Think “feminism.” Think “body image.” What do you see?

You may see a woman who covers her body with the sole purpose of modesty. You may hear the thoughts of a woman who is confident in her body, but not her sexuality.

According to the media, women must be thin and modest. However, the media’s version of feminism fights this idea with upholding the value of confidence in one’s body.

Dove famously embraced “feminism” with “different” shapes of bodies and people of color in a commercial that called out photoshopping in magazines and advertisements. The commercial featured women in the same type of white underwear, demonstrating how everyone looks good with Dove beauty products. Although the women were stripped to their underwear, the commercial did not seek to sexualize the women or let them be confident in their sexuality. The commercial was about being comfortable in your own skin, even though all of the bodies looked similar and almost flawless.

With the perfect body, women cannot sexualize themselves in the media without shock. From the media’s perspective, that is up for the men to do for them.

Women in film are often sexualized by men and are advertised for male viewers. The new “Wonder Woman” trailer from D.C. Comics barely mentions the core values that make Wonder Woman such a strong and influential comic book character to women. Instead the trailer is filled with shots of her steel thighs, her breasts pressed up in her suit and her romantic relations to the main male character.

Of course the media’s interpretation of feminism often fights against this sexualization. From this kind of feminism’s perspective, women must not let men sexualize them and thus must not sexualize themselves. To be the kind of feminist that is comfortable with their body, one must be confident in their skin. One may not express confidence in their sexuality, as modesty is essential in avoiding the male gaze. Sexuality is strictly an idea fostered by men, according to media’s interpretation of feminism.

Although when pop artist Miley Cyrus released the music video for her song “Wrecking Ball” on YouTube in 2013, Cyrus reveled in her sexuality. While the video was not primarily directed toward male viewers, the comments under the video are flooded with slut shaming remarks. Cyrus shows more skin than clothing in the video and shocks viewers, as she explicitly expresses her confidence in not only her body but also her sexuality.

This confidence in sexuality put women that have been taught to follow the media’s version of feminism against Cyrus. Suddenly women who claimed to love their bodies were in disbelief over Cyrus’ video, as they themselves have never felt comfortable enough to view sexualization positively.

The idea that Cyrus made the video and does not care if male viewers are satisfied with it seems un-feminist. Why would a woman want to expose her body like that unless she did not have respect for herself?

Instead of teaching people that being comfortable with one’s body sexually is also what feminism stands for, the media pocketed the big bucks when their stories of the once Hannah Montana star, turned slut, was published. Cyrus’ body image rhetoric did not follow theirs, which lead the media to tear at Cyrus’ confidence.

Feminism is the fight for equity and for all people to live comfortably in their skin and their world. A true feminist would argue that a woman who is sexually proud and a woman who is modest can both be feminists, as their bodies are theirs and theirs only.

The problem comes in when men and other people sexualize women and their bodies. When men take a woman’s body and sexualize it for their own pleasure, true feminism screams “no.”

The media wants people to believe that women cannot be confident in their sexuality. However, rather than shaming women for being confident in their sexuality and calling them sluts, the male gaze is to blame. If the male gaze did not sexualize women for their own gain, then a woman’s body would be hers and hers only.

But the male gaze exists and thrives under “feminism.”

The media sells that to be a feminist, avoiding the male gaze is essential. True feminism argues that a woman owns her own body in every way, pointing the blame on the existence of male gaze, period.

True feminism is to own your body and your sexuality in any way you want to—modestly, sexually and more. True feminism uplifts those damaged by the male gaze and fights against its existence.

Do not let the media’s force-fed feminism fool you. Do not just avoid the male gaze; destroy it.

The post Decklar: Feminism damages body images appeared first on Emerald Media.

When Hillary Clinton snagged the Democratic presidential nomination, many “feminists” roared with victory. As the presidential race draws to a close, Clinton’s slight lead is exciting these “feminists,” but why are they praising the win of a woman who is not fighting for everyone?

