Since 2001, women have patrolled war zones, opened fire at enemy combatants and even died in hostile action. Yet regardless of their heroic sacrifices and immeasurable bravery, women are still derided as damsels to be protected by certain letters of the law. 

The current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan mark a turning point for women at arms. Due to the unpredictable nature of insurgency, battlefields appear everywhere, thus blurring the distinction between combat and non-combat roles and propelling women into front lines for the first time at equal capacity with men. Cultural sensitivities make female troops indispensable when searching Muslim women during patrols, necessitating all-female search teams (dubbed the Lionesses) to accompany combat units. During conflict-heavy phases of war, U.S. enlistees are stretched thin, consequently forcing military leaders to use whatever man and woman power they have.  

According to retired Lt. Colonel John Nagl, a counterinsurgency expert, “We literally could not have fought [in Iraq] without women.” 

The House Armed Services Committee ignored these realities when it approved an amendment in 2005 barring female soldiers from serving in direct ground combat forces.  

Specifically the law prohibits women from joining teams below brigade level whose sole purpose is direct ground combat — such as infantry, armor, Special Forces as well as most field artillery units — and from doing support jobs while living with those units. Endorsed as a way to protect women from ill-defined Army policies, the ban is as impractical as it is chauvinistic because it does little to keep up with the ever-changing face of warfare.  

Supporters of this exclusion cite unit cohesion, sexual harassment and personal hygiene as critical reasons to keep women behind front lines. But these issues are simply matters of maturity and professionalism that must be expected of all soldiers at all times rather than merely in circumstances when women in combat arise. The reality is more than 356,000 female troops serve in the armed forces today, and their presence in war has had a transformative effect.  

In 2004 and 2005, retired Lt. Colonel Michael Baumann led thirty women soldiers and six female officers in Baghdad. Though he followed military policy by assigning these women to a separate chemical company of the division, his superiors knew these women were essential members of his field artillery battalion.  

To Baumann, the question over whether women can handle infantry work is obsolete. “Not only could [women] handle it, but in the same way as males,” he explains. “I would go out on patrols every single day with my battalion. I was with them. I was next to them. I saw with my own eyes. I had full trust and confidence in their abilities.” 

So why do lawmakers continue to be naysayers? Women have fought and will continue to fight in combat regardless of legislation. And reports of their performance under fire repeatedly disprove critics’ claims.

As retired Navy Capt. Lory Manning declares, “We are waiting for the policy to catch up to the real-world practice.” 

afghanistan, amendment, Baghdad, Colonel John Nagl, combat forces, culture, female troops, heroic, Irak, law, lawmakers, legislation, Lt. Colonel Michael Baumann, men, militaru, Muslim, Navy Capt. Lory Manning, patrols, personal hygiene, sexual harassment, soldiers, Special Forces, The House Armed Services Committee, U.S, war, warfare Hide

I’m not one for succumbing to media gimmicks and TV-fostered hype. In fact, I am so anti-television that I keep my set in my closet and adamantly cling to the bunny ears that will soon be obsolete. Yet, twice a week I crawl in amongst my dresses and winter coats and give myself over to the mind-numbing awe of American Idol.

For the first 5 seasons (now in season 8), I ridiculed all who gave up their social lives on Tuesday and Wednesday nights in order to avidly drool over a contrived reality program designed to humiliate people as much as encourage them. Then season 6 happened and an old friend from high school made it on the show. Out of curiosity as much as loyalty, I began to watch. While it met every expectation of cheesy, shameless marketing and mediocre smoke-and-mirror showmanship, it far surpassed itself in heightened human drama. Suddenly, and unexpectedly, this show was like heroin in my veins.

At first I thought my addiction stemmed from the tangible nerves of these performers as they dared to publicly dream the impossible. I felt elated when their song choices earned accolades from the infamous judges; my heart plummeted at the pain in their faces when they realized they just made a potentially deadly mistake. There’s also the sickening yet fascinating moment when they’ve been told they’ve been kicked off the show and then have to sing their losing song one more time. What could be crueler (or more interesting to watch) than trying to save face in front of millions of viewers who ultimately rejected you?

