Andrej Pejic

 

***NSFW Not Safe For Work NSFW*** 
(Begrudging warning because I don't believe any of this is inappropriate)


When considering the kyriarchy as an all encompassing tangled knot of authority and privilege, it is difficult to extract those who are the oppressed and those who are the oppressors. As an American feminist, I cannot fully appreciate what it is like to be a woman who is a citizen of another country, living under a different government. As a white feminist, it can be easy to neglect or deny the power I inherently have in our racist society. As an educated feminist, empathizing with those who do not have the same access to school and information can be challenging. As a straight, cisgendered feminist, it is impossible to experience the significant added struggles those in the LGBTQ(etc.)** community face. Denying any of my privilege will only work against the gains I want to achieve, not only for women, but people in general. 


Even though I lament the shortcomings females face due to our gender, I can't ignore the relative ease I've experienced regarding my own personal gender identity. Never have I questioned whether or not I was given the right parts or characterized in the right way. Cisgender means a person's assigned gender at birth, their body parts, and their personal identity all match. I am a cisgendered female because I have a vagina, the hospital I was born in labeled me a girl, and I personally choose to have a feminine identity. Transgender means an individual's gender identity does not match their assigned sex based on their genitals and/or they relate to masculine or feminine social roles regardless of their assigned gender. It can be a bit confusing when you first begin to consider these variables. Cis and Transgender identities have nothing to do with sexuality. Can you be a cisgendered lesbian? Yes. Can you be straight and transgender? Yes. 

Jenna Talakova, Miss Canada Participant

I'll be the first to admit this a new consciousness for me thanks to the open minded feminists I read everyday. BITCH Magazine has a great column on their website called "End of Gender" where they have been discussing these ideas for a while. Melissa Harris-Perry did a whole segment on her weekend show with transgender community leaders and prominent feminists. Even Donald Trump and his Miss Universe organization opened up competition to transgender women after Canada tried to kick out Jenna Talakova for being born male. Progress and awareness are being made by those who are informed, meaning there is going to be more for me to learn. 

Andrej Pejic is one of the fashion industry's current top models. Not yet 21, he has been in dozens of magazines and designer campaigns. What makes him a stand out is his ability to successfully model both female and male looks; most notably, walking in Jean-Paul Gaultier's men's and women's collections.  


He says his professional gender identity is up for artistic interpretation and that he feels no need to explain himself. In a fantastic, cliched fashion world way, he's simply Andrej. Which is great for everyone because his public image will affect more people on a personal level. After he said he would consider getting a sex change if offered a Victoria's Secret contract, some believed him to be flippant about the challenges faced by many transgendered individuals. While that may or may not be true, in the same quote he said he is comfortable with himself right now, projecting both female and male characteristics. I see this as a positive because his approach to gender seems to be extremely fluid, resulting in less suffocating either/or restrictions. 

“It’s not like, ‘Okay, today I want to look like a man, or today I want to look like a woman.'   I want to look like me. It just so happens that some of the things I like are feminine.”

Andrej was born in Bosnia in the early 90's but ended up growing up in Australia as a refugee after fleeing his homeland due to the war. In a New York Times
interview, he talks about shutting down for a while when he realized it was no longer acceptable for a boy to want to be pretty and behave like a girl. He eventually adopted a "Fuck it" attitude and decided to live the way he felt the most comfortable. Since his mother and grandmother sacrificed so much to protect him from the war, they unquestionably accepted him and his natural tendencies and are overwhelmingly proud of his successes. 


Many of us won't personally question our assigned genders. We should still be sensitive to those that do, not only because they could be our loved ones, but an accepting mentality fosters a better community. Remember when J.Crew ran the ad in their catalog of a little boy with pink painted toenails? Social conservatives said it was a celebration of transgendered children and were outraged. Many reacted to that outrage by supporting the ad; an example of progression due in large part to public figures like Andrej.  A ripple effect of tolerance forms around him based on his true sense of self.