Feminism stands for the rights of everyone, whether they are a person of color, a person who identifies outside of the gender binary or both. Those who think true feminists only want equity for people who identify as women are slightly misinformed.

Feminism is rooted in intersectionality, bridging social justice movements from Black Lives Matter to sexual assault awareness advocacy. Coined by critical race theorist Kimberlé Crenshaw, intersectionality is the idea that oppression often intersects across various identities, creating many different experiences of discrimination. If feminism were not intersectional, the fight for equity would be wasted.

If the movement is only for the benefit of white people, especially white women, then what is the point? Equity would not be accomplished, and people who do not identify as white women would still be struggling. It is common for justice to move in phases from white men, to men of color, to white women and then to women and people of color. However, this phase system is not relieving all people from oppression quickly enough.

However, there are feminists that many call “liberal feminists,” commonly made up of white people who identify as women. These liberal feminists often ignore intersectionality to focus on the empowerment of women politically and encourage women to be leaders even when they may not want to. Through this kind of encouragement, liberal feminists damage other minority groups as the recognition of experiences felt by intersecting identities is missing.

Although Clinton recently changed her views on LGBTQIA+ marriage and claims to fight for African American and Latino families, she is still a liberal feminist.

According to Solidarity, in 2009, Clinton voiced support for a coup in Honduras, which led 176 LGBTQIA+ members to murderous deaths by 2014. Although Clinton has recently spoken about preventing crimes against people who are LGBTQIA+, her decision to support post-coup Honduras is problematic and not intersectional.

While Clinton has called for an increase in women’s rights in countries with large Muslim populations, the United States has killed women in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan with its drone strikes. Clinton’s historical support to expand military operations in the Middle East is against true feminism, as more women of color are murdered with each passing day.

When Clinton claims she is a woman who represents every woman’s fight for equity, her liberal feminism blatantly peeks through. Not only has Clinton supported laws that have bound people of color to discrimination, but the issues she has chosen to support internationally have damaged feminism worldwide. Clinton stands up for women like herself: White mothers who do not have race and class barriers to keep them from living.

Clinton’s choice of Tim Kaine for vice president is one of her latest unfeminist actions. Kaine has voiced support against abortion in the past, although he presently says he is only pro-life religiously.

Feminists who support Clinton without acknowledging her inability to think intersectionally are just like white suffrage movement leader Susan B. Anthony, who refused to fight for the rights of people of color.

Defining feminism as only the right for women to live rich lives of leadership is problematic, inaccessible and only sending the United States back in time.

Although Clinton has fought against sexism and discrimination as a woman in the political system, that does not forgive her actions against people of color and people who are LGBTQIA+. She may have a racist and sexist opponent, but that does not make Clinton a true feminist.

To be a true feminist is to recognize the experiences of all people and fight against intersectional oppression, not just the ones that affect white women.

Although Clinton may not be a feminist who currently acts intersectionally, that does not mean she cannot grow and learn to incorporate intersectionality into her actions.

The post Decklar: Hillary Clinton robs true feminism appeared first on Emerald Media.

What happened to me on the bus was not “20 minutes of action,” as Stanford sex offender Brock Turner’s father might say, or even “locker room talk,” as Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump defined sexual harassment and assault.

I walked onto the bus to escape the downpour, and sat in front of a man who gazed up and down my body. As the bus left the station, he started moaning and subtly hitting the metal next to my arm. Unbeknown to me, the man was rubbing himself behind me. Jolted in fear, I inched my body away from his fingers on the metal and tried to ignore his moaning until he grasped my arm and groaned, “Oooh, girl.”

My whole body froze in terror.

I do not remember getting off the bus. My brain could not find the words to describe the incident as I reached for “sexual harassment,” but I feared no one would believe me.