And so, for a while, I cynically assumed what America really loved about this show was the ability to torture its participants. But as the seasons have marched on, I have discovered a marvelous yet dirty little secret: the public has been hiding a tender soft spot. The winners are rarely the most marketable package available on the program. The last seven seasons’ winners have included a single mom, an overweight man, a pre-maturely gray southern rocker, and now, tonight, this season we stand to choose an eye-liner-nail-polish-sporting-glam-rockin’ gay man. Is it really possible that in a country torn apart over the issues of gay rights and gay marriage we would elect a gay man as our “American Idol?”

While I would hate to impose more dignity and gravitas than it deserves, I do believe this show is a kind of social marker. Despite the media constantly telling us that we like little blond women with tight abs or hunky men with protruding pectorals, as it turns out, we don’t. When given the choice, we choose the perfectly flawed instead—we choose talent over total package. What a remarkable revelation that stirs my heart: to believe that the generations behind us are gaining a much deeper sense of self and, perhaps. will one day be immune to the artificial flavors in the big-wig marketing schemes.

So even if you’re not already an American Idol fanatic, tune in tonight to the season finale and check out the unbelievable talent of Adam Lambert and trust that America might just have good taste after all.

adam lambert, american idol, culture, music, paula abdul, simon cowell, television Hide

You don’t have to be a fan of modern dance to understand the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater (AAADT). According to Judith Jamison, the Artistic Director, you just have to be human.

“The first thing you do when you’re born is what?” asks Jamison. “You open your mouth first and wave those little chords in the air to make sure people know you’re alive. And you’re breathing, those lungs are moving. Everything is moving. It’s within us to move.”

AAADT celebrated movement and connection with its 50th anniversary last year, where Jamison also announced she will be retiring in 2011. The world eagerly awaits her announcement of a predecessor. “I’m looking for someone with great intelligence and great nerve – someone who understands the tradition of the company, but makes choices as an individual. That’s what I did. I couldn’t imitate Alvin (Ailey). All I could do was follow the road map.”

That map laid out AAADT’s mission to bring African American culture to the world. Ailey always believed that dance came from the people, and should be delivered back to the people. She began dancing at the age of 10, training in classical ballet, though her passionate style and muscular figure contradicted the ballerina’s wiry ideal. In 1965, Jamison joined AAADT as a dancer and found international stardom with the company for the next fifteen years; she took over the company in 1989.

Among the most notable of Jamison’s roles is Cry (1971), a 15-minute tour-de-force solo. Dedicated to women everywhere, Cry brilliantly conveys every emotion, role, and contradiction associated with womanhood. In her autobiography Dancing Spirit, Jamison writes, “Exactly where the woman is going through the ballet’s three sections was never explained to me by Alvin. In my interpretation, she represented those women before her who came from the hardships of slavery, through the pain of losing loved ones, through overcoming extraordinary depressions and tribulations. Coming out of a world of pain and trouble, she has found her way – and triumphed.”

Under Jamison’s leadership, AAADT expanded dramatically with developments like the Women’s Choreography Initiative, performances at two Olympic Games, and a historic run in South Africa that ended the cultural boycott of the old apartheid government. Jamison also established a B.F.A. program with Fordham University. As an advocate for arts education, Jamison is committed to advancing programs that bring dance into the community and introduce children to the arts. She is a firm proponent of the power of dance to reach across cultural divides and connect the otherwise-separated.

“[AAADT is] here to celebrate the idea of what the human body can do and how far it can reach into your soul and make you feel differently about yourself. Make you feel good. Make you feel, period,” Jamison proclaims. “Alvin was always about our being recognized – as beautiful, important, distinct, absolutely talented, brilliant people. And, in doing that, it opened a world to who we are as human beings. Everything we do is about giving back to this world. And if we can do it through talent, through movement, through dance, then we are all the more blessed for it.”

aadt, alvin ailey, arts, autobiography, ballerina, ballet, cry, culture, dance, dancing spirit, education, fordham university, judith jamison, olympics, solo, south africa, theater, women's choreography initiative Hide

It’s fascinating that, while Aussies drive on the opposite side of the road, use words I’ve never heard, eat Vegemite, and play cricket, we still have something in common: Hollywood. Being from America, I’m always surprised at how influential our entertainment industry is. Whether it’s movie posters loitering on the street corners, Jay Leno recaps on their morning news, or last night’s waiter inquiring about whether I’d ever seen a movie star in person, Hollywood has a reigning dominance worldwide. In today’s world where we have the ability to share our ideas, our cultures bleed together and our influences are often international, transcending both boundaries and borders.

