We can't get out of the bedroom so help me get out of this dress

A common theme: the Madonna or the whore. 

This dichotomy of female personalities is seen in the everyday expectations of women and their eligibility: 

"I want a lady in the street, but a freak in the bed" 

"Prude" "Slut." 

A girl can't win. There is no grey area allowed for her to balance out her sexuality. What I didn't realize was the connection within the actual history of Hollywood. Sure, we can attribute modern day movies as the cause that separates these two kinds of women, but it goes back further. It started with the need to appeal to the greater audience, the male audience, and thus moved to sex. During the 1980-90s the trend was the unsuspectingly intelligent unconventional beauty who steals the heart of the boy away from the sexy high school biatch when she's given a makeover...and consequently promotes the idea that it was her hidden PHYSICAL beauty that made her worth attention rather than the subdued phenomenal personality and brains. What exacerbates this situation is that the best friend of the girl who loved her from the beginning for who she was, never ended up being the hero, that went to the hot popular jock because values! (Although I'll give it to American Pie because they not only had a sex-pot foreign exchange student who was actually kind, as well as an honest and well-spoken horny band geek...and a mature older woman with a healthy libido so at least while everyone wanted sex, they had a personality to go with it.)  But the idea that you have to choose between being sexy or intelligent goes back to Golden Age of Hollywood- even before the 40s and 50s. Characters were given a specific passion to flesh out the personality, but it was never an even balance, it was one or the other:

You're powerful, or you're sexy.

Why is it that we pigeon-hole so many characters? Mainly female... Why is it that they can't be smart and horny? Women, like men, are animals after all. Maybe it's because there is power in these negative words. They're insults and whoever wields them can stand tall knowing they're alpha. But what if we embraced these words? Or eradicated them? What if we take the power away from these stigmas? There is nothing wrong with having casual sex with whomever you want- just be safe about it. There is nothing wrong about wanting to save sex for someone you truly care about- just don't hold too much importance on that one interaction. There is nothing wrong with following your own path and your own bodily desires- just don't judge others for being different or wanting different things.

Maybe if we admitted that every person has an individual sense of sexuality and we actually reflected this in our personifications and conversations, there would be more diverse, realistic, and inspirational characters that come forward both in Hollywood and in Washington. Women shouldn't be shamed for wanting a political career instead of a life at home, or visa versa. Women shouldn't be shamed for wanting both. There's a lot of negativity that is spread because someone, mostly the patriarchy of days past and modern misogynists, want to be in power, but what happens if we get rid of the platform they are standing on? What happens when we take away their influence by changing the way we think? Soon, that way of thought becomes the minority and consequently impotent and irrelevant.

"Human beings in a mob
What’s a mob to a king?
What’s a king to a god?
What’s a god to a non-believer?"

There is only power in something if you let there be. Words and ideas only have influence if you let them. So don't you let them...

Put you in Your Place: the Grey Area

So here's something I never understood: Revenge.

Maybe I was just raised on the eye-dea (get it? You will....) that and "eye for an eye makes the world blind," so I saw revenge as something harmful to all involved. I can't be the only one that feels this way...

Well I read an article on Black Girl Dangerous that irked me.

"One of my favorite scenes in all of Beyonce’s new videos is in “Partition” when she drops that napkin just so that white woman has to pick it up. I read it as an incredible moment wherein a powerful black woman flips the script on white women who are constantly trying to put her in “her place” and in one subtle movement puts them in theirs. And I am all for black women pushing back against white feminist nonsense. But it should not happen at the expense of a black feminism that includes keeping our critical lens focused, not just on white women and others who would seek to tear us down, but also on our idols and ourselves."

First of all, I actually do agree with her on some points of the article, mainly this:

"Adiche quotes a dictionary definition of a feminist as “a person who believes in the social, economic and political equality of the sexes.” This seems to be Beyoncé’s way of declaring herself a feminist. I like the quote, I think it’s important, and I’m really glad it’s there. That said: I think it sets the bar just a bit too low. I would argue that, with all due respect to the dictionary, that definition is lacking in one very important sense. I would add:

…and who is able to look at the world with a critical eye so as to be able to identify those times and places where that equality is not present.""

