people in the face of national indifference and hatred. Day of Remembrance reminds non-transgendered people that we are their sons, daughters, parents, friends and lovers. Day of Remembrance gives our allies a chance to step forward with us and stand in vigil, memorializing those of us who’ve died by anti-transgender violence.

The event is held in November to honor Rita Hester, whose murder on November 28th in 1998 prompted the “Remembering Our Dead” web project.

Why do we need a day of remembrance? Because of people like Tyra Hunter:

Tyra Hunter was a 24 year old transsexual woman who died after being injured as a passenger in a car accident. Emergency medical technicians at the scene of the accident uttered derogatory epithets and withdrew medical care after discovering her birth sex, and ER staff at DC General Hospital subsequently provided dilatory and inadequate care.

There will be vigils across the country and around the world. Toronto will hold a Transgender Day of Remembrance on Tuesday, November 20th from 7:00pm to 9:00pm at The 519 Church St. Community Centre, Auditorium.