Controversial Cover

Pejic's modeling career highlights a lot of the differences we place on the physical bodies of men and women. His topless Dossier magazine cover was banned by many shops in the US. Stores that did sell it, used a decency cover (the black plastic normally found over Playboy or Penthouse) in order to not offend their patrons. It was thought customers would think he was a naked woman, which would be upsetting.


Hmm. 


Women's bodies are so sexualized we rarely think about it anymore. In the west we look at middle eastern cultures and cast judgement on the women who are fully covered in burkas yet we don't question the indecency assigned to breasts in our own culture. "You just gotta cover 'em up gals and make sure you don't show too much cleavage because that could invite stares or worse (!) from poor men who can't contain themselves." At the Christian camp I used to work at as a teen, girls weren't allowed to wear bikinis at the waterfront because they could become "stumbling blocks" for the boys.  This upsets me not because I don't understand modesty but because the responsibility of decency falls only on the shoulders of females. And that is a secular responsibility as much as it is a religious one.

The controversy surrounding Andrej's cover seemed really silly to me because I, like most, have normalized topless men.  Guys are always shirtless. Sometimes they are sexualized but most of the time a topless man is just out on the beach or working in the yard. It's no different than having rolled up sleeves or cropped pants. Even using the phrase "topless man" seems a bit off. But an exposed nipple on a lady?! Look out! And the idea that because Pejic has feminine features, a topless picture of him should be hidden or scandalized highlights just how obnoxious that modesty standard really is. If breasts are inherently sexual and therefore indecent in public, how could his cover create a problem when he clearly doesn't have breasts?


By choosing to appear feminine, Andrej experiences the same type of sexualized attention women are well accustomed to. He is harassed by men who believe him to be female. Many are surprised he doesn't take offense to being mistaken for a woman.

Original Image

 "In this society, if a man is called a woman, that's the biggest insult he could get. Is that because women are considered something less?" - AP

Now, don't be shocked, my answer is YES! Female bodies are regularly consumed for sexual purposes. Even covering them up is sexual because it is to preserve some idea of modesty. Covered or exposed; we are on display in a way that men aren't. Men are allowed control over their bodies and always have been. This is why a feminine male is so confusing and discomforting for us. Why would you choose to give up control? Andrej doesn't believe he gives up any authority when he accentuates female characteristics. That's empowering and true. We are only less if we believe that we are. 

This image is a great visual interpretation of the sexualization of females. The male superheroes cause unease when you first see them. You almost want to look away because their pose is so unfamiliar and feels indecent; like an exposed breast if you will. When you see Wonder Woman and realize the males are just positioned and dressed like her, you're hit with a wave of realization about how standardized hypersexual images of women are compared to those of men. 

As we emerge from the womb, we are labeled either male or female: either/or. Our parents and caretakers further cement this distinction in the way they clothe us, how they speak to us, the activities in which we are allowed to participate, and the entertainment they use to educate us about our acceptable roles as either boys or girls. Mother Goose nursery rhymes inform us little boys are made of a creepy mix of puppy dog tails and snail bits, while little girls are formed with sugar, spice, and whatever it is "everything nice" entails. 

Andrej, right, modeling for Marc by Marc Jacobs

Pejic and others like him are breaking us out of the either/or gender trap which upsets us.


Believing in two genders, accepting only two genders, seems to give us great comfort. Without any leniency, we are relegated to one side or another, making the development of self identity predetermined, thus minimizing individual choice (which is hard, y'all!). If you are a male, you can choose from column A; including acceptable, expected masturbation, jobs running the world, sports, and other activities aiding general domination. Column B, for women, offers gestation/birthing/nursing/raising males (preferably) or females, menstruation, dresses, and unquestionable submission to male domination. See, simple.


Of course, it's not simple. 


Gender exists on a spectrum; varied and undefined. You can be a woman without a womb and a man who doesn't produce testosterone. Your birth certificate may read "female", however, you can choose to live your life as a man. Eventually, whether current society likes it or not, our gender roles will be a thing of the past, as outdated as chastity belts and duels to the death. This can't be stopped and our population won't suffer because of it. We will be free to choose from either Column A or Column B: which will create a more satisfying society. We'll be happier and will feel emancipated. 