Feminism is just the idea that men and women are equal; that humans are equal. She does a lovely job at explaining this and defending Beyonce and her beliefs because of it. HOWEVER, she crosses a line that limits "white feminists" to racists. Pretty much plain and simple. She believes that somehow every white feminist has forgotten about women of color. Yet this is an unfounded prejudice that hurts not only those of us who constantly recognize our own privilege and fight against it, but more so it hurts feminism and sisterhood. Not all of us "white feminists" think this way. We aren't all selfish enough to forget the terrible history that our ancestors put their fellow women through. Not only that, but Mia also assumes that all of those who criticized Beyonce for her questionable feminism were white, which is a HUGE assumption. She speaks as if there is some giant schism between those with different melatonin levels. As if it's a conspiracy that white women can't handle having a woman in power just because she's black. What about the women who are half-white and half-colored? Where do they fit into this theory?  They can't. Because she has created an ultimatum and has forced them to chose a side. Are you a white feminist or a feminist of color?

Feminism is about women. It's about men. It's about co-existing. Yes, race definitely plays into privilege and leading lives day to day, but pigeon holing all white women and demonizing them only causes a race war. We are sisters on this Earth. We are here to band together and be strong. If you accuse all "white feminists" of trying to tear you down, you aren't fighting against the patriarchy, you're fighting against those who are trying to help you but you are in fact prejudice against because of your own assumtions. Power doesn't come from flipping the script on white women and putting them in their place, that's just revenge which ends up hurting everyone. Power doesn't stem from stepping on others. Or maybe it does. But EQUALITY, does not. Equality is a result of mutual respect and consideration. What she's talking about does not seem like feminism to me, it seems like revenge from someone who is angry and feels they need to be honored and compensated for the terrible misdeeds that have been done to others before them.

I can't deny that I have grown up with white privilege. However, it is not fair to accuse me of constantly trying to put women of color in their place. I was not born in the 1950s or the 1800s. I understand how cruel my ancestors were. But rather than punishing me for it and taking revenge, how about we grow past that. You don't have to forgive my forefathers who were slave owners, I don't even forgive them for that. However, I am different. My friends are different. Modern day white feminists are different...or at least some of them are. We aren't the same as those in the past and we aren't the same as each other. Don't assume we are all forgetful, ignorant, or selfish. It's unfair to us, it's unfair to you, and it's unfair to the cause that should be bringing us together.

Be powerful. Be commanding. But be mindful. Not everyone is trying to hurt you. Don't pigeon hole a group because of a few critical people. That's how stigmas are created. Not all men are misogynists. Not all white women are racist. Nothing is black and white. Not even our skin.

Valentine's Day Massacre

So this is a little late, about two weeks late, but only because my brain and heart were so pregnant with ideas, frustration, and slight contempt for ignorance; so thank you for joining me on this momentous occasion that is the birth of yet one more blog post.

Valentine's Day. 

A day of love. A day to celebrate those who bring joy to your life. But mostly a day for everyone to complain about high expectations, disappointments, failed romances, and how the card and candy companies use this day to sell merchandise while simultaneously alienating those who are single. We're all aware that February 14th is actually just "Single Awareness Day," but what you may not have realized, like I apparently hadn't, is that feminists have a war against Valentine's Day.

Okay, not really. I'm not going to even attempt to be sarcastic in this post for fear that some misguided and confused soul would think I'm being serious. It's not the first time that would've happened...

Our story begins with a conversation. I asked was if he was doing something special with his wife. Then:

Him: "Valentines is a fake holiday"

Me: "With good intentions" 

Him: "Eh that's arguable. I didn't think someone like you would be in support of that."

Stop. Pause. Hold up a second. Someone like me? Someone like me is in support of the good intentions of Valentines Day? WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?!

"A feminist. Like a real feminist"
 
M: "...a feminist cant celebrate Valentines Day?"
H: "Usually they trash its values as something that should just be a daily occurrence."
M: "First of all, feminists are all different..."

The dreaded word "They." The word that lumps every person who calls themselves a "Feminist" into a destructive, power-hungry, man-condemning cult. "They" which attributes a series of beliefs of a supposed "all" unto every individual. Taking a whole "Ism" and stereotyping, not just a stranger, but a friend. Flat out disregarding and dismissing what he's experienced everyday with me and STILL expecting and assigning negative connotations to my personality purely based on a stigma.