I sometimes don’t realize how influential our culture is – not only on the rest of America, but the rest of the world. While the entertainment industry may not tell people what to think, it certainly influences what they think about. I’ve had conversations with young Aussies wanting to move to California to pursue music. A girl on the train aspiring to sing in the lounges of New York hopes of one day seeing the Hollywood sign and Broadway dreams.

While I think other countries are powerfully influential in business, in religion, politics and fashion, The States owns the powerhouse of Hollywood. In the past, I always heard that a smile transcends country, language or culture; I venture to say our A List celebrities do just as much. Already, I’ve been asked about Christian Bale’s outburst on set, Julia Roberts making a come back, my thoughts on the Bachelor’s finicky behavior and Natasha Richardson’s recent and unexpected skiing accident.

It’s both an honor and a responsibility to know that we spearhead an industry as influential as Hollywood and that, as a country, we have a voice being heard around the world. I can only hope that we are conscious about our thoughts, our words and our actions, as they are being broadcasted on a universal microphone, received by and influencing the entire world.

To our actors, musicians, producers, directors, athletes and the entertainment’s other most influential players, you play the 21st century role of the mythological gods, Medieval kings and queens, and the ruling class of Rome.  As power has an inseparable shadow of responsibility, may history look back on your reign as those who used their power for good, who inspired their people, encouraged the weak, and provided an example by which society was made better. We are only as strong as our weakest leaders; don’t let us down, Hollywood, we need you more today than ever.

Australia, christian bale, culture, dreams, entertainment, hollywood, julia roberts, natasha richardson, power, The Bachelor, travel Hide

We always ask the question, “Where have all the good guys gone?” Well ladies, I found them. They are half way around the world, being held captive on an island commonly known as Australia. Maybe it was the gorgeous “passport stamper” I saw the moment I entered the country, or the charming bellboy at our hotel. Better yet, maybe it was three young gentlemen I met while doing a life threatening climb across the Sydney Harbor bridge. Either way, Australia is where all the great guys have been hiding.

Naturally, once you’ve done something like Survivor, it kind of sets the stage for the rigorous challenges you sign yourself up for in order to maintain your well deserved, “tough girl,” reputation. Thus I gravitated towards, “The Bridge Climb”- a 500 foot climb above the Sydney harbor. Shuffling along a narrow, grated floor, we walked along the top arch of the iconic bridge for the best view in town and a heart pounding experience that could easily be mistaken for nausea.

Luckily, in our “climbing group” we had three lovely gentlemen, Jordan, Andrew and John, all natives to Australia, there to celebrate one of their birthdays with a little natural high. Not only did we spend three and a half hours climbing surreal heights with these guys, throwing out awkward jokes to distract us from our ridiculous adventure choice, but we also decided to grab pizza and beer with them.

What gentlemen. They were sweet, funny, eloquent, respectful and even offered to pay for both me and my mom when the meal came to an end. I kept politely suggesting that they should come back to The States with me, that there were some serious need for good guys in my neck of the woods. While I think they assumed I was joking, I was silently sizing them up to see how many I could fit in my oversized suitcase.

Either way, it was refreshing to meet great guys with to die for Aussie accents. They had me the moment they said, “Is it true guys in America like their girls really, really skinny??” My reply, as I’m unapologetically shoving pizza in my face was, “Yeah, can you believe it?” They explained that, to them, looks only mattered to a certain extent and they’d much rather date a healthy girl to a painfully thin one. My heart fluttered as they talked about how much more important it was for a girl to have a good personality and a good sense of humor.