Before you get too uncomfortable with this future, remember not long ago it was unthinkable women would wear pants or men would choose to care for children. So many of our accepted "natural" rules for gender are eliminated within a century or a few decades. How are women who inflate their boobs with silicone or men who use steroids more natural than those who identify against their assigned gender? We're simply more comfortable with those physical alterations because they propagate the gender structure as is. I'm more uncomfortable with the idea that we would somehow stop gender progress now as if we've reached the all mighty grail of complete cultural enlightenment. Spoiler alert: We haven't. 


The need for societal androgyny is not solely based the "feminist desire to crush male domination". Gender roles repress both men and women. They harm families who don't accept children who reject their birth certificate identity. Individuals who never feel comfortable with their assigned gender can suffer from depression, self-harm, and suicide. This is an ailment holding us back as a whole which is why it should be important no matter what your personal gender identity may be. People like Andrej are leading us into a new time that will provide more variation and personal expression which is nothing short of natural progression.


Have you ever considered what your likes and dislikes would be without influence from gender guidelines?


**I add the etc. after LGBTQ because after watching Kate Bornstein on Melissa Harris-Perry's transgender segment, she said those letters were not all inclusive so that is my small way of updating it until there is a more widely accepted inclusive version. 


A great reference on androgyny as an identity is the website "Practical Androgyny". Great answers for lots of questions!


This pic is from one of my last Jane magazines and it's up on my fridge!

Daisy Bates

"When a woman tells the truth, she is creating the possibility for more truth around her." 

-Adrienne Rich

Oh, Mike Daisey. Ugh. Why did you become my hero and then become the prime example of what I don't want to become!? For those of you non-This American Life listeners, Mike Daisey is a storyteller whose theatrical show "The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs" was aired in what came to be their most popular episode to date this past winter. Last weekend, Ira Glass painfully retracted the piece due to factual errors in Daisey's story about his trip to Shenzhen, China and discussions he had with Foxconn factory workers.  


The original story is mentioned and linked in my last post about Rachel O'Neill because it was moving and his storytelling abilities were (are?) inspirational to me. Turns out, most of his tale is made up. He did go to China, however, he exaggerated most of his experience and completely falsified other portions. TAL took issue with this because Daisey told them it was 100% factual. He even deterred their fact checking efforts with blatant lies to keep them from contacting his interpreter and other sources that would surely discredit him. TAL says this goes against their journalistic responsibility to present the facts. Daisey's defense is he isn't a journalist and he used artistic liberty to make sure he was heard and therefore able to shine a spotlight on the very real problem of worker's rights violations.


Hmm. I don't buy it. Unfortunately for Daisey, this incident coincides with all of the KONY 2012 nonsense. Unfortunate because he seems to be just another example of what some are refering to as The White Savior Industrial Complex. Teju Cole* writes about this in The Atlantic and his quote summing up its definition best is this: 

"The White Savior Industrial Complex is not about justice. It is about having a big emotional experience that validates privilege."

Ouch. Too true. And it hits close to home. I was all about Save Darfur years ago when I lived in Colorado; the movement aimed at stopping the genocide going on in Sudan. Couldn't tell you much about it now outside of knowing from Jezebel that George Clooney got arrested for protesting at the Sudan embassy last weekend. But when I slapped on a green sticker showing my support as I walked away from an information table at a summer festival, I felt like I had participated in saving humanity. Ha, even my last post about where our shit comes from reeks of my need to prove I'm at least somewhat considerate in order to lessen my guilt while I continue to browse Forever 21. (Full disclosure: went there today actually.)


While a portion of our intentions are to actually help, the desire for acknowledgment seems to overwhelm us. This is where we usually fail because our focus becomes "Look, look! I'm one of the good ones helping out the have-nots. So now I deserve what I've got!"  Invisible Children might truly want to stop Joseph Kony and the LRA, but their approach makes it undeniable that they want you to know they are the ones who are going to do it. (#MakeUsFamous2012) Daisey probably really does feel guilty about where all of his Apple toys come from and believes the injustice the workers face can and should be changed. But he also wants to have the best story and if cutting out the full truth will resolve the problems and assuage his guilt faster so he can happily go back to playing with his Ipad, then what's the harm? 