(Side note, while showing affection should occur daily, it's ridiculous to condemn a holiday based in dedicating EXTRA time to celebrate love in a special manner.)

So let's get back to the content: Because I'm a Feminist, I can't and won't support the holiday that celebrates love, mutual respect, romance, and sexual consent? No, that's not Feminist one bit (sorry, couldn't resist the sarcasm in the end...) Look, I understand that February 14th has become a holiday seemingly less about the meaning of love and more about consumerism, but it doesn't have to be. Just like every other holiday, the individual makes it special in their own way. Feminists don't trash anything except for inequality, and they especially don't trash the idea of loving others. In fact Feminists have taken Valentine's Day and claimed it as their own:

V-Day

"V-Day is a global activist movement to end violence against women and girls. V-Day is a catalyst that promotes creative events to increase awareness, raise money, and revitalize the spirit of existing anti-violence organizations. V-Day generates broader attention for the fight to stop violence against women and girls, including rape, battery, incest, female genital mutilation (FGM), and sex slavery."

Furthermore, Eve Ensler's The Vagina Monologues are annually performed encouraging women to love their vagina's and themselves.

Continuing on....

Him: "I'm all for the fact that feminism celebrates the day as something different, that's pretty much what I'm saying. You don't need to show me articles to prove that"
Me: "It's not entirely different though- it still celebrates love, sexuality, and romance, but it enlarges it to include platonic and familial relationships as well as using it to promote mutual respect and consent. So "someone like me" would in no way "trash" Valentines day."
Him: "Trashing what it has become is a thing whether or not you want to believe and that's nothing bad. When i say trash it, I just mean they criticize it heavily and call out the bullshit on it because its stupid."
Me: "But they don't...PEOPLE criticize Valentines day for consumerism, but Feminists use it as a holiday to celebrate all forms of love. Of course there are exceptions within Feminism because it is an "Ism" and not everyone agrees, but V-day is a HUGE thing among the international Feminist community and that's where you're misunderstanding."

(By the way this conversation was copy and pasted word for word. Sorry for the invasion of privacy mysterious friend.)

So let me explain something. The reason why I am writing this is not just to educate about Valentines/ V-day, but more importantly to show how stereotypes are spread based on misunderstandings and false attributions of character. Those who condemn Valentine's Day CAN be Feminists, but they don't have to be. Those who are Feminist CAN condemn Valentine's Day, but they don't have to. There is no reason anyone should be surprised to find that "someone like me" supports a holiday that not only celebrates love but has actually extended it to include loving others, loving who you are, and physically loving yourself. (As in love your partner, love your personality, and learn to love your penis/vagina). 

And while some feminists do reject Valentine's Day because it establishes "gender binaries" and "traditional gender roles" thus supporting the patriarchy, there is MUCH MUCH MORE to consider. 

(Also I would like to note that this card is actually from an Anti-Feminist blog that ASSUMES this is what "someone like me" thinks.)

As a feminist, I admit that there are those more extreme than myself, and I do see where traditionally Valentine's Day falters, but there is no reason why it can't transcend these customs and be celebrated between friends or couples (heterosexual or homosexual). It's a holiday about love. It may be advertised as a holiday for husbands to do something for their wives, but it can just as easily be celebrated in equality if embraced in that way. Rather than rejecting, condemning, and spreading hate, we should adapt, change, and take charge of how we live our own lives. Make Valentine's Day your own, not what you think it's meant to be. Don't fall into the stereotype, and don't let stereotypes affect how you live.

With that, there is NO EXCUSE for attributing stigmas and negative connotations to Feminism (or any Ism/belief system) ESPECIALLY if you have not done your research. Furthermore, even if you have done your research, DO NOT assume that just because a few people believe in something means that ALL people of the same "Ism" believe the same. This goes for every religion, gender, sex, ethnicity, culture, nationality, so on so forth. Stop the hate. Stop the ignorance. Stop the judgement. Stop and look around. Observe, learn, read, explore, and come to understand that most hate is based in misunderstanding, lack of education, and the inability to listen.