What happened to me did not fit the state of Oregon’s definition of sexual offenses, as the man did not “penetrate” me and I was not mentally or physically “defective.” Never mind that my physical and mental boundaries were crossed by this man — I was not sexually assaulted or harassed, according to the state. According to the law, behavior like this is not only legal, it is commonly accepted.

But I am not the only one whose body has been sexually violated and their experiences invalidated.

13 women recently revealed that Trump sexually assaulted them, but according to Trump they were either “horrible” or not attractive enough for him to assault.

Not only do these 13 women worry about whether their stories fit the definition of sexual assault, but society is peering at their photographs and judging whether they are attractive enough for Trump — dismissing their stories altogether.

Attractiveness is not cause for verification of sexual assault. The shape of my body and the clothes I chose to wear on the bus that day should not be considered facts in deciding if what happened to me was sexual harassment. But then again, who could I talk with considering the fact that my experience does not match the definition of sexual assault?

Speechlessness is a frequent problem in many assault cases. Even when survivors do speak, as was the case for the survivor of Turner’s assault, their validity is questioned by the law.

In a letter the survivor read to Turner in court, she was asked about wearing a cardigan the night of the assault and what color her cardigan was. Every time the words “what were you wearing” rang through her ears, the survivor lived through the violent experience of not knowing who assaulted her. This question is an example of what often happens when survivors report an incident: the probing of their bodies, minds and validity.

When the law questions the survivor in this damaging way, the law harms the survivor.

Survivors are not just women, as one out of every ten survivors identifies as male and 21 percent of transgender, non-conforming and genderqueer college students have been sexually assaulted. The current definition of sexual assault and harassment disregards these statistics and defines rape without accounting for the survivors’ perspectives.

Although many of these incidents are traumatizing, some argue that many people falsely report sexual assault which makes a legislative definition of sexual assault and harassment essential. Yet, according to Roger Williams University, “Statistical studies indicate false reports make up two percent or less of the reported cases of sexual assault.”

To avoid reliving the trauma within cases like Turner’s, only one out of every ten rapes are actually reported. Survivors end up blaming themselves for the violation of their bodies, which silences survivors and strengthens sexual violence.

When the definition of sexual assault and harassment does not center on the survivor, justice is lost.

However, advocacy centers like Sexual Assault Support Services in Lane County are attempting to end sexual violence with survivor-centered approaches. SASS staff always believe the survivor and ask them only one question: “How can I support you?”

Unless the definition for sexual assault and harassment changes, survivors will never be given the power and strength they need to heal. Every person’s body and boundaries are their own, meaning every survivor’s definition must be theirs, especially due to the traumatizing effects of reporting — which will inevitably widen the acts that are classified as sexual assault.
When validation comes from the survivor and spreads to the courts, then there will be justice.

University of Oregon’s Oregon Student Public Interest Research Group lobbied at Oregon’s capitol for cleaner energy sources in early February. Their campaign urges electric companies in the state to stop using coal-fired resources in their electric supply by 2040 with House Bill 4036, according to Renewables Coordinator Caitlin Feely.

“You walk around at the state capital building and you feel like you’re making change solely by being there,” Feely said.

Many of the 16 state lawmakers said they supported their fight, but OSPIRG is still working to make Eugene run on 10 percent solar energy by 2025. The bill passed through the house about a week after the lobby day, Feely said.

OSPIRG received 3,300 student petition signatures statewide and 2,000 from UO students in the four days before the lobby day, said Co-Renewables and Lobbying Coordinator Kade Anderson.

“We also got almost every important student group to sign on — so ASUO Exec., we got ASUO Senate, we got Democracy Club, the LGBTQIA3 and so many at this point,” Anderson said. According to Anderson, 35 OSPIRG student activists then went to Salem, Oregon to address the state lawmakers.

“The funny thing is, almost all of them were already on our side,” Anderson said.

Co-Renewables Coordinator Sarah Bethea said that most of the state lawmakers that agreed to meet with OSPIRG were already enthusiastic about their mission. “Most of them, after we asked if it was something they were going to vote for, said, ‘Yeah, duh, of course,’” Bethea said.