Icing on the cake to meeting these adorable boys was “Mr. you only see guys like me once in a life time” playing the guitar on the side walk as we returned from a long day checking out the Blue Mountains. For some reason, in the States we think we have to choose between the gorgeous jerk or the “cute” good guy… ladies, we are selling ourselves short. They DO exist, the FULL package. So if you’re losing hope (with good reason for some of you) trust me, they are out there.

In the meantime, I’ll see how many I can convince to come home with me, they’ll be my little travel memorabilia… only I have to be honest, my ladies at iatg get first dibs.

alexis jones, Australia, boys, culture, iatg, survivor, sydney, the bridge climb, travel Hide

In Qingdao, China, a businessman could no longer afford his extra marital lifestyle, so he held a talent competition to decide which of five mistresses to keep. Before returning home, the first mistress eliminated, Yu, convinced the other four mistresses and her former lover to accompany her on a final trip. Yu then drove the party off a cliff, killing herself and injuring her passengers. “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.”

Though this story was originally reported as true and picked up by such entities as CNN, it ended up being fabricated. Even so, it epitomizes the real concerns that bellists fight– the objectification of women, the petty competition between us, and the self-oppression that stems from females internalizing negative stereotypes.

To start, modern women should not have to bear the indignity and objectification that comes as a part of belonging to a harem. In many cultures, women are taken into these groups because of the societal constraints that withhold them from personal autonomy.  At one point, women worldwide relied on men for financial stability, but civil rights and suffrage movements in many industrialized countries have  brought us a long way (though not long enough in many parts of the world).

Women are independent, fully capable beings, so to hear of men who refuse to recognize our autonomy degrades every step that has been made in the name of gender equality. Lawyers, doctors, teachers, and others have become leaders in their field despite being viewed as mere “dolls” and it’s important that those of us who have benefited from the women’s movement in the U.S. take a stand in bringing these ideals worldwide.

Though justified in her anger of being tossed away like a used toy, Yu’s theoretical response to being kicked to the curb was an overreaction. Rage, anger, and in this case manslaughter only perpetuate the notion of women being illogical human beings. In responding irrationally, we create our own self-oppression.  No bigots or sexists will change their minds if women acquiesce to this disparaging preconception.

It’s problematic that Yu’s fury was pointed at her fellow mistresses because it highlights the female competition that Fan, and a sexist society, loves to encourage. The mistresses were in that situation together, and although pitted against each other, they could have possibly found strength in their sisterhood. Hardship and struggle should bring us together, not pit us against each other.

Although this misfortune occurred in China, it could have happened anywhere. When the belief in the superiority of one group over another is so pervasive that the oppressed perpetuates its own subjugation, individualism loses and tyranny wins. Whether it’s through working in women’s shelters or mentoring programs, voting and campaigning for progressive initiatives, or simply living every day as strong, autonomous women, we need to inspire change in the world around us. The story of the five mistresses shouldn’t remind us of how little has advanced; it should motivate us to take the necessary steps toward the future that we, as women, hope to achieve.

china, cnn, culture, inequality, mistress, objectification, qingdao china Hide

She resigned two weeks ago, just after the nude pictures of her had surfaced. Tears were streaming down her face when she said, “I wish to state that I am not ashamed of my sexuality as a woman and a single person.”

But this is not quite the story of an American celebrity apologizing for an embarrassing picture taken on the red carpet. I am instead talking about Elizabeth Wong, a politician of the opposition People’s Justice Party in Malaysia. And for us, the pictures aren’t so shocking: she was simply photographed sleeping in a sarong, half-naked. But the issue here is not the content of the photographs, but instead, their implications.

In America, sensationalism is mostly inconsequential. One scandal seems to be replaced with another and rather quickly at that. Sure, Britney caught our attention when she didn’t wear panties, we know Rush Limbaugh has a prescription drug addiction and Governor Rod Blagojevich tried to sell Obama’s congressional seat, but what does it all really matter? In the end, these stories become commodities, used to sell more magazines and garner more website hits. In our country, we often play the moral card, but it’s not such a serious game.