Do the world a favor, and reconsider your negative stereotypes.

Blurring the Lines of Feminismismismism itself

So here's the thing, I'm a little behind in reacting to the whole Blurred Lines fiasco but it's because I've been trying to hold my tongue and collect my thoughts. So essentially this is what I am going to say on the matter:

1) For those feminists that believe "Blurred Lines" is objectifying women and is rude, crude, lude, and offensive: you're right.

2) For those feminists that believe "Blurred Lines" is progressive and the reactions have been taken to the extreme and misinterpreted based on the lyrics: you're also right.

Here's the thing: Robin Thicke did in fact talk about how women are in power of their own sexuality. "You're far from plastic," "Let me liberate you," (even though the woman should already be liberated) "That man is not your maker," so on so forth... Those lyrics are pretty evident of his belief that women should not be controlled. In addition, there are tons of women who like to have their hair pulled and be dominated in bed. So who is to say what is "proper" objectification and what is just straight up kinky? Certainly not anyone, since telling people what they can and cannot do sexually goes against all things feminist to begin with. Because hey, after all, Robin Thicke is right: we are animals and it is in our nature.

HOWEVER there is something to be said about the music video that accompanied the music. First of all: the women are on display. Plain and simple. Every single woman in the video (there are three very selectively chosen "diverse" women who happen to miraculously all be the same body type) is naked. Now what about the men? Suits. They're in suits. One suit may be a track suit, yes, but you see no thighs, no abs, nothing. You cannot argue that the song is feminist and yet deny the obvious objectification of the women in the music video. They are LITERALLY WALKING AROUND NAKED FOR THE AMUSEMENT OF THE MEN AND AUDIENCE. THAT is not equality. THAT is not liberation. THAT is a parade of boobs.

Furthermore, those women are treated with disrespect. At around 2:18 in the video Robin actually BLOWS SMOKE into Elle Evans' face and she coughs. SHE COUGHS. AND THEY KEPT IT. That's not funny. That's straight up insulting.

So yes, the girls are bouncing around and it looks like they're having fun so on so forth, it's cute, we're entertained, but there are some serious repercussions to the way that they are traipsing around....mostly that they are naked and the men are not and as a result it sends the message that women are to be the ones oogled while the men are to do the oogling. NOW had the men been the ones strutting around and the women been the ones making the first move like it so suggests in the lyrics "the way you grab me...go ahead get at me," or if both the men and women had been dressed up, OR CRAZY IDEA, the men were ALSO naked, then maybe we could talk about this song being TRULY sexually liberating.

(If we really want to talk about sexism and songs how about we take a look at, say, Snoop Dogg's "Ain't No Fun," huh?)

Which brings us to my next segment: FEMINISM IS FOR EVERYONE AND EVERYONE WITH AN OPINION IS MOSTLY RIGHT.

Feminism is not an all or nothing. If you're a feminist and she's a feminist and he's a feminist and it's a feminist, you are all entitled to have a different opinion. Just because you all call yourselves (or hopefully call yourselves) feminist does not mean you have to agree with what one another says! What it DOES mean is that you should inform yourself to your utmost ability and form fully thought out critical analyses in order to properly discuss these ideas at a later date.

Don't judge a book by it's cover. Watch the whole video, read the whole article, finish the entire segment, and research whatever you missed. You never know what could happen if you quit out early. Like the "Semicolon" song....Lonely Island failed with it's usage, but you never would've known had you changed the song before it ended.

A well-informed and patient person is a wise person.


And that concludes this segment of Feminism: the blurred spectrum.

This is why you should be a feminist

I know this is all scatterbrained and such but it's me getting back into this whole "speaking" thing. Bear with me....

The Sexy Lie

Just take a moment to watch this video. As Caroline Heldman describes the symptoms of living in a sexually objectifying culture, think of all of the ways your life and the lives of those around you exemplify what she is saying and are hindered by these ways of thought.

I hate to say it, but I am a culprit of everything that she describes. I can't help but fall into the pack of girls and women who look at magazines and television and constantly compare myself to these models. I can't help but walk into a party and size myself up against those around me. I can't help but see the "pretty girls" from high school and college and innately feel contempt and distrust.