Anderson said that there was not a state lawmaker that said no when asked if they would support the bill.

“We would not have been able to do this without the power of the people,” Bethea said.

Bethea said people often turn down petitions because they do not feel it will make a difference. But without the signatures, the renewables campaign would not have received as much support.

The bill will implement more remote solar panels for more populated areas of the state, in order to cut down on the coal-fired resources, Feely said. The campaign is going to work on local legislation for spring term.

“The city of Eugene has their climate action plan — which is a really great, progressive step forward —, but they’re not setting any goals,” Feely said.

The campaign’s aim is to work with city councilors in the community in order to make a solar goal first.

“I asked them if they thought it was possible to get it done by the end of the year and they said, ‘Absolutely,’” Feely said.

A year after rallying for a living wage, the University of Oregon Graduate Teaching Fellows are still on average a couple hundred dollars short of making ends meet.

“We were guaranteed a living wage last year, but that hasn’t happened,” Political Science GTF Malori Musselman said.

About 30 members of the UO Graduate Teaching Fellows Federation gathered in front of Johnson Hall at noon rallying for a living wage.

“The rally is for a living wage, and that is important to us as most of our money comes from teaching,” Political Science GTF Nicole Francisco said.

During the rally, speakers and signs said UO President Michael Schill makes $800,000, making him the ninth highest paid president across more than 200 universities. The GTFs pointed out what Schill was making as a contrast to what they are not.

“We teach one-third of undergraduate classes, so this affects the quality of education,” Francisco said.

Among the undergraduates watching the rally, Freshman Lilly Fabian said GTFs should be paid a living wage.

“I came here for education, not for anything else, so I believe they should be getting more,” Fabian said.

The bargaining meeting with the administration to discuss liveable wages was held in the Knight Library right after the rally.

The EMU was evacuated at approximately 2:15 today after a construction lift bumped into the building’s gas main outside the Craft Center, according to Mark Butler, senior project manager for Lease Crutcher Lewis. The building is now clear.

“With live gas, you have to take action,” said Butler.

Josh Shields, Lease Crutcher Lewis construction worker, said all of the past alarms at the EMU were tests, but this time was a real emergency.

At 2:45 p.m., Eugene Fire Department had turned off the gas main and was doing a clean-air check. Emergency responders and EMU employees asked passersby and people in the building to walk across the street.

“You could almost smell the gas, there’s no denying that,” EMU board chair Miles Sisk said.

More to come.

University of Oregon President Michael Schill will discuss whether non-tenure track faculty will stay or go with the UO Board of Trustees this week, according to the Register-Guard.

Non-tenure track faculty employment has increased in some departments, such as the College of Arts and Sciences, even as enrollment in the programs has declined. This leaves some non-tenure track faculty with fewer day-to-day tasks to work on as they used to. Schill aims to replace a “small number” of them with up to 100 new professionals in a few disciplines, interim Dean W. Andrew Marcus pledged, with the goal being an increase in tenure track faculty.

The faculty within the UO College of Arts and Sciences will be the first group to experience Schill’s idea, given the BOT accepts it.

The once-per-term BOT meeting will be held at the Ford Alumni Center this Thursday and Friday.

Schill announced his plan to funnel more of the budget into research and tenure-track faculty in early January.

Tim Boyle, University of Oregon alumnus and Columbia Sportswear CEO, donated $10 million for UO research that includes fish breeding and zebrafish genomics, the UO announced.

The Columbia Sporstwear CEO’s $10 million will bring and expand new equipment to the research. The gift will mainly fund the UO’s aquatic animal care facility, help acquire updated instruments, and expand facilities dedicated to genomics research.

Additionally, the donation will lead to immediate investments in high-powered microscopes and DNA-sequencing technologies. These tools will be used in collaboration with Oregon State, Portland State and Oregon Health & Science University, according to the report.