Conversely, Malaysia is a much more conservative country. Wong has been criticized in the past for being too independent because she is a woman. Marriage is rigorously upheld as a fundamental institution, especially for women. The media is mostly controlled by the government and heavily censored. BBC calls the censorship laws in Malaysia “some of the toughest in the world.” It is of course the majority party—the National Front coalition who imparts control and opposes the People’s Justice Party. Wong charged at her resignation, “Although the smear campaign directed towards me has caused me a lot of anguish, I am aware that the real objective is to discredit [the party].”

On her blog, she describes this situation as “the darkest period of her life” but also tells her readers she remains committed to the ideals of her party. Opposition party leader Anwar Ibrahim has urged her to reconsider her resignation. He was a past target of the National Front coalition as well, serving time in jail for supposed corruption charges by former Prime Minister, Mahathir bin Mohamad. Technically, despite her public resignation, Wong is currently on leave until the police investigation concerning the pictures is completed. A new election may take place, depending on Wong’s final decision and the outcome of the investigation.

But here is where cultural differences make this situation more complex. We are champions of the individual here, constantly telling people to stand up for their rights. However, Malaysia has a different cultural context. Wong knew this was an attack on her party and as stated in her resignation speech, “[She] decided to make a stand in the interests of the party and its struggle for the people.” But Wong did not only stand up for her party, but defended the pictures of herself and the right to privacy for the citizens of Malaysia. Wong stepped away from her political position but, in doing so, stood up for the women of Malaysia and putting an end to as she puts it, “gutter politics.”

anwar ibrahim, censorship, culture, elizabeth wong, mahathir bin mohomad, malaysia, people's justice party, politics, sexuality Hide

See it and Read it:

It’s not everyday you see women being slapped, pummeled, and yanked by the hair by men in broad daylight. But such recent events in Mangalore, India at a bar called Amnesia: The Lounge are being justified by some groups who call the violence “moral policing.” Whether a global audience agrees or disagrees with the justification is not the biggest issue here, whether or not the world, or India in this case, is ready for the modern female, however, is.

Shri Ram Sena, a radical wing of the Hindu nationalist movement, claimed responsibility for the January 29 attacks on young woman inside and outside the bar. Several women were assaulted and two were pushed to the ground outside according to a video posted by journalists for Daijiworld, Mangalore’s first internet TV.

Kuldip Nayar, a New Delhi-based journalist and political analyst acknowledged that tradition hasn’t been entirely abandoned in India and the “class of people going to pubs, dancing, is still very small.” Isn’t a comparison with the Afghani Taliban a bit harsh for the Shri Ram Sena group? They claim to only be protecting morality, after all. But here lies the double standard.

The key component of these violent acts was that women were the main victims, not a whole “class.” The fact that the women were attacked for doing what was seen as normal in Bollywood movies suggest the society may be moving forward faster than its culture. The culture is lagging behind its so-called image. I, myself, have seen countless Bollywood movies with women drinking in a bar – Dostana and Kal Ho Naa Ho, for example. Why does pop culture promote one modern lifestyle while the public condemns it?

Nirmala Venkatesh, a member of the central government’s National Commission for Women, had a suggestion for Indian women. In her opinion, women can enjoy themselves freely, but need to “recognize societal limits,” she said.

What one can infer from Venkatesh’s response is that women in India need to maintain a balance in today’s India. Yes, the country is moving forward rapidly in one sector, but perhaps other areas like culture will take more time. The idea is valid and perhaps women should keep this in mind. After all, who is to say wanting tradition and “morality” is wrong? But why is it that throughout the world’s history, freedom for female modernization has taken extra time?

“I feel caught between two worlds,” said Tina Chopra in an LA Times article, 21, a college student. “At home, it’s the old traditional India. When I go out, it’s the new India. . . . I’m like two separate people.”

Some view the acts against women at a bar in Mangalore as solely political. Regardless, it is still telling of a gender conflict. Why was violence towards women chosen as the political act? Why were women at a bar attacked? Conservative and liberal are two ways of approaching tradition. However, when women get caught in that crossfire it reveals more than just a political rivalry, but the repeatedly told story that societies modernize before allowing their women to.

attack, bollywood, culture, india, internet tv, women, worldwide Hide