But the thing is, I can help it.

Every morning I allot an hour to putting on my make-up and choosing what clothes are going to make me look my best. An hour. Exactly what Caroline said. My male friends? How long do they take? 5 minutes. The majority throw on whatever jeans are closest with whatever shirt has the coolest looking design and softest fabric to sit on their back. And what about the minority of male friends? They slide on some suit pants with a button-up shirt that they didn't wear the day before, a tie that compliments the color, and shoes that don't clash with the socks.

Why is it that Mens' professional wear doubles as "sexy" clothes? Yet for women, we have all different kinds of "sexy" wear: "sexy" casual, "sexy" formal, "sexy" professional, "sexy" sexy...The short body-con dress that girl in the corner of the party is wearing? She'd never go to a professional interview wearing that. The suit and tie that guy is wearing? Justin Timberlake just created a song about it!

Maybe it's because a woman had the historic role of house keeper and was in charge of mending and sewing garments, so as the fashion industry developed more clothes were marketed towards women.

Maybe it's because what women have been bred to find "sexy" is a man who can provide for them, so any man dressing snazzy is most likely going to be rich, successful, and sophisticated.

Maybe it's because women haven't been bred to view scantily clad men as sexual objects because the media has been traditionally run by men and has consequently led them to think that they are the ones who need to impress rather than be impressed.

Because even though men with muscle are considered sexy due to their favorable base traits of evolution (their ability to find a cave or build a house, and to outsmart animals while hunting for food), the impossibly skinny too-malnourished-to-have-a-baby unintelligent modern female is the one considered desirable.

So maybe it is time to change. Maybe women should stop mid-adjustment and think about how they're presenting their mind or their heart rather than their stomach and thighs. Sit in a way that enhances what you can contribute to the conversation rather than what will attract the male in the corner who just wants to USE you rather than participating in a TWO-SIDED two-party party.

Because sexually objectifying a female establishes a gender role that hinders everyone. Men are criticized for caring about fashion and hygiene because that obviously makes them homosexual....because being gay is wrong and insulting? Men who have emotions and like children may be sexy to women, but they're not macho, they're just pussy whipped.

Establishing a binary system limits EVERYONE and a system that encourages depression should make everyone sad, no matter what their sex or gender.

Abortion? Rape? Why can't we just be concerned for health?

So here's the thing. I'm sad. I'm disappointed. I'm disheartened. Why? Because it has gotten to the point where people care more about their own "moral beliefs" than the safety of others. Now, I'm not grouping all of the pro-lifers together, I'm mostly just concentrating on a few.

Now I know this may seem like a weird statement, but let us consider this for a moment:

Where did our moral beliefs stem from?

Well, whether you believe that they came from a religious text or you think humans established these "laws" or you think it's just a standard code we should abide by, I'm pretty sure it's safe to say that morals came about because they were a way of preventing conflict and pain both emotionally and physically.

Let's look at the 10 commandments:

1. You shall have no other gods before me.
    
2. You shall not make for yourself any carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.
    
3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.
    
4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
    
5. Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.
    
6. You shall not murder.
    
7. You shall not commit adultery.
    
8. You shall not steal.
    
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
    
10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

 Now let's look at the ones that really affect our everyday moral code:

5: Those who birthed you tend to love you and want the best for your well-being, thus you should respect them for that and love them (this may be hard sometimes but really, try your best).

But the moral reason for doing this is because a family unit survives better when they stay together. Loving is always better than hating, and loving prevents pain physically and emotionally.

6: Killing. Should I really explain how killing is bad for emotional and physical well-being and how it causes pain? Yes? O.k.:

Well besides the pain of being killed, there is also the pain experienced by the family who lost a relative, of a lover who lost a companion, a society who lost an influence. Think of "It's A Wonderful Life." When an individual is taken from this world, their ideas and positive influences are also removed. Murder is not a solution. It's a cycle.

7: Adultery causes pain emotionally. Obviously for the one who has been deceived, but also guilt as well as family members (like children) who have to learn to understand why mommy and daddy (or daddy and daddy or mommy and mommy) don't necessarily love each other anymore.