The gift marks the largest donation the university’s aquatic animal care facility has ever received.

Boyle’s aunt was a molecular biology researcher, while Boyle himself was a member of the UO Foundation of Board of Trustees. Both attended the UO in the early 1970s.

“Not everyone would make a gift to support the basic sciences in the way that Tim and Mary Boyle have done,” UO President Michael Schill said in the report. “We’re incredibly grateful.”

Candidates can now self-nominate themselves for a place in the UO Senate, Committees and other elected positions.

According to Around The O, provost Scott Coltrane and Senate President Randy Sullivan posted a message to the UO community, asking for help with the nomination process in “shaping the future for the University of Oregon.”

All members of the community are encouraged to participate in this process.

For those wanting to nominate, a reception will be held on Wednesday, March 2 from 4-5 p.m. in the Gerlinger Lounge. The event is a space for community members to discuss involvement, both nominated and volunteer, according to Around The O.

The nomination ballot will be open until Sunday, March 6.

The free transportation service for people with accessibility needs has created a new routing system, and many who need the University of Oregon Access Shuttle said the route refuses to accommodate them.

Before the change, freshman Abdullah Alshabanah could call the Access Shuttle’s number and driver Vickie Peterson would put his stop on the schedule for the week. Now, Alshabanah is required to wait a maximum of 40 minutes for the Access Shuttle to head his way, making it difficult to get to his classes that have 10 minutes in between them.

“Even if I want to wait for the Shuttle, there aren’t any chairs. We’re tired of waiting,” Alshabanah said.

Since 2008, the Access Shuttle has served those “with permanent or temporary conditions that limit mobility,” according to the service’s website.

“We used to serve about 100-250 people a week before the route system and now we serve at max 30 people a week,” Peterson said. “That’s about one to three people a day.”

Peterson said she used to be able to pick up students, staff and faculty through the scheduling system as far as 22nd Avenue and as far south as Mill Street, but now she cannot make a stop even one block off of campus.

“I was told no scheduling and to stay on this route unless someone screams loud enough,” Peterson said.

Peterson said the new route stays close to the UO campus, only detouring to places owned by the university, such as the Baker Center, Spencer View Apartments and Autzen Stadium.

“It isn’t an accessible shuttle anymore,” graduate student Janet Stafford said. “[Alshabanah and I] had to change our schedules.”

Peterson said the system is trying to follow a campus-only route similar to the system Oregon State University has in place, as UO gained iPads for the routing system and another vehicle.

“We’re now serving less people than before [when] we didn’t have iPads and served more people with one vehicle,” Peterson said.

Stafford said the new routing system came with an online interactive map that allows people to know when the shuttle will arrive, but Stafford’s visual condition makes reading a screen challenging.

“On a scale of one to 10 of how accessible the new system is, I’d give it a two,” Stafford said.

While there are other options to get to the UO campus, such as Ride/Source and Handi-Cab, both services charge their riders. For Handi-Cab, Peterson said it costs $25 to get to campus if a person lives one block off of campus.

“I like what I do and I love the students and staff,” Peterson said. “I’m not frustrated; I’m angry. I don’t want to lose my job over it, but something needs to be done.”

Peterson said the Access Shuttle mainly receives funding from subsidies from Johnson Hall, which pays for the bus’ gas charges. The Department of Parking and Transportation field operations supervisor provided no comment.

“When Abdullah told [the field operations supervisor] about this inaccessibility, he was told to change his schedule,” Stafford said.

Stafford and Alshabanah said they are both supported through the university in other ways, including having notetakers for their classes.

“There are helpful resources, but I’m not fully supported,” Alshabanah said.

Alshabanah and Stafford said they present on invisible disabilities every term and hope others on campus acknowledge the Access Shuttle’s current inaccessibility.

“We need just a little appreciation for what we do,” Alshabanah said.