The harm, suggests Cole, is "there is much more to doing good work than "making a difference" and those who are being helped must be consulted on matters that concern them." Without that, we bulldoze over the very people we are trying to save in the name of our own names, thus perpetuating The White Savior Industrial Complex (TWSIC). And this happens all the time.

"Apparently, I'm part of the 1%. I hate 'The Help'"

                                        - Facebook status from October 2011

I've had trouble articulating eloquently what exactly enraged me the most about "The Help" but TWSIC pretty much hits the nail on the head. Can you think of a pop culture example that better illustrates our need to justify our privilege while over taking actual history? I'll be candid; if I didn't follow Melissa Harris-Perry on twitter or check into Feministing everyday, I probably would have been fine with the book. (Not the movie though. Seriously, it was too cheesy even for those of us feeling the most guilt and need for redemption, right?) Luckily for me, the historical inaccuracies, feminist heresy, and white savior blasphemy were intelligently pointed out before I could become entranced by Skeeter's efforts to save the maids! Kathryn Stockett really showed us how to appropriate someone else's story and use it to our own advantage, huh? But it felt good, so again, what's the harm?

While fiction can be used to encourage and inspire us in reality, there is no place for massive revisions within the truth about how our society has been shaped. Too many actual stories about the way history has occurred have gone unacknowledged to justify books like "The Help"**.  Allowing TWSIC to repackage those stories as a way to sidestep acknowledgement of our own racism and responsibility for atrocities such as segregation must stop. What is the solution? Telling the truth. Being honest even though it may reveal something ugly about us as a people. Accepting that white people did not initiate integration but were peacefully shamed into change by our black neighbors we so ruthlessly oppressed for centuries. 

"She didn't ask, she told."  - Daisy Bates: First Lady of Little Rock

Daisy Bates was so audacious she pissed off white supremacists, white southerners, white politicians, white men, black leaders, black men, black southerners, parents of her students, and her students; just to name a few. She was threatened, harassed, and criticized. She lived her life as an unashamed, unapologetic black woman and that scared a lot of people. She instilled the kind of fear that exposes the truth behind rhetoric. She called out hypocrisy and challenged those who felt they were free from having to explain their cowardice to once and for all defend the constitution and extend its rights to all US citizens. 

L.C. and Daisy

Bates was born in Arkansas in 1914. At the age of eight, she learned her birth mother was raped and murdered by three local white men. Shortly afterwards, her birth father left her with the people she had believed to be her real parents. Her mother's murderers were never brought to justice and lived their entire lives openly, in uncontested freedom. This realization created a severe sense of insecurity and challenged her entire worldview. When she was 15, she became involved with a married insurance broker named L. C. Bates who was 10 years her senior. After she turned 18, they ran off to Little Rock together and established a black paper which published desegregation violations. This is how she became involved with the Little Rock Nine and ignited change.


After Brown vs. The Board of Education, segregation was deemed unconstitutional in public schools and districts all over the south began to reorganize and prepare to integrate. Little Rock Central High School had always been "whites only" but in 1957, 9 students with high grades and excellent attendance, were selected by the school board to be the first black students to attend. Daisy became their advisor and was prominently involved in all public discourse about the students and was the liaison between the city and the NAACP. She harbored the Little Rock Nine at her home and suffered greatly for being the face of their efforts. She and her husband lost all ad revenue for their paper and eventually had to stop its publication. Her house had rocks thrown through it on a regular basis and gun shots were fired into her living room. Not a day went by when her life wasn't threatened. 

Bates' home after the window was assaulted by bricks and bullets

Segregationists held protests and the Governor of Arkansas, Orval Faubus, enlisted the National Guard to block the students from entering. 