8: Stealing is unfair to those who have put mental, emotional, and physical effort into creating something or buying something they so desired. If you steal it, you are proving to be more detrimental to their mental and emotional health as well as dragging down a forward moving society. This isn't necessarily just petty-theft, but also applies to big businesses, since they can steal childhood or sanity away from their workers....

9: Lying hurts a society because it encourages deception. It allows for people to manipulate others. That's just damaging to society. Why do we lie? To get something we want without having to tell the truth. Why don't we tell the truth? Because people are ashamed or want to cut corners. If people were honest about their actions they would be more inclined to do something they are proud of; something that actually helps people around them. Lying is selfish when we get down to it; self-preservation is the main motivation. So what happens when we want to preserve the whole of society? Help everyone? We start being honest and start doing things we are actually proud of.

10: Kinda goes with adultery/stealing/lying.

So anyway, my point is that when we look at our "moral" code, most of them have been followed because they have proven to be the best guidelines in preventing emotional and physical pain, but also for forwarding society.

If people don't kill each other and instead chose to talk through their differences in a dialogue, there is more man-power to further society. More brains to further education and medicine. More bodies to grow food and build shelter.

So, why would we enforce moral codes that hurt other people? Bubba Carpenter and Paul Ryan may be proud of the fact that they are supporting life (That's great!), but the problem is their actions actually result in pain and suffering. After learning about the statements the two men above are now infamous for, I don't feel as offended as some others. Ryan and Carpenter have been ripped apart and I don't necessarily agree with the treatment they've received, but I am left extremely grieved at their mentality.

They want to support life. That's fine. I understand that for them, abortion is murder (Commandment #6) so what they are doing is both morally correct and beneficial to society. BUT when you are willing to sacrifice a life due to unsafe birth control practices (...Bubba...) that "moral code" is questioned. You are "literally" condemning a woman to death and you are fine with that? You admit to knowing that women will resort to hangers, yet you justify it by saying "moral values...have to start somewhere"? Does her life mean less than an unborn child to you? For all you know the mother may end up having a miscarriage and the fetus may not even survive. And Ryan, I understand that the method of conception for you doesn't change the fact that a life has been created. You're right. A baby has been conceived. But are you really willing to let a child suffer through life in starvation and fear because a mother was unable to provide for the child? Or have a mother feel shame and regret on top of being emotionally traumatized by an event she couldn't have predicted? Love can only do so much for a child since shelter, food, and water are still necessary for life to happen.

And what about health care and medicine? They seem to be threatened, too.

Why are we letting moral beliefs affect laws in the first place? Shouldn't individuals have the choice of what they follow and what they support? Isn't that what democracy was founded for? So that no one religion or belief dominated the government's choices? (How would you like it, Paul Ryan, if the Muslims of the country banded together to create a law forcing women into Burkas? That's a moral belief, too and it's just as well founded as yours. Or how about if the Jews put in a law to make it so that all male children must be circumcised at birth?)

Why are we establishing moral laws that result in pain and suffering? Why are politicians so concentrated on saving unborn lives but not the lives of those already living? Why are we passing laws that very openly hurt mothers and endanger lives under the excuse that "moral values....have to start somewhere" when morals exist to protect individuals and society as a whole? That's why we have them in the first place! (Or why God established these laws for humans to abide by...)

Why are we trying to eliminate health care to save the economy when the whole reason we strive for a strong economy is so that we have a better standard of living? Isn't the standard of living completely dependent on how healthy and happy we are? How well we eat? Our access to proper medicine? Isn't that why "developed" countries are considered "developed" because they no longer have disease and famine?

I just don't understand how we have advanced so far and yet we as a society have become preoccupied with blaming each other and trying to get the upper-hand. Shouldn't we be concentrating on how to move our society forward, not on paper, but in real life? Why is our money going to a political campaign rather than AIDS research? Cancer? Famine? Drought? Those things influence all of us no matter what color, religion, political party, or state we are in. I'm looking at everyone in the political system. It seems to me that no matter which side you follow, everyone has resorted to mud-slinging to get into power but no one seems to actually care about the health or safety of others, they just care about their own personal beliefs.

COME ON, PEOPLE!