None of this slowed Daisy down. She was determined to make her efforts a success. As a riveting public speaker, her speeches attracted international attention. At the height of The Cold War, Russia used the US' race issues as propaganda outing the government as hypocrites. This greatly embarrassed the White House. Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne Division to Little Rock and used his executive power to overtake the Arkansas National Guard from the governor's control. This authority had not been exerted by a president since the Civil War. 

Once inside the school, the students weren't safe among their peers. They faced ridicule, taunts, and unbearable pressures day in and day out. Many became frustrated with Daisy and other NAACP leaders for not being able to protect them further or understand their struggle. This was not lost on Daisy and upset her greatly. The black community at large suffered during the fight because the white community blamed them for creating chaos for their own children in regards to their education. Despite all of this hardship, 8 of the 9 graduated under Bates' guidance and succeeded in lasting desegregation for Central High. 

The Little Rock Nine with Daisy Bates

Daisy, along with Josephine Baker and Rosa Parks, were the only women to speak during Martin Luther King Jr.'s March on Washington in 1963. The male speakers were invited to attend meetings and discussions with the nations top leaders afterward but the women were kept out. This is significant. Black women during the Civil Rights days not only had to battle the white establishment, but faced profuse gender inequality within the movement itself. Daisy knew the male leadership would not extend her the opportunity to be Little Rock's NAACP president so she tricked them by running for the county position which usurped the authority of the city. This gave her a chance at winning the election and sure enough she did. She became the leading black figure in Arkansas. Women weren't considered capable leaders in the deep south during this time, but Bates' and others rose up to speak for themselves. When white women came down from the north to join the movement, they were awed by the tenacity and independence of the black women. They returned home inspired by what they saw which lead them to begin the women's rights campaign. Bates' made waves that transcended race. 


It's important to acknowledge that Daisy had to fight for acceptance within her own community. Just because many leaders of the Civil Rights Movement were working to alleviate a deep societal ailment, they were painfully unaware and sometimes unsympathetic about women's rights. This doesn't take away from the great work they did and the accomplishments they made, however, it does remind us that humans are humans and therefore imperfect. Remember my Abigail Adams post? John Adams and the other founders believed that like slavery, rights for women would come later, after their rights were secured. Great leaders never can solve the problems of our time but they can change the course of history. As long as we recognize the difference, and remember there is always room for progress, we can be confident we aren't idolizing them in an undeserved way. 


Daisy was imperfect as well but she did give her life to her cause. After her husband died, she put all of her money into reestablishing their paper, a promise she had made him. As a result, she ended her life with very little. She isn't as well known nationally as other Civil Rights leaders but is revered in Arkansas. 


Learning about women like Daisy, and knowing that so much change can be initiated by one person really does inspire me. Her story is a great reminder of the power behind true, factual history. I'd rather hear Daisy's story than read a flowery, fairy tale, that simply repeats a fabricated myth about how righteous we are. Exposed flaws should make us want to be better, to do better. Referring back to Cole's article, we seem to acknowledge racism yet can never find any racists. We accept the existence of misogyny but refuse to out any misogynists. Invisible Children and Mike Daisey nobly condemn "evil doers" in the name of justice, yet when their integrity and approach are questioned, they proclaim no wrong doing. It is not immoral to want to help others, however, we must not dictate and disregard those we are trying to save. We must take ownership of our own participation in oppression before we can include ourselves as part of the solution.

Most of my Daisy Bates knowledge comes from the PBS documentary Daisy Bates: First Lady of Little Rock. I strongly recommend it! You can watch it online at pbs.org through the end of March. 


*Seriously, read Teju Cole's article in The Atlantic. It is very thought provoking and worthwhile. 


**If you did like "The Help" and you'd now like to read a nonfiction alternative to Stockett's book, "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks" is beautifully crafted; relating a white woman to the life of a black woman and her daughter in an honest, factual way. It's a great example of how to tell the story of someone else's struggle without covering up race issues and playing into The White Savior Industrial Complex. 


PS. Daisies make me happy. :)